Weed Control and Corn (Zea mays) Response to Planting Pattern and Herbicide Program with High Seeding Rates in North Carolina

Abstract

Effective weed control in corn (Zea mays L.) is important to optimize yield. Concern over environmental impact of atrazine and selection for glyphosate resistance has increased the need to develop alternative strategies that use herbicides other than atrazine and glyphosate and appropriate cultural practices to control weeds. Research was conducted during 2011 and 2012 to determine weed and corn response to herbicide programs containing dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate applied postemergence alone or with atrazine in single-and twin-row planting patterns. Planting pattern had no effect on common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) and Texas panicum (Panicum texanum L.) population and did not interact with herbicide program. Effective weed control hastened maturity in some but not all instances. Under weed-free conditions, corn grain yield was higher in 5 of 7 trials when planted in twin rows versus single rows at equivalent corn populations (141,000 plants ha −1 ). These results suggest that while planting pattern may not impact weed control dramatically, planting corn in twin rows may be an effective alternative to single-row planting patterns because of increased yield under high corn populations.

Effect of Weed Control Treatments and Planting Density in Maize (Zea mays L.)

“…Also, dense planting increased ears, stover and total yields by 25.07, 30.94 and 28.55 %, respectively. These results are in agreement with those reported by other investigators of them Porter et al (1997), Bavec & Bavec (2002), Widdicombe &Thelen (2002, Acciares & Zuluaga (2006), Maddonni et al (2006), Singh & Singh (2006) and Williams et al (2014). But, Abouziena et al (2008) found that the highest 100-grain weight and grain weight/ ear were recorded when maize was planted with low plant population.…”

“…Also, similar significant effects were observed in shelling percentage, ears, stover and total yields per fad as well as harvest index where, they were increased significantly due to weeding without significant differences among the three weeding treatments which recorded at par higher averages than the un-weeded control. These results are in agreement with those obtained by El-Metwally et al (2001), Dalley et al (2006), Abouziena et al (2008), Ali et al (2011), Larbi et al (2013), Zhang et al (2013), Amare et al (2014), Sepahvand et al (2014), Williams et al (2014) and Abana & Godwin (2015).…”

High‐yield characteristics and root support of rain‐fed maize under film mulching

“…Weed, diseases, and insect pests were rare at the field site in this region (Wang et al., 2018); therefore, no chemical control was used at the field site. However, considering the serious growth impact of weeds (Williams, Heiniger, Everman, & Jordan, 2014) and aiming to avoid impacts on maize root−shoot development as much as possible, any weeds that accidentally appeared on test plots were regularly inspected to ensure manual removal rapidly. In 2015, the tested maize XY335 was sown on 30 April and harvested on 15 September, and the full growth period was 138 d. In 2016, the maize was sown on 27 April and harvested on 11 September, and the full growth period was 137 d.…”

Corn Hybrid, Row Spacing, and Seeding Rate Effects on Yield in Upstate Missouri

“…Although several studies show that narrow rows increase yields 3.8 to 10% (Barbieri et al, 2000; Johnson and Hoverstad, 2002; Thelen, 2006; Widdicombe and Thelen, 2002; Williams et al, 2014), some studies show no effect or a yield reduction (Farnham, 2001; Lee, 2006; Novacek et al, 2013; Van Roekel and Coulter, 2012). The most consistent yield responses (7–10%) to narrow rows have been in the north‐central United States (Johnson and Hoverstad, 2002; Porter et al, 1997; Sharratt and McWilliams, 2005; Thelen, 2006; Widdicombe and Thelen, 2002) or twin‐row irrigated wide‐row (36‐inch) systems in the southern United States (Karlen and Camp, 1985; Williams et al, 2014). However, Nielsen (1988) reported a 2.7% increase in grain yields with 15‐ compared with 30‐inch rows in Indiana.…”

“…. The most consistent yield responses (7-10%) to narrow rows have been in the north-central United States (Johnson and Hoverstad, 2002;Porter et al, 1997;Sharratt and McWilliams, 2005;Thelen, 2006;Widdicombe and Thelen, 2002) or twin-row irrigated wide-row (36-inch) systems in the southern United States (Karlen and Camp, 1985;Williams et al, 2014). However, Nielsen (1988) reported a 2.7% increase in grain yields with 15-compared with 30-inch rows in Indiana.…”