Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays)
Eight cultivation programs with several equipment combinations were compared with each other and with an atrazine plus pendimethalin herbicide program with and without supplemental cultivation from 1992 to 1994. In two of the three years, cultivation with a rotary hoe or tine weeder reduced weed see...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Weed technology 1997-01, Vol.11 (1), p.123-131 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 131 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 123 |
| container_title | Weed technology |
| container_volume | 11 |
| creator | Mohler, C.L Frisch, J.C Mt Pleasant, J |
| description | Eight cultivation programs with several equipment combinations were compared with each other and with an atrazine plus pendimethalin herbicide program with and without supplemental cultivation from 1992 to 1994. In two of the three years, cultivation with a rotary hoe or tine weeder reduced weed seedling density by 39 to 74%. Tine weeding was more effective than rotary hoeing in 1992. Rotary hoeing or tine weeding reduced corn populations by an average of 6%. Weed control by different types of inter-row cultivators varied little, except that an in-row cultivator provided better control than a rolling cultivator in two years and better control than a shovel cultivator in one year. Weeds establishing from seeds were better controlled by herbicides in all three years, but weeds establishing from roots, rhizomes, and tubers were controlled as well or better by cultivation. Weed control was sometimes better using herbicides plus cultivation than with herbicides alone, but the combination damaged the crop in two of the three years. Cost of mechanical treatments which combined inter-row cultivation with rotary hoeing or tine weeding differed from that for the herbicide treatment by less than 2%. Yields of the best mechanical treatment and the herbicide treatment were nearly equal in all years, but the best mechanical regime varied between years. Consequently, mean net return was moderately higher for the herbicide treatment. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0890037X00041452 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1017_S0890037X00041452</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3988241</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3988241</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-a556287446809550be9670e9aa4f94a257956410a244f11f57ec5e12d0accf713</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNplkL1PwzAQxS0EEqXwB4AYPDDAEDg7_ohHVJUPqRJDqYRYosO1S6omruwA6n9PoqAuTDe833t39wg5Z3DLgOm7ORQGINdvACCYkPyAjJiUkHEt4JCMejnr9WNyktIagCnOYUSm02_cfGFbhYYGT2tnP7GpLG7oj3NLWmODK1e7pqXbGFYR60R9iNSG2NDrd4cdsUs3p-TI4ya5s785JouH6evkKZu9PD5P7meZzRlvM5RS8UILoQow3XEfzigNziAKbwRyqY1UggFyITxjXmpnpWN8CWit1ywfEzbk2hhSis6X21jVGHclg7LvofzXQ-e5GjxbTN1fPmJjq7Q3ci07VHXY5YCtUxviXs5NUXDRb74YZI-hxFXsEhZzo3NVGJb_Aja1bOs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays)</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Mohler, C.L ; Frisch, J.C ; Mt Pleasant, J</creator><creatorcontrib>Mohler, C.L ; Frisch, J.C ; Mt Pleasant, J</creatorcontrib><description>Eight cultivation programs with several equipment combinations were compared with each other and with an atrazine plus pendimethalin herbicide program with and without supplemental cultivation from 1992 to 1994. In two of the three years, cultivation with a rotary hoe or tine weeder reduced weed seedling density by 39 to 74%. Tine weeding was more effective than rotary hoeing in 1992. Rotary hoeing or tine weeding reduced corn populations by an average of 6%. Weed control by different types of inter-row cultivators varied little, except that an in-row cultivator provided better control than a rolling cultivator in two years and better control than a shovel cultivator in one year. Weeds establishing from seeds were better controlled by herbicides in all three years, but weeds establishing from roots, rhizomes, and tubers were controlled as well or better by cultivation. Weed control was sometimes better using herbicides plus cultivation than with herbicides alone, but the combination damaged the crop in two of the three years. Cost of mechanical treatments which combined inter-row cultivation with rotary hoeing or tine weeding differed from that for the herbicide treatment by less than 2%. Yields of the best mechanical treatment and the herbicide treatment were nearly equal in all years, but the best mechanical regime varied between