Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T20:15:53.902Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Laboratory Exercise for Teaching Critical Period for Weed Control Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Lance R. Gibson and
Matt Liebman
Lance R. Gibson*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Matt Liebman
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: lgibson@iastate.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Crop–weed interactions is an important topic for introductory weed science courses. The effect of the timing of weed emergence and the duration of weed competition on crop yield are two topics usually covered when discussing competition. Students generally gain a better knowledge of these concepts through observation in addition to discussion of the underlying concepts. An additive removal and plant-back experiment was used, in the undergraduate weed science laboratory at Iowa State University, to demonstrate critical period for weed control concepts for cultivated radish. In one series of treatments, weeds were sown at the time of radish planting and removed at 2, 3, and 4 wk after planting. In another series, weeds were sown at 1, 2, and 4 wk after radish planting and allowed to grow in the flats until completion of the experiment. Two controls, one weed free and one unweeded, were also included. The results from four semesters suggested that the critical period for weed control began immediately after planting and lasted 3 wk. The timing and duration of the critical period was consistent across the four semesters evaluated. This activity was successful in demonstrating the critical period for weed control in radish.

Keywords

RadishRaphanus sativus LCompetitioneducationweed ecologyweed-free period

Information

Type
Education/Extension
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 2003, pp. 403 - 411
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

Aldrich, R. J. and Kremer, R. J. 1997. Principles in Weed Management. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. 170 p.Google Scholar
American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America. 1998. Publications Handbook and Style Manual. Madison, WI: ASA, CSSA, SSSA.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E. 1993. Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) density and relative time of emergence affects interference in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 41: 551–556.Google Scholar
Holloway, J. C. Jr. and Shaw, D. R. 1996. Effect of herbicides on ivyleaf morningglory (Ipomoea hederacea) interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 44: 860–864.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. 1998. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book. p. 3:23.Google Scholar
Kropff, M. J., Weaver, S. E., and Smits, M. A. 1992. Use of ecophysical models for crop-weed interference: relations amongst weed density, relative time of weed emergence, relative leaf area, and yield loss. Weed Sci. 40: 296–301.Google Scholar
Miller, A. B. and Hopen, H. J. 1991. Critical weed-control period in seeded cabbage (Brassica oleracea var capitata). Weed Technol. 5: 852–857.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 2001. Enhancing the competitive ability of crops. In Liebman, M., Mohler, C., and Staver, C., eds. Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 269–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monks, D. W. and Schultheis, J. R. 1998. Critical weed-free period for large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) in transplanted watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Weed Sci. 46: 530–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulugeta, D. and Boerboom, C. M. 2000. Critical time of weed removal in glyphosate-resistant Glycine max . Weed Sci. 48: 35–42.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. pp. 398–399.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W., Harrison, S. K., Wax, L. M., Regnier, E. E., and Nafziger, E. D. 1987. Weed interference in soybeans (Glycine max). Rev. