Reduction of Phenmedipham + Desmedipham + Ethofumesate Herbicides Dosage Based on Application Timing in Sugar Beet

Subject Areas : Journal of Crop Ecophysiology

Valiyolah Anabestani ¹ , Mohammad Armin ²

1 - Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Sabzevar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sabzevar, Iran
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Sabzevar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sabzevar, Iran

Received: 2016-04-05 Accepted : 2017-01-03 Published : 2017-02-19

Keywords: Sugar beet, Herbicides, Quantitative and qualitative yield, Reduced dosage,

Abstract :

An experiment was conducted to study possible reduction of concentration (dose) of phenmedipham + desmedipham + ethofumesate herbicides at different application times to control weeds in sugar beet field. Thus, a factorial experiment based on complete randomized block design with three replications was performed at Sabzevar, Khorasan-e-Razavi in 2013. Factors consisted of herbicide dosages (control, 75% of the recommended dosage, and 125% of recommended dosage and application times at 2-4, 4-8 and 8-12 leaf stages of sugar beet. Herbicide used in the experiment was phenmedipham (9.2%) + desmedipham (7.2%) + ethofumesate (11.3%) (PROGRESS OF BETAMIX) as 877 ga.i ha-1 27.4 EC. The results indicated that the delayed application of herbicide increased weed density by 55.92% and weed dry matter by 33%. Application of herbicide at 4-8 leaf stage produced highest root and sugar yields. Root impurities were not affected by the time of herbicide application. Used of 125% of recommended dosage resulted in lowest weed density and weed dry matter and highest root and sugar yields. Impure sugar percentage and K content was not affected by herbicide dosage. Other root quality characteristics were not statistically significant different between the recommended dose 125% of recommended dosages. Results as a wholes suggested that at early growth stage of sugar beet (2-4 leaf stage) lower herbicide dosage and at later growth stage of sugar beet (8-12 leaf stage) higher herbicide dosage may produce highest root yield of sugar beet.

References:

Abdillahian-noghabi, M. 2002. New approach to the management of genetically modified herbicide tolerant sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 18 (2): 167-168. (In Persian).
Abdollahi, F., and H. Ghadiri. 2004. Effect of separate and combined applications of herbicides on weed control and yield of sugar beet. Weed Technology. 18 (4): 968-976.
Ahmadi, K., H. Gholizadeh, H.R. Badzadh, R. Hossein Pour, F. Hatami, and B. Fazli. 2015. Agricultural statistics. 2014-2015 crop year. First volume: Crops. http://maj.ir/portal/Home/Default.aspx?CategoryID=117564e0-507c-4565-9659-fbabfb4acb9b. (In Persian).
Alizadeh Nobakht Sabzevari, M. 2014. The effect of weeding times on reducing herbicide dose in sugar beet. M.Sc. Thesis. Sabzevar Branch, Islamic Azad University. 120 pp. (In Persian).
Amiri, H. 2013. Efficient management of herbicide at sugar beet fields in Lorestan. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production. 4 (8): 1835-1838.
Armin, M., E. Zand, and M.A. Baghestani. 2008. The effect of low herbicide dose of Clodinafop-propargyl on percentage of wild oat (Avena ludoviciana) control, yield and economic return of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Plant Protection. 22 (2): 110-118. (In Persian).
Bandegi, M.R. and M. Armin. 2014. Effect of weed interference with sugar beet under different management system. Plant Echophysiology. 19 (2): 45-57. (In Persian).
Bazoobandi, M., M.A. Baghestani, and E. Zand. 2006. Weeds and their management in sugar beet fields. Plant and Pests and Diseases Research Institute. 85 PP.
Blackshaw, R.E., J.T. O'Donovan, K. Harker, G.W. Clayton, and R.N. Stougaard. 2006. Reduced herbicide doses in field crops: a review. Weed Biology and Management. 6 (1): 10-17.
Dale, T.M., K.A. Renner, and A.N. Kravchenko. 2006. Effect of herbicides on weed control and sugar beet  (Beta vulgaris L.) yield and quality. Weed Technology. 20 (1): 150-156.
Deveikyte, I., and V. Seibutis. 2006. Broadleaf weeds and sugar beet response to phenmedipham, desmedipham, ethofumesate and triflusulfuron-methyl. Agronomy Research. 4: 159-162.
Draycott, A.P. 2008. Sugar beet. John Wiley & Sons. 235 PP.
Ganbari Birgani, D., M. Hosseinpour, P. Shimi, and M.A. Noghabi. 2007. Integrated weed control of sugar beet in Dezful and Boroujerd. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences. 8 (4): 283-299. (In Persian).
Ghanbari Birgani, D., and H. Sharifi. 2000. Investigating betanal progress AM for the control of broad leaf weeds in sugar beet. Final Research Report. Saffiabad Agricultural Research Station, Khuzestan, Iran. (In Persian).
Hansson, D., S. Svensson, D. Cloutier, J. Ascard, J. Netland, and T. Cottis. 2004. Steaming soil in narrow strips for intra-row weed control in sugar beet. European weed research society. Proceedings of the 6^th EWRS Workshop on Physical and Cultural Weed Control, Lillehammer, Norway, 8-10 March, 2004. European Weed Research Society.
Jahad-Akbar, M.R., R. Tabatabaii-NimAvard, and H.R. Ebrahimiyan. 2004. Critical period of weed competition with sugar beet in Kabotarabad-Esfahan. Journal of Sugar Beet 20: 73-92. (In Persian).
Jahedi, A., A. Norouzi, and M. Saati. 2005. Reduce herbicide use by combined application of cultivator and band spraying in sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 21 (1): 77-86. (In Persian).
Kaya, R. 2012. Possibilities of reducing herbicide use in weed control in sugar beet production. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 27 (3): 19-28.
Kaya, R., and Ş. Buzluk. 2006. Integrated weed control in sugar beet through combinations of tractor hoeing and reduced dosages of a herbicide mixture. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry. 30 (2): 137-144.
Koocheki, A., M. Nassiri, A. Siahmarguee, J. Gherekhloo, M. Rastgoo, and A. Ghaemi. 2008. Effect of different integrated weed management methods on weed density and yield of sugar beet crop. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. 6 (2): 383-394. (In Persian).
 Longden, P. 1989. Effects of increasing weed beet density on sugar beet yield and quality. Annals of Applied Biology. 114(3): 527-532.
Maleki, G., E. Zand, and S.M.J. Mirhadi. 2008. Using integrated inter- row cultivation and herbicide band application in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) weed management for reducing herbicide use. Iranian Journal of Crop Research. 6: 443-452. (In Persian).
Mansilla Martínez, J., J. Valero, A.D. Padilla, and M.R. Picornell Buendía. 2015. Competition and critical periods in spring sugar beet cultivation. Journal of Plant Protection Research. 55(4): 336-342.
Mesbah, A., S.D. Miller, K.J. Fornstrom, and D.E. Legg. 1994. Sugar beet-weed interactions. Agricultural Experiment Station. Department of Plant, Soil, and Insect Sciences, College of Agriculture, University of Wyoming.
Mobarak, O.M.M.A.E. 2013. Determination of critical period of weed competition with sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) and weed control. Ph.D Thesis. University of Assiut (Egypt). 147 pp. 
Najafi, H., and M. Abdollahian-Noghabi. 2015. Effect of plantingpattern, time of weed removal and herbicide application on weed density and sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) root yield. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences. 17(1): 18-34. (In Persian).
Noroozi, A. 2000. Combined application of cultivator and band spraying for reducing herbicide use in sugar beet weed control. 6^th Iranian Congress of Crop Production and Plant Breeding. Babolsar. p. 579-580. (In Persian).

Zargar, M., H. Najafi, E. Zand, and F. Mighani. 2012. Evaluation of the effect of chemical and non-chemicalweed management methods toward reducing herbicide application rate in sugar beet. Journal of Plant Protection. 25(4): 368-377.