Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris)

Interference of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2′) was determined in a 2-yr field experiment. Yield of sugarbeet roots and recoverable sucrose/ha decreased as the density of common lambsquarters increased. At densities of 6, 12, 18, and 24 commo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Weed science 1983-01, Vol.31 (1), p.5-8
1. Verfasser:	Schweizer, Edward E.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Agricultural seasons Biomass production Broadleaf weeds Crop harvesting Crop production Density Plant roots Plants Sunflowers Weeds
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

container_end_page	8
container_issue	1
container_start_page	5
container_title	Weed science
container_volume	31
creator	Schweizer, Edward E.
description	Interference of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2′) was determined in a 2-yr field experiment. Yield of sugarbeet roots and recoverable sucrose/ha decreased as the density of common lambsquarters increased. At densities of 6, 12, 18, and 24 common lambsquarters plants/30 m of row, root yields were reduced 13, 29, 38, and 48%, respectively, and recoverable sucrose yields were reduced 11, 27, 37, and 46%, respectively. The minimum number of common lambsquarters plants required per 30 m of row to reduce sugarbeet root yields was estimated to be six in 1980 and four in 1981.
doi_str_mv	10.1017/S0043174500068454
format	Article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1017_S0043174500068454</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0043174500068454</cupid><jstor_id>4043558</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4043558</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c263t-a60abf7448db4e6d64bfb8683ae34dbd1b0da95e972981e49f1fb1d7434e072d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKs_QBCZpV2MJpPHZJY6-CgUXIxdh6S5qVM6E01mBP-9KS1uBFcX7nfOvZyD0CXBtwST8q7BmFFSMo4xFpJxdoQmhHOcFyWvjtFkh_MdP0VnMW4wJqIg1QQ1te8632cL3Zn4OeowQIjZTf0Ovf_wth27TG_N2M2yeZ-QgwD9CrK2z5pxrYMBGJL8AQadfY3btGnj7BydOL2NcHGYU7R8enyrX_LF6_O8vl_kq0LQIdcCa-NKxqQ1DIQVzDgjhaQaKLPGEoOtrjhUZVFJAqxyxBliS0YZ4LKwdIrI_u4q-BgDOPUR2k6Hb0Ww2rWi_rSSPFd7zyYOPvwaWNJxLhO-3mOnvdLrlEYtG1JJlgrjkvMkoIefqbDQ2jWojR9Dn3L-8_UH9mV2-Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris)</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Schweizer, Edward E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schweizer, Edward E.</creatorcontrib><description>Interference of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2′) was determined in a 2-yr field experiment. Yield of sugarbeet roots and recoverable sucrose/ha decreased as the density of common lambsquarters increased. At densities of 6, 12, 18, and 24 common lambsquarters plants/30 m of row, root yields were reduced 13, 29, 38, and 48%, respectively, and recoverable sucrose yields were reduced 11, 27, 37, and 46%, respectively. The minimum number of common lambsquarters plants required per 30 m of row to reduce sugarbeet root yields was estimated to be six in 1980 and four in 1981.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-1745</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2759</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0043174500068454</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Agricultural seasons ; Biomass production ; Broadleaf weeds ; Crop harvesting ; Crop production ; Density ; Plant roots ; Plants ; Sunflowers ; Weeds</subject><ispartof>Weed science, 1983-01, Vol.31 (1), p.5-8</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1983 Weed Science Society of America</rights><rights>Copyright 1983 The Weed Science Society of America</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c263t-a60abf7448db4e6d64bfb8683ae34dbd1b0da95e972981e49f1fb1d7434e072d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c263t-a60abf7448db4e6d64bfb8683ae34dbd1b0da95e972981e49f1fb1d7434e072d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4043558$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/4043558$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,4010,27900,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schweizer, Edward E.