Influence of seeding rate and reduced doses of haloxyfop-R-methyl herbicide on weed control, yield and component yield of mung bean
Subject Areas : Journal of Plant Ecophysiology
abdolraheem
shakibapoor
1
(دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد رشته شناسایی و مبارزه با علفهای هرز، واحد شوشتر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شوشتر، ایران)
Saeed
Saeedipour
2
(استادیار دانشکده کشاورزی، واحد شوشتر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شوشتر، ایران)
Keywords: Seed yield, herbicide, Weed control, Weed dry matter, Crop-weed competition,
Abstract :
Crop-weed competition has a profound effect on the seed yield of mung bean. We evaluated the effects of both the seed rate and weeding regime on the weed infestation and crop performance of mung bean. Two factors via seed rate (15, 25 or 35 kg ha-1) and different doses of haloxyfop-R-methyl (0, 0.4, 0.8 and 1.2 L ha-1) were included in the experiment. The experiment was implemented in a split-plot design accommodating seed rate in the main plot and doses of herbicide in the subplot with four replications. Mean data from the experiment showed that weed density and weed dry weight were significantly affected by seed rate: these two variables decreased with the increase in the seed rate (p<0.01). The seed rate significantly influenced plant height, number of pod per plant, biological yield and seed yield. Different variables that included: Plant height, number of pod per plant, 1000 seed weight, harvest index and seed yield were significantly influenced by variations of herbicide doses. Seed yield was significantly improved in dose of 1.2 L ha-1. Overall, the interaction effect of seed rate and herbicide doses was not significant in respect to the plant characteristics except harvest index and seed yield. Nevertheless, a seed rate of 35 kg ha-1, coupled with volume of 0.8 L ha-1, illustrated the best seed yield. Therefore, crop competition can be explored as an effective alternative weed management strategy and achieving optimal yield of bean
Arce, G.D., P. Pedersen and R.G. Hartzler. 2009. Soybean seeding rate effects on weed management. Weed Tech. 23: 17-22.
Arnold, R.N., M.W. Murray, E.J. Gregory and D. Smeal. 1993. Weed control in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with imazethapyr combinations. Weed Tech. 7: 361-364.
Auskalnis, A. 2003. Experience with plant protection on line for weed control in Lithuania. Proceedings of the Crop Protection Conference for the Baltic Sea Region, April 28-29, 2003, Poznan, Poland, pp: 166-175.
Babaei, M. and S. Saeedipour. 2015. Effect of seed rate and post emergence herbicide application on weed infestation and subsequent crop performance of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Walia J. 31: 158-162.
Baloch, A.W., A.M. Soomro, M.A. Javed, M. Ahmed, H.R. Bughio, M.S. Bughio and N.N. Mastoi. 2002. Optimum plant density for high yield in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Asian J. Plant Sci. 1: 25-27.
Barros, J.F.C., G. Basch and M. de Carvalho.2007. Effect of reduced doses of a post-emergence herbicide to control grass and broad-leaved weeds in no-till wheat under Mediterranean conditions. Crop Prot. 26: 1538-1545.
Bauer, T.A., K.A. Renner, D. Penner and J.D. Kelly. 1995. Pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) varietal tolerance to imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 43: 417-424.
Bayan, H.C. and P. Saharia. 1998. Effect of weed management and phosphorus on kharif green gram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek.) J. Agri. Sci. Soc. 9: 151-154.
Beckie, H.J. 2007. Beneficial management practices to combat herbicide-resistant grass weeds in the Northern Great Plains. Weed Tech. 21: 290-299.
Burnside, O.C., W.H. Ahrens, B.J. Holder, M.J. Wiens, M.M. Johnson and E.A. Ristau. 1994. Efficacy and economics of various mechanical plus chemical weed control systems in dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Tech. 8: 238-244.
Chhokar, R.S., S. Singh and R.K. Sharma. 2008. Herbicides for control of isoproturon-resistant little seed canary grass (Phalaris minor) in wheat. Crop Prot. 27: 719-726.
Chikoye, D., S.F. Weise and C.J. Swanton. 1995. Influence of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) time of emergence and density on white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Sci. 43: 375-380.
Egan, J.F., B.D. Maxwell, D.A. Mortensen, M.R. Ryan and R.G. Smith. 2011. 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)-resistant crops and the potential for evolution 2,4-D-resistant weeds. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 10.1073/pnas.1017414108.
