The Effect of Organic Mulches and Metribuzin on Weed Control and Yield of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)

Subject Areas : Journal of Crop Ecophysiology

Rouzbeh  Zangoueinejad ¹ (Ph.D. Student of Weed Science, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran)
Mohammad Taghi  Alebrahim ² (Asscociate Professor, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran)

Received: 2016-06-22 Accepted : 2017-01-18 Published : 2018-05-22

Keywords: herbicide, Weed density, Non-living mulches, Relative yield, Weed height,

Abstract :

To evaluate the effects of four kinds of organic non-living mulches (wheat straw, sawdust, coco peat and peat moss) and metribuzin (herbicide treatment) on weed control and yield of tomato cv. "CH" an experiment was designed in randomized complete blocks with 7 treatments and 3 replications at the College of Agriculture, Shiraz University in 2012. According to the results all mulch treatments showed lower efficiency in weed control than the metribuzin. Also, all mulch treatments showed higher weed density compared to metribuzin. When straw, among non-living organic mulches, showed lowest weed control (62.3 weed.m-2). According to the results the highest tomato yield per unit area was produced by using peat moss mulch (from 5.7 kg.m-2) and the lowest yield from weedy plots (1.2 kg/m-2). To calculate the percentage of predicted performance of each of the treatments, only Gompertz model was applied and only the beginning of weed interference between the treatments was taken into account.

References:

• Berger, R.D. 1981. Comparison of the gompertz and logistic equations to describe plant disease progress. Ecology Epidemiology. 71 (7): 716- 719.


• Grassbaugh, E.M., E.E. Regnier, and M.A. Bennett. 2004. Comparison of Organic and Inorganic Mulches for Heirloom Tomato Production. Acta Hourticulture. 638: 171-176.


• Iyagba, A.G., C.B. Isirima, and L. Akonye. 2012. Influence of rumen-base organic mulch treatment on weed control and maize performance in rivers state, Nigeria. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science. 7 (7): 524- 526.


• Meftah Halghy, M., and M. Eskafi Noghany. 2009. Economic optimization of crop yield with determination critical period of weed control (CPWC) on corn. Journal of Plant Production. 16(4): 125 – 134. (In Persian).


• Monaco, T.J., S.C. Weller, and F.M. Ashton. 2002. ‎weed science: principles and practices. Wiley-Blackwell. 688 pp.


• Munn, D.A. 1992. Comparisons of shredded newspaper and wheat straw as crop mulch. Hort Technology. 2(3): 361- 366.


• Prajneshu, B., and K.P. Chandran. 2005. Computation of compound growth rates in agriculture: Revisited. Agriculture Economics Research Review. 18: 317- 324.


• Radics, L., E.B. Szekelyne, P. Pusztai, and K. Horvath. 2006. Role of mulching in weed control of organic tomato. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection. 18: 643-650.


• Robinson, D.E., and N. Soltani. 2006. Weed control in processing tomato (Lycopersicon escolentum) with rimsulfuron and thifensulfuron applied alone or with chlorothalonil or copper pesticides. Hotr Science. 41 (5): 1295-1297.


• Seyfi, K., and M. Rashidi. 2007. Effect of drip irrigation and plastic mulch on crop yield and yield components of cantaloupe. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology. 9 (2): 247-249.


• Soltani, N., D.E. Robinson, A.S. Hamil, S. Bowley, and P.H. Sikkema. 2005. Tolerance of processing tomato (Lycopersicon escolentum) to thifensulfuron methyl. Weed Technology. 19: 669-673.


• Wilen, C.A., U.K. Schuch, and C.L. Elmore. 1999. Mulches and subirrigation control weeds in container production. Journal of Environmental Horticulture. 17: 174–180.


• · Zaniewicz-Bajkowska, A., J. Franczuk, and E. Kosterna. 2009. Direct and secondary effects of soil mulching with straw on fresh mass and number of weeds, vegetable yield. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies. 18 (6): 1185-1190.