Modeling of weeds interference periods in bean

Parreira, Mariana Casari; Barroso, Arthur Arrobas Martins; Pereira, Fernanda Campos Mastrotti; Alves, Paulo Roberto Arruda

doi:10.1590/s0100-83582012000400004

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

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%

Weed management and its relation to yield and seed physiological potential in common bean cultivars

Costa

Barbosa

Sá

2013

Pesqui. Agropecu. Trop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Common bean is an important crop in Brazil primarily because of its nutritional characteristics. Some agronomic practices, such as weed management, are fundamental to cultivation, as a means of obtaining a high crop yield. However, some studies have shown that weed management may alter the function of the cultivar cycle. Thus, this study aimed at determining the optimal phenological stage in early-maturing common bean cultivars to perform the weed control without providing reductions in yield and seed quality. The experimental design was randomized blocks with 20 treatments and four replications, in a 2×2×5 (cultivars × types of weed control × periods of weed control) factorial scheme. The periods of weed control for both cultivars (Carioca Precoce and IPR-Colibri) consisted of full cycle weeded (control), weed control at the V4-3 stage (first three nodes on the main stem with trifoliate leaves), at the R5 stage (beginning of bloom) and at the R8 stage (appearance of pods) and full cycle unweeded (no weed control). The types of weed control used were chemical (fluazifop-p-butyl + fomesafen) and mechanical (hoe). The Carioca Precoce cultivar demonstrated higher agronomic performance and yield than the IPR-Colibri cultivar, although the IPR-Colibri seeds had a higher vigor. The type of weed control (chemical or mechanical) did not affect the agronomic characteristics, yield and seed physiological potential of the cultivars. The ideal period for weed control in early-maturing common bean cultivars to obtain a higher yield and seed physiological potential was observed at the V4-3 phenological stage.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

Weed management and its relation to yield and seed physiological potential in common bean cultivars

Costa

Barbosa

Sá

2013

Pesqui. Agropecu. Trop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…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%

Weed interference periods in the 'Fécula Branca' cassava

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-This study aimed to determine the periods of weed interference in the first cycle of 'Fécula Branca' cassava. The experiment was arranged in a randomized block design, with four repetitions. The treatments consisted of eight periods of weed control (25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, and 175 days after planting -DAP) and eight periods of coexistence between the weed community and the crop (25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, and 175), besides control without weeds and control with weeds until harvest (322 DAP). The predominant weed species with higher relative importance were: Avena sativa, Sorghum halepense, Conyza Canadensis, Euphorbia heterophylla, Raphanus raphanistrum, and Commelina benghalensis. It was concluded that, accepting losses of 1% for root and starch production, the period before interference (PBI) was 66 and 70 DAP; the total period of interference prevention (TPIP) was 88 and 91 DAP and the critical period of interference (CPI) was between 66-88 and 70-91 DAP, respectively. For losses of 5% for root and starch production, the PBI was 87 and 88 DAP, and the TPIP 80 and 81 DAP, respectively; in this case, there was no CPI. Considering the average prices of R$ 218.90 t -1 and R$ 1,191.84 t, paid in 2012 for root and starch production, respectively, and control cost of R$ 300.00 ha -1 , the root and starch production for the period prior to economic loss (WEEPPEL) could be estimated to be 20 and 24 DAP, respectively.Keywords: cassava, Manihot esculenta, weed interference, WEEPPEL.RESUMO -Objetivou-se neste trabalho determinar os períodos de interferências das plantas daninhas no primeiro ciclo da cultura da mandioca Fécula Branca. O delineamento utilizado foi o de blocos casualizados com quatro repetições. Os tratamentos constituíram-se de sete períodos de controle das plantas daninhas (25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150 e 175 dias após o plantio -DAP) e de sete períodos de convivência entre a comunidade de plantas daninhas e a cultura (25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150 e 175 DAP), além de testemunha capinada e outra testemunha sem capina, até a colheita (322 DAP). As espécies de plantas daninhas que predominaram e apresentaram maiores índices de importância relativa foram: Avena sativa, Sorghum halepense, Conyza canadensis, Euphorbia heterophylla, Raphanus raphanistrum e Commelina benghalensis. Concluiu-se que, aceitando-se perdas de 1% para produção de raízes e fécula, o PAI foi de 66 e 70 DAP; o PTPI, 88 e 91 DAP; e o PCPI, entre 66 e 88 e 70 a 91 DAP, respectivamente. Para perdas de 5% na produção de raízes e fécula, o PAI foi de 87 e 88 DAP e o PTPI, de 80 e 81 DAP, respectivamente; para este caso, não houve o PCPI. Considerando-se valores médios pagos em 2012 para raízes e fécula de R$ 218,90 t -1 e R$ 1.191,84 t -1

show abstract

“…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

“…Na cultura do feijão não é diferente: na quase sua totalidade, no período entre 2012 e 2013 foi utilizado o nível arbitrário de 5% de redução na produtividade (Ghamari & Ahmadvand, 2012;Parreira et al, 2012Parreira et al, , 2013Bressanin et al, 2013;Frenda et al, 2013). No Brasil, a análise econômica tem pouca demanda, mas gera muito interesse na atual conjuntura econômica.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparação entre métodos para determinar o período anterior à interferência de plantas daninhas em feijoeiros com distintos tipos de hábitos de crescimento

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMO -A interferência causada pelas plantas daninhas pode reduzir em até 80% a produtividade de grãos do feijão quando não manejadas de forma correta. Portanto, a decisão sobre o momento de controlá-las é um dos principais aspectos do manejo integrado. Nesse sentido, objetivou-se com este trabalho determinar o período anterior à interferência das plantas daninhas (PAI) em cultivares de feijão com diferentes tipos de hábitos de crescimento. Adotou-se o delineamento experimental de blocos casualizados com quatro repetições. Os tratamentos experimentais foram constituídos de dez períodos de convivência da cultura com as plantas daninhas: 0-7, 0-14, 0-21, 0-28, 0-35, 0-42, 0-49, 0-56, 0-97 (colheita) dias após a emergência (DAE) e mais uma testemunha sem convívio com as plantas daninhas. O PAI foi determinado por meio de distintas abordagens: o nível arbitrário de 5% de perda na produtividade, o nível de tolerância (NT) e o de dano no rendimento econômico (PADRE). O PAI obtido foi diferente em todas as abordagens, e os feijoeiros de crescimento indeterminado tipo II apresentaram os menores tempos de convivência. : 0-7; 0-14; 0-21; 0-28; 0-35; 0-42; 0-49;0-56; 0-97 (harvesting) Palavras-chave: Phaseolus vulgaris, cultivares, competição. ABSTRACT -Beans grain productivity may be reduced by up to 80% and, therefore, knowing the proper time to control weeds becomes fundamental, his research was conducted in order to determine the period prior to interference (PPI) on bean cultivars of different types' plant growth through distinct approaches: arbitrary level of 5% productivity loss; tolerance level (TL), and the Weed Period Prior to Economic Loss (WEEPPEL). Experimental treatments were constituted of ten periods of coexistence, periods of the crop with the weeds

show abstract

Modeling of weeds interference periods in bean

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Weed management and its relation to yield and seed physiological potential in common bean cultivars

Weed management and its relation to yield and seed physiological potential in common bean cultivars

Weed interference periods in the 'Fécula Branca' cassava

Comparação entre métodos para determinar o período anterior à interferência de plantas daninhas em feijoeiros com distintos tipos de hábitos de crescimento

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About