Can irrigation systems alter the critical period for weed control in onion cropping?

Souza, Matheus de Freitas; Lins, Hamurábi Anízio; Mesquita, Hélida Campos de; Teófilo, Taliane Maria da Silva; Reginaldo, Laís Tereza Rêgo Torquato; Pereira, Ruana Karoline Viana; Grangeiro, Leílson Costa; Silva, Daniel Valadão

doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2020.105457

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Bachega et al (2013), weed species, especially those that germinate and emerge at the beginning of a crop cycle, intensify intra and interspecific competition and the taller and more developed plants become dominant and the smaller and less developed plants are suppressed or die. A study evaluating the CPWC in onion cultivated by drip and micro sprinkling during three agricultural seasons reported a similar behavior in relation to the density of individuals throughout the growing cycle, with an average reduction of 70% (FREITAS SOUZA et al 2020a).…”

Section: Weed Density and Dry Mattermentioning

confidence: 72%

“…As a plant with a C4 mechanism, D. Horizontalis Willd. is very efficient in the use of resources such as water, nutrients, and especially light, and therefore, it presents accelerated growth, resulting in the reduction in the photosynthetic rate of the cultivated species, affecting its growth and the rate of biomass accumulation (LINS et al, 2019;FREITAS SOUZA et al, 2020a;FREITAS SOUZA et al, 2020b).…”

Section: Carrot Productivity and Periods Of Weed Control And Coexistencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Swanton et al (2008), while establishing a critical weed-free period in carrots, reported a loss of 92% to 100% in productivity when the weeds were left uncontrolled; mainly weed species from the Poaceae family and Digitaria. However, owing to variations in climatic conditions and composition of the weed community, the results of studies conducted in different environments or in different cultures may not apply to other systems (FREITAS et al, 2009;BRIM-DEFOREST et al, 2017;FREITAS SOUZA et al 2020a;MONTEIRO et al, 2021). Therefore, critical periods of weed competition and differences in composition between the weed community and the effects of competition on carrot production in different irrigation systems are not known.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Weed Interference in Carrot Yield in Two Localized Irrigation Systems

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Weed interference is one of the factors that reduces carrot yield considerably. The aim of this study was to determine the periods of weed interference in carrots cultivated under two localized irrigation systems. The experiment used a completely randomized block design, with three replications, using the split plot scheme. The plots consisted of two irrigation systems (drip and micro sprinkler) and the subplots corresponded to the duration of coexistence of the crop with weeds, comprising periods of control (weed -free) or coexistence (with weeds) (0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 120 days after emergence (DAE) of the crop). Considering a yield loss of 2.5%, 5%, and 10% in marketable carrots, the beginning and end of the critical period of weed control (CPWC) was determined by adjusting a sigmoid model to the relative production data. The presence of the weed community throughout the crop cycle resulted in yield losses of up to 98%. The CPWP varied for the irrigation systems used. Carrot cultivation with and without competition, under the micro sprinkler irrigation system showed a higher yield than with the drip system. Considering a yield loss of 5%, the CPWC was 23 DAE and 7 DAE in the drip irrigation and micro sprinkler irrigation systems, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Weed Density and Dry Mattermentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Carrot Productivity and Periods Of Weed Control And Coexistencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Weed Interference in Carrot Yield in Two Localized Irrigation Systems

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main purpose of this study was to determine the amount of fertilizer that is discarded and propose its management as a pollutant. However, since the HWW discharged from hydroponics contains water, it is considered necessary to study the reuse of HWW to conserve water resources at a time when global water shortage is emerging [56,[139][140][141][142][143][144][145].…”

Section: Assessing Pollutant Load Through Hww Composition and Outflow...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Characteristics of Pollutant Discharge in Tomato Hydroponic Wastewater (HWW) for Sustainable Water Management in Korea

Son

2024

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In South Korea, the use of hydroponic cultivation has been on the rise. However, this system produces a large amount of wastewater. In this study, the amount of wastewater generated by hydroponic tomato cultivation is identified, and a management plan is proposed. Based on the analysis of 103 tomato HWW samples, it was found that the electrical conductivity (EC) was 4.25 ± 1.01 dS/m, the nitrogen (N) content was 411.21 ± 122.64 mg/L, and the phosphorus (P) content was 47.74 mg/L, which caused eutrophication. Therefore, agricultural reuse and HWW treatment were proposed. Regarding the annual HWW load, 1 ha of hydroponics discharges 964.26 kg/ha of N, 111.95 of P, 937.46 of K, 795.14 of Ca, 313.83 of Mg, and 405.40 of S. The trace elements were heavy metals, which were calculated as Fe—4.03, Mn—0.77, Zn—1.08, B—2.25, Cu—0.38, and Mo—0.05 kg/ha. Since wastewater is a national source of drinking water, it needs to be collected and treated. Inter-item correlation analysis showed that most of the fertilizer components were correlated with the EC concentrations. This study can be used to determine the concentrations required for agricultural reuse and to determine the treatment capacity in HWW management.

show abstract

“…The excessive use of herbicides has been reported to have significant negative impacts on the environment, including water and soil quality, and biodiversity [4][5][6]. Furthermore, determination of the minimum doses for optimum control [7,8] and critical periods [9] is very important for reducing herbicide use, as part of integrated weed management systems. The use of herbicides is difficult because of the high sensitivity of legumes to most products and the selectivity of herbicides to certain groups of weeds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of Minimum Doses of Imazamox for Controlling Xanthium strumarium L. and Chenopodium album L. in Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

Gürbüz

Yentürk

2022

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to investigate the minimum doses of the imazamox active ingredient (ai) that provide satisfactory efficacy (>90%) against fat hen (Chenopodium album L.) and common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.). These two weeds are among the most troublesome weeds of bean fields. The minimum dose studies were carried out separately in the 2–4 and 6–8 true leaf stages of both weeds. The experiments were carried out in pots under greenhouse conditions. The experiments were repeated three times. In the first two experiments, the recommended dose of imazamox (100%) together with 75%, 50% and 25% doses were applied to the weeds during the above-mentioned leaf stages. Some pots were left untreated for control. In the third experiments, 12.50% and 6.25% of the recommended doses were also tested. Plant height and the number of leaves were recorded on the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 14th, 21st and 28th days following the herbicide application. As a result of the studies, it was determined that nearly half the recommended dose (48.18 g ai/da) provides 90% success in the control of common cocklebur (X. strumarium) when applied at the 2–4 true leaf stages, while a lower dose (36.11 g ai/da) is required for obtaining the same control when applied at the 6–8 true leaf stages. For the fat hen (C. album), only a 17.69 g ai/da application dose was found to provide 90% control at the period of 2–4 true leaves, while 21.21 g ai/da was noted to provide 90% control when applied at the 6–8 true leaf stage. The results suggest that the increase in leaf area reduces the imazamox requirement for the control of X. strumarium.

show abstract

Can irrigation systems alter the critical period for weed control in onion cropping?

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

Weed Interference in Carrot Yield in Two Localized Irrigation Systems

Weed Interference in Carrot Yield in Two Localized Irrigation Systems

Evaluation of the Characteristics of Pollutant Discharge in Tomato Hydroponic Wastewater (HWW) for Sustainable Water Management in Korea

Determination of Minimum Doses of Imazamox for Controlling Xanthium strumarium L. and Chenopodium album L. in Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About