</creatorcontrib><title>Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris)</title><title>Weed science</title><addtitle>Weed sci</addtitle><description>Interference of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2′) was determined in a 2-yr field experiment. Yield of sugarbeet roots and recoverable sucrose/ha decreased as the density of common lambsquarters increased. At densities of 6, 12, 18, and 24 common lambsquarters plants/30 m of row, root yields were reduced 13, 29, 38, and 48%, respectively, and recoverable sucrose yields were reduced 11, 27, 37, and 46%, respectively. The minimum number of common lambsquarters plants required per 30 m of row to reduce sugarbeet root yields was estimated to be six in 1980 and four in 1981.</description><subject>Agricultural seasons</subject><subject>Biomass production</subject><subject>Broadleaf weeds</subject><subject>Crop harvesting</subject><subject>Crop production</subject><subject>Density</subject><subject>Plant roots</subject><subject>Plants</subject><subject>Sunflowers</subject><subject>Weeds</subject><issn>0043-1745</issn><issn>1550-2759</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1983</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKs_QBCZpV2MJpPHZJY6-CgUXIxdh6S5qVM6E01mBP-9KS1uBFcX7nfOvZyD0CXBtwST8q7BmFFSMo4xFpJxdoQmhHOcFyWvjtFkh_MdP0VnMW4wJqIg1QQ1te8632cL3Zn4OeowQIjZTf0Ovf_wth27TG_N2M2yeZ-QgwD9CrK2z5pxrYMBGJL8AQadfY3btGnj7BydOL2NcHGYU7R8enyrX_LF6_O8vl_kq0LQIdcCa-NKxqQ1DIQVzDgjhaQaKLPGEoOtrjhUZVFJAqxyxBliS0YZ4LKwdIrI_u4q-BgDOPUR2k6Hb0Ww2rWi_rSSPFd7zyYOPvwaWNJxLhO-3mOnvdLrlEYtG1JJlgrjkvMkoIefqbDQ2jWojR9Dn3L-8_UH9mV2-Q</recordid><startdate>198301</startdate><enddate>198301</enddate><creator>Schweizer, Edward E.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198301</creationdate><title>Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris)</title><author>Schweizer, Edward E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c263t-a60abf7448db4e6d64bfb8683ae34dbd1b0da95e972981e49f1fb1d7434e072d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1983</creationdate><topic>Agricultural seasons</topic><topic>Biomass production</topic><topic>Broadleaf weeds</topic><topic>Crop harvesting</topic><topic>Crop production</topic><topic>Density</topic><topic>Plant roots</topic><topic>Plants</topic><topic>Sunflowers</topic><topic>Weeds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schweizer, Edward E.</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Weed science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schweizer, Edward E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris)</atitle><jtitle>Weed science</jtitle><addtitle>Weed sci</addtitle><date>1983-01</date><risdate>1983</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>5</spage><epage>8</epage><pages>5-8</pages><issn>0043-1745</issn><eissn>1550-2759</eissn><abstract>Interference of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2′) was determined in a 2-yr field experiment. Yield of sugarbeet roots and recoverable sucrose/ha decreased as the density of common lambsquarters increased. At densities of 6, 12, 18, and 24 common lambsquarters plants/30 m of row, root yields were reduced 13, 29, 38, and 48%, respectively, and recoverable sucrose yields were reduced 11, 27, 37, and 46%, respectively. The minimum number of common lambsquarters plants required per 30 m of row to reduce sugarbeet root yields was estimated to be six in 1980 and four in 1981.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0043174500068454</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 0043-1745
ispartof	Weed science, 1983-01, Vol.31 (1), p.5-8
issn	0043-1745 1550-2759
language	eng
recordid	cdi_crossref_primary_10_1017_S0043174500068454
source	Jstor Complete Legacy
subjects	Agricultural seasons Biomass production Broadleaf weeds Crop harvesting Crop production Density Plant roots Plants Sunflowers Weeds
title	Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris)
url	https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-22T00%3A52%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Common%20Lambsquarters%20(Chenopodium%20album)%20Interference%20in%20Sugarbeets%20(Beta%20vulgaris)&rft.jtitle=Weed%20science&rft.au=Schweizer,%20Edward%20E.&rft.date=1983-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=5&rft.epage=8&rft.pages=5-8&rft.issn=0043-1745&rft.eissn=1550-2759&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0043174500068454&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E4043558%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0043174500068454&rft_jstor_id=4043558&rfr_iscdi=true