years. Consequently, mean net return was moderately higher for the herbicide treatment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-037X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2740</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0890037X00041452</identifier><identifier>CODEN: WETEE9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America</publisher><subject>ANALISIS DE COSTOS Y BENEFICIOS ; ANALYSE COUT AVANTAGE ; ATRAZINA ; ATRAZINE ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biological control and other methods ; CHEMICAL CONTROL ; CONTROL CULTURAL ; CONTROL QUIMICO ; Corn ; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ; COSTOS ; COSTS ; COUT ; CROP LOSSES ; CROP YIELD ; CULTIVADORES ; CULTIVADORES ROTATIVOS ; CULTIVATEUR ; CULTIVATEUR ROTATIF ; CULTIVATION ; CULTIVATORS ; CULTIVO ; CULTURAL CONTROL ; DANOS MECANICOS ; DEGAT MECANIQUE ; DENT D'OUTIL ; DESHERBAGE ; EFFICACY ; ESCARDA ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Herbicides ; Hoeing ; Hoes ; in-row cultivation ; INTEGRATED CONTROL ; INTERROW CULTIVATION ; LUCHA INTEGRADA ; LUTTE CHIMIQUE ; LUTTE CULTURALE ; LUTTE INTEGREE ; MALEZAS PERENNES ; MAUVAISE HERBE VIVACE ; MECHANICAL DAMAGE ; Parasitic plants. Weeds ; PENDIMETALINA ; PENDIMETHALIN ; PENDIMETHALINE ; PERDIDAS DE LA COSECHA ; PERENNIAL WEEDS ; PERTE DE RECOLTE ; Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection ; PRATIQUE CULTURALE ; PROFITABILITY ; RENDEMENT DES CULTURES ; RENDIMIENTO DE CULTIVOS ; RENTABILIDAD ; RENTABILITE ; RETURNS ; rolling cultivators ; ROTARY CULTIVATORS ; Shovels ; Sustainable agriculture ; Tillage ; TINES ; VIBROCULTIVADORES ; WEED CONTROL ; Weeds ; ZEA MAYS</subject><ispartof>Weed technology, 1997-01, Vol.11 (1), p.123-131</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1997 The Weed Science Society of America</rights><rights>1997 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-a556287446809550be9670e9aa4f94a257956410a244f11f57ec5e12d0accf713</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-a556287446809550be9670e9aa4f94a257956410a244f11f57ec5e12d0accf713</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3988241$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3988241$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27903,27904,57995,58228</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2750006$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mohler, C.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frisch, J.C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mt Pleasant, J</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays)</title><title>Weed technology</title><description>Eight cultivation programs with several equipment combinations were compared with each other and with an atrazine plus pendimethalin herbicide program with and without supplemental cultivation from 1992 to 1994. In two of the three years, cultivation with a rotary hoe or tine weeder reduced weed seedling density by 39 to 74%. Tine weeding was more effective than rotary hoeing in 1992. Rotary hoeing or tine weeding reduced corn populations by an average of 6%. Weed control by different types of inter-row cultivators varied little, except that an in-row cultivator provided better control than a rolling cultivator in two years and better control than a shovel cultivator in one year. Weeds establishing from seeds were better controlled by herbicides in all three years, but weeds establishing from roots, rhizomes, and tubers were controlled as well or better by cultivation. Weed control was sometimes better using herbicides plus cultivation than with herbicides alone, but the combination damaged the crop in two of the three years. Cost of mechanical treatments which combined inter-row cultivation with rotary hoeing or tine weeding differed from that for the herbicide treatment by less than 2%. Yields of the best mechanical treatment and the herbicide treatment were nearly equal in all years, but the best mechanical regime varied between years. Consequently, mean net return was moderately higher for the herbicide treatment.