Wesley France, J. Norsworthy, T. Roberts, J. Ross, T. Barber, E. Gbur
Off-target movement of dicamba has been blamed for damaging millions of hectares of soybean in the United States since registration of the herbicide for use in dicamba-resistant cotton and soybean. Understanding the effect of a low dose of dicamba on non-dicamba-resistant soybean across multiple cultivars, growth stages, and planting dates could help producers better understand the implication of current management practices on yield loss from dicamba in fields where non-dicamba-resistant soybean are grown. A field experiment was conducted in 2019 in Fayetteville and Stuttgart, Arkansas, to evaluate the impact of planting date on response of soybean to a low dose of dicamba. The hypothesis of the planting date experiment was that soybean injury and yield loss will differ depending on planting date and dicamba application timing. Additionally, an experiment was conducted in 2018 and 2019 in Fayetteville to assess whether cultivars differ in sensitivity to dicamba. The hypothesis of the cultivar experiment was that genetic differences of soybean cultivars will allow for differential tolerance to dicamba. In the cultivar experiment, “Eagle DrewSoy” was identified as having enhanced tolerance to dicamba based on reduced injury (47% at R1 and 26% at V3) over both experimental years and locations. Soybean height in this experiment was affected only by application timing. In the planting date experiment, planting after mid-June resulted in reduced yields from dicamba injury. Dicamba exposure reduced yield at the July planting date (61% reduction from nontreated) more severely when compared to dicamba-treated plots of other planting dates (94% average relative yield among other planting dates), indicating that the negative effects of dicamba are increasingly deleterious for soybean planted later in the growing season. Maximum injury manifestation was generally delayed at later planting dates, indicating that dicamba may have been metabolized more slowly.
{"title":"Effect of Cultivar and Planting Date on Soybean Response to Dicamba","authors":"Wesley France, J. Norsworthy, T. Roberts, J. Ross, T. Barber, E. Gbur","doi":"10.1155/2022/9479650","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9479650","url":null,"abstract":"Off-target movement of dicamba has been blamed for damaging millions of hectares of soybean in the United States since registration of the herbicide for use in dicamba-resistant cotton and soybean. Understanding the effect of a low dose of dicamba on non-dicamba-resistant soybean across multiple cultivars, growth stages, and planting dates could help producers better understand the implication of current management practices on yield loss from dicamba in fields where non-dicamba-resistant soybean are grown. A field experiment was conducted in 2019 in Fayetteville and Stuttgart, Arkansas, to evaluate the impact of planting date on response of soybean to a low dose of dicamba. The hypothesis of the planting date experiment was that soybean injury and yield loss will differ depending on planting date and dicamba application timing. Additionally, an experiment was conducted in 2018 and 2019 in Fayetteville to assess whether cultivars differ in sensitivity to dicamba. The hypothesis of the cultivar experiment was that genetic differences of soybean cultivars will allow for differential tolerance to dicamba. In the cultivar experiment, “Eagle DrewSoy” was identified as having enhanced tolerance to dicamba based on reduced injury (47% at R1 and 26% at V3) over both experimental years and locations. Soybean height in this experiment was affected only by application timing. In the planting date experiment, planting after mid-June resulted in reduced yields from dicamba injury. Dicamba exposure reduced yield at the July planting date (61% reduction from nontreated) more severely when compared to dicamba-treated plots of other planting dates (94% average relative yield among other planting dates), indicating that the negative effects of dicamba are increasingly deleterious for soybean planted later in the growing season. Maximum injury manifestation was generally delayed at later planting dates, indicating that dicamba may have been metabolized more slowly.","PeriodicalId":13844,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Agronomy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48552007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Wesley France, J. Norsworthy, T. Roberts, J. Ross, T. Barber, E. Gbur
With the release of the dicamba-resistant crop technology and subsequent increase in dicamba off-target movement to non-dicamba-resistant crops, discovering means of mitigating yield loss through studying dicamba injury to soybean and interactions with factors such as irrigation regime and fertilization would prove beneficial. Field experiments were conducted in 2019 in Fayetteville and Colt, Arkansas, to evaluate the effect of irrigation regime to non-dicamba-resistant soybean that was injured by dicamba at a low dose at multiple timings. Another experiment was conducted in Fayetteville in 2019 and 2020 evaluating the impact of nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) fertilization on soybean recovery following injury by dicamba at multiple reproductive stages. Visible injury in both experiments was affected by application timing. Soybean yield components were impacted by dicamba applications within the irrigation regime experiment, and yields were decreased by dicamba applications; however, soybean yield was higher from branches than from the mainstem in dicamba-treated compared to nontreated plants. In the fertilization experiment, soybean treated with a low dose of dicamba that received N fertilization tended to have reduced biomass compared to treatments receiving no fertilizer or K alone, with greatest biomass reduction tending to occur among treatments receiving both N and K. Total grain yield was not affected by either irrigation regime or fertilization. While an increase in yield due to neither irrigation nor fertilization was observed, these results may help improve understanding of the effect of low-dose dicamba on soybean and aid producers making management decisions.
