Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T08:17:30.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farmer Perceptions of Problematic Corn and Soybean Weeds in Indiana

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kevin D. Gibson,
William G. Johnson and
David E. Hillger
Kevin D. Gibson*
Affiliation:
Department Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1155
William G. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1155
David E. Hillger
Affiliation:
Department Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1155
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: kgibson@purdue.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Corn and soybean farmers across Indiana were surveyed in 2003 to determine the perceived importance of weeds at the state and district levels. Weeds were considered the primary crop pest by 69 to 84% of farmers, depending on district. Diseases or insects were ranked first by no more than 14% of farmers and nematodes were ranked first by no more than 11%. Giant ragweed, Canada thistle, common lambsquarters, common cocklebur, and velvetleaf were considered the most problematic summer annual and perennial weeds statewide. Chickweed, horseweed, dandelion, and henbit were considered the most problematic winter annual weeds statewide. However, no weed species was listed by more than 41% of farmers statewide suggesting that relatively unique weed management problems may exist on many farms. Also, the perceived importance of most weed species varied substantially among Indiana's nine districts. For example, velvetleaf was not listed as a problematic weed by any farmers in three districts. Burcucumber was not considered a statewide problem but was listed among the top three weeds by 14 and 16% of farmers in two southern districts. This survey supports the idea that educational programs focused on weed management should be tailored to geographic regions within Indiana.

Keywords

Burcucumber, Sicyos angulatus L. # SIYANCanada thistle, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. # CIRARchickweed, Stellaria media (L.) Vill. # STEMEcommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. # XANTHcommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALdandelion, Taraxacum officinale Weber in Wiggers # TAROFgiant ragweed, Ambrosia trifidia L. # AMBTRhenbit, Lamium amplexicaule L. # LAMAMhorseweed, Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. # ERICAvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti L. # ABUTHcorn, Zea mays L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merrpestsweed rankingswinter annualsummer annualperennialSorghum halepenseSorghum bicolor, # SORVU, # SORHUGDD, growing degree daysIASS, Indiana Agricultural Statistics Service

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , December 2005, pp. 1065 - 1070
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Anderson, R. L., Tanaka, D. L., Black, A. L., and Schweizer, E. E. 1998. Weed community and species response to crop rotation, tillage, and nitrogen fertility. Weed Technol. 12:531–536.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2004. Indiana Agricultural Statistics Service: 2003–2004. West Lafayette, IN: Indiana Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service.Google Scholar
Aref, S. and Pike, D. R. 1998. Midwest farmers' perceptions of crop pest infestation. Agron. J. 90:819–825.Google Scholar
Bàrbieri, P., Cozzani, A., Macchia, M., and Bonari, E. 1998. Size and composition of the weed seedbank under different management systems for continuous maize cropping. Weed Res. 38:319–334.Google Scholar
Bhowmik, P. C. and Bekech, M. M. 1993. Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) seed production, emergence and distribution in no-tillage and conventional-tillage corn (Zea mays). Agronomy (Trends Agric. Sci.) 1:67–71.Google Scholar
Bourgeois, L., Morrison, I. N., and Kelner, D. 1997. Field and producer survey of ACCase resistant wild oat in Manitoba. Can. J. Plant Sci. 77:709–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Owen, M. D. K. 1997. Emergence and survival of horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci. 45:98–101.Google Scholar
Cardina, J., Herms, C. P., and Doohan, D. J. 2002. Crop rotation and tillage system effects on seedbanks. Weed Sci. 50:448–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, D. J., Blackwell, R. L., and Geiger, C. R. 1993. Survey of problem weeds in Indiana: 1992. Purdue University Coop. Ext. Service Bulletin WS10. 4 p.Google Scholar
Childs, D. J., Jordan, T. N., and Blackwell, R. L. 1997. Survey of problem weeds in Indiana: 1996. Purdue University Coop. Ext. Service Bulletin WS10. 4 p.Google Scholar
Czapar, G. F., Curry, M. P., and Brink, W. H. 2002. Pest management recommendations and water quality concerns: an Illinois agribusiness perspective. Weed Technol. 16:440–443.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2004. Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Weed Science Society of America: Web page: http://www.weedscience.org/. Accessed: November 3, 2004.Google Scholar
Hume, L. 1987. Long-term effects of 2,4-D application on plants. 1. Effects on the weed community in a wheat crop. Can. J. Bot. 65:2530–2536.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M. and Berry, M. A. 1991. Use of a grower survey for estimating weed problems. Weed Technol. 5:460–466.Google Scholar
Nice, G. R. W., Bauman, T. T., Blackwell, R. L., and Medlin, C. R. 2001. Survey of problem weeds in Indiana. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 56:23.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. 2003. Use of soybean surveys to determine weed management needs of South Carolina farmers. Weed Technol. 17:195–201.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L. 2000. The impact of glyphosate-tolerant crops on the use of other herbicides and on resistance management. Pest Manag. Sci. 56:320–326.Google Scholar
Smeda, R. J. and Weller, S. C. 2001. Biology and control of burcucumber. Weed Sci. 49:99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, C. L. 2002. A regional perspective on glyphosate resistance management. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 57:213.Google Scholar
Stevenson, F. C., Legere, A., Simard, R. R., Angers, D. A., Pageau, D., and Lafond, J. 1997. Weed species diversity in spring barley varies with crop rotation and tillage but not with nutrient source. Weed Sci. 45:798–806.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. and MacDonald, G. E. 2001. A survey of weeds in various crops in Georgia. Weed Technol. 15:771–790.Google Scholar