</description><subject>ANALISIS DE COSTOS Y BENEFICIOS</subject><subject>ANALYSE COUT AVANTAGE</subject><subject>ATRAZINA</subject><subject>ATRAZINE</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biological control and other methods</subject><subject>CHEMICAL CONTROL</subject><subject>CONTROL CULTURAL</subject><subject>CONTROL QUIMICO</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS</subject><subject>COSTOS</subject><subject>COSTS</subject><subject>COUT</subject><subject>CROP LOSSES</subject><subject>CROP YIELD</subject><subject>CULTIVADORES</subject><subject>CULTIVADORES ROTATIVOS</subject><subject>CULTIVATEUR</subject><subject>CULTIVATEUR ROTATIF</subject><subject>CULTIVATION</subject><subject>CULTIVATORS</subject><subject>CULTIVO</subject><subject>CULTURAL CONTROL</subject><subject>DANOS MECANICOS</subject><subject>DEGAT MECANIQUE</subject><subject>DENT D'OUTIL</subject><subject>DESHERBAGE</subject><subject>EFFICACY</subject><subject>ESCARDA</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>Hoeing</subject><subject>Hoes</subject><subject>in-row cultivation</subject><subject>INTEGRATED CONTROL</subject><subject>INTERROW CULTIVATION</subject><subject>LUCHA INTEGRADA</subject><subject>LUTTE CHIMIQUE</subject><subject>LUTTE CULTURALE</subject><subject>LUTTE INTEGREE</subject><subject>MALEZAS PERENNES</subject><subject>MAUVAISE HERBE VIVACE</subject><subject>MECHANICAL DAMAGE</subject><subject>Parasitic plants. Weeds</subject><subject>PENDIMETALINA</subject><subject>PENDIMETHALIN</subject><subject>PENDIMETHALINE</subject><subject>PERDIDAS DE LA COSECHA</subject><subject>PERENNIAL WEEDS</subject><subject>PERTE DE RECOLTE</subject><subject>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</subject><subject>PRATIQUE CULTURALE</subject><subject>PROFITABILITY</subject><subject>RENDEMENT DES CULTURES</subject><subject>RENDIMIENTO DE CULTIVOS</subject><subject>RENTABILIDAD</subject><subject>RENTABILITE</subject><subject>RETURNS</subject><subject>rolling cultivators</subject><subject>ROTARY CULTIVATORS</subject><subject>Shovels</subject><subject>Sustainable agriculture</subject><subject>Tillage</subject><subject>TINES</subject><subject>VIBROCULTIVADORES</subject><subject>WEED CONTROL</subject><subject>Weeds</subject><subject>ZEA MAYS</subject><issn>0890-037X</issn><issn>1550-2740</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNplkL1PwzAQxS0EEqXwB4AYPDDAEDg7_ohHVJUPqRJDqYRYosO1S6omruwA6n9PoqAuTDe833t39wg5Z3DLgOm7ORQGINdvACCYkPyAjJiUkHEt4JCMejnr9WNyktIagCnOYUSm02_cfGFbhYYGT2tnP7GpLG7oj3NLWmODK1e7pqXbGFYR60R9iNSG2NDrd4cdsUs3p-TI4ya5s785JouH6evkKZu9PD5P7meZzRlvM5RS8UILoQow3XEfzigNziAKbwRyqY1UggFyITxjXmpnpWN8CWit1ywfEzbk2hhSis6X21jVGHclg7LvofzXQ-e5GjxbTN1fPmJjq7Q3ci07VHXY5YCtUxviXs5NUXDRb74YZI-hxFXsEhZzo3NVGJb_Aja1bOs</recordid><startdate>19970101</startdate><enddate>19970101</enddate><creator>Mohler, C.L</creator><creator>Frisch, J.C</creator><creator>Mt Pleasant, J</creator><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19970101</creationdate><title>Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays)</title><author>Mohler, C.L ; Frisch, J.C ; Mt Pleasant, J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c312t-a556287446809550be9670e9aa4f94a257956410a244f11f57ec5e12d0accf713</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>ANALISIS DE COSTOS Y BENEFICIOS</topic><topic>ANALYSE COUT AVANTAGE</topic><topic>ATRAZINA</topic><topic>ATRAZINE</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biological control and other methods</topic><topic>CHEMICAL CONTROL</topic><topic>CONTROL CULTURAL</topic><topic>CONTROL QUIMICO</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS</topic><topic>COSTOS</topic><topic>COSTS</topic><topic>COUT</topic><topic>CROP LOSSES</topic><topic>CROP YIELD</topic><topic>CULTIVADORES</topic><topic>CULTIVADORES ROTATIVOS</topic><topic>CULTIVATEUR</topic><topic>CULTIVATEUR ROTATIF</topic><topic>CULTIVATION</topic><topic>CULTIVATORS</topic><topic>CULTIVO</topic><topic>CULTURAL CONTROL</topic><topic>DANOS MECANICOS</topic><topic>DEGAT MECANIQUE</topic><topic>DENT D'OUTIL</topic><topic>DESHERBAGE</topic><topic>EFFICACY</topic><topic>ESCARDA</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>Hoeing</topic><topic>Hoes</topic><topic>in-row cultivation</topic><topic>INTEGRATED CONTROL</topic><topic>INTERROW CULTIVATION</topic><topic>LUCHA INTEGRADA</topic><topic>LUTTE CHIMIQUE</topic><topic>LUTTE CULTURALE</topic><topic>LUTTE INTEGREE</topic><topic>MALEZAS PERENNES</topic><topic>MAUVAISE HERBE VIVACE</topic><topic>MECHANICAL DAMAGE</topic><topic>Parasitic plants. Weeds</topic><topic>PENDIMETALINA</topic><topic>PENDIMETHALIN</topic><topic>PENDIMETHALINE</topic><topic>PERDIDAS DE LA COSECHA</topic><topic>PERENNIAL WEEDS</topic><topic>PERTE DE RECOLTE</topic><topic>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</topic><topic>PRATIQUE CULTURALE</topic><topic>PROFITABILITY</topic><topic>RENDEMENT DES CULTURES</topic><topic>RENDIMIENTO DE CULTIVOS</topic><topic>RENTABILIDAD</topic><topic>RENTABILITE</topic><topic>RETURNS</topic><topic>rolling cultivators</topic><topic>ROTARY CULTIVATORS</topic><topic>Shovels</topic><topic>Sustainable agriculture</topic><topic>Tillage</topic><topic>TINES</topic><topic>VIBROCULTIVADORES</topic><topic>WEED CONTROL</topic><topic>Weeds</topic><topic>ZEA MAYS</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mohler, C.