{"title":"Effect of Irrigation Regime and Fertilization on Recovery of Dicamba Injured Soybean","authors":"Wesley France, J. Norsworthy, T. Roberts, J. Ross, T. Barber, E. Gbur","doi":"10.1155/2022/6589317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6589317","url":null,"abstract":"With the release of the dicamba-resistant crop technology and subsequent increase in dicamba off-target movement to non-dicamba-resistant crops, discovering means of mitigating yield loss through studying dicamba injury to soybean and interactions with factors such as irrigation regime and fertilization would prove beneficial. Field experiments were conducted in 2019 in Fayetteville and Colt, Arkansas, to evaluate the effect of irrigation regime to non-dicamba-resistant soybean that was injured by dicamba at a low dose at multiple timings. Another experiment was conducted in Fayetteville in 2019 and 2020 evaluating the impact of nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) fertilization on soybean recovery following injury by dicamba at multiple reproductive stages. Visible injury in both experiments was affected by application timing. Soybean yield components were impacted by dicamba applications within the irrigation regime experiment, and yields were decreased by dicamba applications; however, soybean yield was higher from branches than from the mainstem in dicamba-treated compared to nontreated plants. In the fertilization experiment, soybean treated with a low dose of dicamba that received N fertilization tended to have reduced biomass compared to treatments receiving no fertilizer or K alone, with greatest biomass reduction tending to occur among treatments receiving both N and K. Total grain yield was not affected by either irrigation regime or fertilization. While an increase in yield due to neither irrigation nor fertilization was observed, these results may help improve understanding of the effect of low-dose dicamba on soybean and aid producers making management decisions.","PeriodicalId":13844,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Agronomy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46163885","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Field bindweed is the major weed problem for tef producers across the central highlands of Ethiopia. Herbicide application alone or coupled with once or twice hand weeding for field bindweed control is difficult due to its biological features, labor-intensive, and time-consuming. The field trial was carried out at Debre Zeit from 2020 to 2021 cropping seasons to investigate different postemergence herbicides against the grass and broadleaf weeds, in general, and field bindweed in particular, in tef farming, using a randomized complete block design with three replications. As a result, we could see that the herbicide combination had no visible effect on durum wheat’s overall performance, which makes us recommend it for the control of field bindweed. In the sequential application, a wide spectrum of herbicides (Musket Power OD 460, Pallas 45 OD, and Sekator OD 375) were applied at tillering stage, and other selective herbicides (Derby 175 SC and 2,4-diamine salt 720 g/L 720 g/L) were applied at the heading stage, and the last nonselective herbicide (Roundup) was applied at physiological maturity of tef when the Convolvulus arvensis was regrowth naturally/latecomer weed. All postemergency herbicide treatments reduced significantly both broadleaf and grass weeds, in general, and C. arvensis infestation, in particular, when compared to the weedy control. Of these, Musket Power OD 460 at tillering stage integrated with 2,4-diamine salt 720 g/L at the heading stage was more effective than other herbicides for eliminating all weeds and C. arvensis in particular throughout the crop life. This weed management option resulted in considerably enhanced weed control efficiency and weed killing potential, reduced weed dry biomass and yield loss, improved grain yield, and economic benefit with an acceptable marginal rate of return for tef growers.