Fernandez-Quintanilla, C., J. Barroso, J. Recasens, X. Sans, C. Torner and S. del Arco. 2000. Demography of Lolium rigidum in winter barley crops: Analysis of recruitment, survival and reproduction. Weed Res. 40: 281-291.
Hamill, A.S. and J. Zhang, 1995. Herbicide reduction in metribuzin-based weed control programs in corn. Can. J. Plant Sci. 75: 927-933.
Khaliq, A., A. Matloob, S. Mahmood, R.N. Abbas and M.B. Khan. 2012. Seeding density and herbicide tank mixtures furnish better weed control and improve growth, yield and quality of direct seeded fine rice. Int. J. Agri. Bio.14: 499-508.
Kirkland, K.J., F.A. Holm and F.C. Stevenson. 2000. Appropriate crop seeding rate when herbicide rate is reduced. Weed Tech. 14: 692-698.
Lemerle, D., B. Verbeek, R.D. Cousens and N.E. Coombes. 1996. The potential for selecting wheat varieties strongly competitive against weeds. Weed Res. 36: 505-513.
Lin, X.Q., D.F. Zhu, H.Z. Chen, S.H. Cheng and N. Uphoff. 2009. Effect of plant density and nitrogen fertilizer rates on grain yield and nitrogen uptake of hybrid rice (Oryza sativa L.). J. Agri. Biotech. Sust. Dev. 1: 44-53.
Mahajan, G., M.S. Gill and K. Singh. 2010. Optimizing seed rate to suppress weeds and to increase yield in aerobic direct-seeded rice in northwestern Indo-gangetic plains. J. New Seeds. 11: 225-238.
Malik, V.S., C.J. Swanton and T.E. Michaels. 1993. Interaction of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars, row spacing and seeding density with annual weeds. Weed Sci. 41: 62-68.
Martinkova, Z.A. and A. Honek, 2001. The effect of time of weed removal on maize yield. Rostlinna Vyroba-UZPI, 47: 211-217.
Medd, R.W., R.J. van de Ven, D.I. Pickering and T. Nordblom, 2001. Determination of environment-specific dose response relationships for clodinafop-propargyl on Avena spp. Weed Res. 41: 351-368.
Michael, P.P., L.R. Oliver, C.R. Dillon, T.C. Keisling and P.M. Manning. 2000. Evaluation of seedbed preparation, planting method and herbicide alternatives for dryland soybean production. Agron. J. 92: 1149-1155.
Mohler, C.L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of annual weeds. J. Pro. Agri. 9: 468-474.
Olsen, J.M., H.W. Griepentrog, J. Nielsen and J. Weiner.2012. How important are crop spatial pattern and density for weed suppression by spring wheat? Weed Sci. 60: 501-509.
Powles, S.B. and Q. Yu. 2010. Evolution in action: Plants resistant to herbicides. Anl. Rev. Plant Bio. 61: 317-347.
Roberts, J.R., T.F. Peeper and J.B. Solie. 2001. Wheat (Triticum aestivum) row spacing, seeding rate and cultivar affect interference from rye (Secale cereale). Weed Tech. 15: 19-25.
Santos, B.M. 2009. Drip-applied metam potassium and herbicides as methyl bromide alternatives for Cyperus control in tomato. Crop Prot. 28: 68-71.
Scursoni, J.A. and E.H. Satorre. 2005. Barley (Hordeum vulgare) and wild Oat (Avena fatua) Competition is affected by crop and weed density. Weed Tech. 19: 790-795.
Smitchger, J.A., I.C. Burke and J.P. Yenish. 2012. The critical period of weed control in lentil (Lens culinaris) in the Pacific Northwest. Weed Sci. 60: 81-85.
Talgre, L., E. Lauringson, M. Koppel, H. Nurmekivi and S. Uusna. 2004. Weed control in spring barley by lower doses of herbicide in Estonia. Latvian J. Agron. 7: 171-175.
Urwin, C.P., R.G. Wilson and D.A. Mortensen. 1996. Response of dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars to four herbicides. Weed Tech.10: 512-518.
Vencill, W.K. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th Ed., Weed Science Society of America, Champaign, IL. ISBN-13: 9781891276330, p: 493.
Zhao, D.L., L. Bastiaans, G.N. Atlin and J.H.J. Spiertz. 2007. Interaction of genotype x management on vegetative growth and weed suppression of aerobic rice. Field Crops Res.100: 327-340.
_||_