2012
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-83582012000400004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling of weeds interference periods in bean

Abstract: The research objective was to determine the effects of spacing and seeding density of common bean to the period prior to weed interference (PPI) and weed period prior to economic loss (WEEPPEL). The treatments consisted of periods of coexistence between culture and the weeds, with 0 to 10, 0 to 20, 0 to 30, 0 to 40, 0 to 50, 0 to 60, 0 to 70, and 0 to 80 days and a control maintained without weeds. In addition to the periods of coexistence, there were still studies with an inter-row of 0.45 and 0.60 m, 10 and … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
0
0
4

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(10 reference statements)
2
0
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…As a result, there is more intense competition with the crop. Furthermore, the weed population in this study was similar to those of other studies examining weed interference in common beans, where a crop yield reduction was observed (Salgado et al 2007, Pereira et al 2012.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…As a result, there is more intense competition with the crop. Furthermore, the weed population in this study was similar to those of other studies examining weed interference in common beans, where a crop yield reduction was observed (Salgado et al 2007, Pereira et al 2012.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Data comparison between PBI and WEEPPEL, both for root and starch production, were similar to those obtained by Parreira et al (2012), working with the bean crop.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Scholtenet al (2011) de competição, tendendo a infestar de modo intenso as culturas, especialmente as de inverno (Kissmann & Groth, 1999). Parreira et al (2012Parreira et al ( , 2013 ) ao final dos períodos de convivência, para os cultivares de feijao Pérola, BRS Pontal e IPR Juriti.…”
Section: Comunidade Infestanteunclassified
“…cultivares de feijão-carioca de hábito de crescimento indeterminado tipo III, as perdas de produtividade foram de 60% (Parreira et al, 2012) e 63% (Scholten et al, 2011) Todavia, em estudos na região amazônica, nos cultivares EV x 91-2E-2, BR8 Caldeirão e BR IPEAN V69 de feijão-frade, de hábito de crescimento indeterminado tipo IV, as perdas foram acima de 60, 70 e 90%, respectivamente (Oliveira et al, 2009). Na região Nordeste brasileira o cultivar BR 16, também de feijão-frade, teve redução de 90% em seu rendimento de grãos (Freitas et al, 2009).…”
Section: Comunidade Infestanteunclassified
See 1 more Smart Citation