田间旋花是埃塞俄比亚中部高地tef生产者面临的主要杂草问题。单用除草剂或配合一次或两次手除草,由于其生物学特性、劳动强度大、耗时长,在田间防治中存在一定难度。田间试验于2020 - 2021种植季在Debre Zeit进行,采用3个重复的随机完全区组设计,研究不同的出苗期除草剂对tef种植中的禾草和阔叶杂草,特别是田间花叶草的防治效果。结果表明,该除草剂组合对硬粒小麦的综合性能无明显影响,可推荐用于田间结花的防治。在序施过程中,分蘖期施用广谱除草剂(Musket Power OD 460、Pallas 45 OD和Sekator OD 375),抽穗期施用选择性除草剂(Derby 175 SC和2,4-二胺盐720 g/L 720 g/L),最后一种非选择性除草剂(Roundup)在旋花属自然再生/后生杂草的tef生理成熟期施用。与杂草对照相比,所有紧急后除草剂处理均显著减少了阔叶杂草和禾草杂草,特别是木蠹的侵染。其中,在分蘖期与抽穗期2,4-二胺盐720 g/L混用的Musket Power OD 460除草剂在整个作物生命周期内对所有杂草的清除效果都优于其他除草剂。这种杂草管理方案大大提高了杂草控制效率和杂草杀灭潜力,减少了杂草干生物量和产量损失,提高了粮食产量,并为玉米种植者带来了可接受的边际回报率。
{"title":"Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Control in Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter) through Various Herbicide Combinations","authors":"Gebrekidan Feleke, Dereje Chala, Bizuwork Tafes","doi":"10.1155/2022/4752030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4752030","url":null,"abstract":"Field bindweed is the major weed problem for tef producers across the central highlands of Ethiopia. Herbicide application alone or coupled with once or twice hand weeding for field bindweed control is difficult due to its biological features, labor-intensive, and time-consuming. The field trial was carried out at Debre Zeit from 2020 to 2021 cropping seasons to investigate different postemergence herbicides against the grass and broadleaf weeds, in general, and field bindweed in particular, in tef farming, using a randomized complete block design with three replications. As a result, we could see that the herbicide combination had no visible effect on durum wheat’s overall performance, which makes us recommend it for the control of field bindweed. In the sequential application, a wide spectrum of herbicides (Musket Power OD 460, Pallas 45 OD, and Sekator OD 375) were applied at tillering stage, and other selective herbicides (Derby 175 SC and 2,4-diamine salt 720 g/L 720 g/L) were applied at the heading stage, and the last nonselective herbicide (Roundup) was applied at physiological maturity of tef when the Convolvulus arvensis was regrowth naturally/latecomer weed. All postemergency herbicide treatments reduced significantly both broadleaf and grass weeds, in general, and C. arvensis infestation, in particular, when compared to the weedy control. Of these, Musket Power OD 460 at tillering stage integrated with 2,4-diamine salt 720 g/L at the heading stage was more effective than other herbicides for eliminating all weeds and C. arvensis in particular throughout the crop life. This weed management option resulted in considerably enhanced weed control efficiency and weed killing potential, reduced weed dry biomass and yield loss, improved grain yield, and economic benefit with an acceptable marginal rate of return for tef growers.","PeriodicalId":13844,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Agronomy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46767699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The production and productivity of malt barley are limited using disease-susceptible and low-yielding varieties. Study was focused on identifying and selecting the best performed and adapted malt barley variety/varieties for yield and yield-related traits. We evaluated six improved malt barley varieties using a randomized complete block design with three replications. The study was conducted for 2 years (2019 and 2020 cropping season) at Lay Gayint district. The combined analysis showed highly significant differences ( P <