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frisch, J.C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mt Pleasant, J</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mohler, C.L</au><au>Frisch, J.C</au><au>Mt Pleasant, J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays)</atitle><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle><date>1997-01-01</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>123</spage><epage>131</epage><pages>123-131</pages><issn>0890-037X</issn><eissn>1550-2740</eissn><coden>WETEE9</coden><abstract>Eight cultivation programs with several equipment combinations were compared with each other and with an atrazine plus pendimethalin herbicide program with and without supplemental cultivation from 1992 to 1994. In two of the three years, cultivation with a rotary hoe or tine weeder reduced weed seedling density by 39 to 74%. Tine weeding was more effective than rotary hoeing in 1992. Rotary hoeing or tine weeding reduced corn populations by an average of 6%. Weed control by different types of inter-row cultivators varied little, except that an in-row cultivator provided better control than a rolling cultivator in two years and better control than a shovel cultivator in one year. Weeds establishing from seeds were better controlled by herbicides in all three years, but weeds establishing from roots, rhizomes, and tubers were controlled as well or better by cultivation. Weed control was sometimes better using herbicides plus cultivation than with herbicides alone, but the combination damaged the crop in two of the three years. Cost of mechanical treatments which combined inter-row cultivation with rotary hoeing or tine weeding differed from that for the herbicide treatment by less than 2%. Yields of the best mechanical treatment and the herbicide treatment were nearly equal in all years, but the best mechanical regime varied between years. Consequently, mean net return was moderately higher for the herbicide treatment.</abstract><cop>Lawrence, KS</cop><pub>Weed Science Society of America</pub><doi>10.1017/S0890037X00041452</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0890-037X |
| ispartof | Weed technology, 1997-01, Vol.11 (1), p.123-131 |
| issn | 0890-037X 1550-2740 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1017_S0890037X00041452 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | ANALISIS DE COSTOS Y BENEFICIOS ANALYSE COUT AVANTAGE ATRAZINA ATRAZINE Biological and medical sciences Biological control and other methods CHEMICAL CONTROL CONTROL CULTURAL CONTROL QUIMICO Corn COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS COSTOS COSTS COUT CROP LOSSES CROP YIELD CULTIVADORES CULTIVADORES ROTATIVOS CULTIVATEUR CULTIVATEUR ROTATIF CULTIVATION CULTIVATORS CULTIVO CULTURAL CONTROL DANOS MECANICOS DEGAT MECANIQUE DENT D'OUTIL DESHERBAGE EFFICACY ESCARDA Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Herbicides Hoeing Hoes in-row cultivation INTEGRATED CONTROL INTERROW CULTIVATION LUCHA INTEGRADA LUTTE CHIMIQUE LUTTE CULTURALE LUTTE INTEGREE MALEZAS PERENNES MAUVAISE HERBE VIVACE MECHANICAL DAMAGE Parasitic plants. Weeds PENDIMETALINA PENDIMETHALIN PENDIMETHALINE PERDIDAS DE LA COSECHA PERENNIAL WEEDS PERTE DE RECOLTE Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection PRATIQUE CULTURALE PROFITABILITY RENDEMENT DES CULTURES RENDIMIENTO DE CULTIVOS RENTABILIDAD RENTABILITE RETURNS rolling cultivators ROTARY CULTIVATORS Shovels Sustainable agriculture Tillage TINES VIBROCULTIVADORES WEED CONTROL Weeds ZEA MAYS |
| title | Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays) |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T12%3A44%3A13IST&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=Evaluation%20of%20mechanical%20weed%20management%20programs%20for%20corn%20(Zea%20mays)&rft.jtitle=Weed%20technology&rft.au=Mohler,%20C.L&rft.date=1997-01-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=123&rft.epage=131&rft.pages=123-131&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft.coden=WETEE9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0890037X00041452&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E3988241%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_jstor_id=3988241&rfr_iscdi=true |