2018
DOI: 10.1590/1808-1657000202015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development stages horseweed in soybeans competition

Abstract: The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative competitive ability of soybean with different development stages of hairy fleabane. Two experiments were conducted in greenhouse, in a completely randomized design. In the experiment it was tested soybean and hairy fleabane competition at different stage of development (rosette and 15 cm height) at the proportions 100:0, 75:25, 50:50, 25:75 and 0:100, and total plant population was 315 plant m-2. The variables evaluated were plant height, leaf area, and … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 20 publications
(17 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The graphical analysis method of relative productivity (Radosevich, 1987;Cousens, 1991), as described by Ruchel et al (2019) and Silva et al (2017), was used for analyzing data on height, leaf area and shoot dry matter. The criterion to consider the existence of diferences in competitive abilities for relative competitiveness indexes, coefficients of relative grouping and competitiveness was that there should be differences in at least two of them by the T-test (Bianchi et al, 2006).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The graphical analysis method of relative productivity (Radosevich, 1987;Cousens, 1991), as described by Ruchel et al (2019) and Silva et al (2017), was used for analyzing data on height, leaf area and shoot dry matter. The criterion to consider the existence of diferences in competitive abilities for relative competitiveness indexes, coefficients of relative grouping and competitiveness was that there should be differences in at least two of them by the T-test (Bianchi et al, 2006).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%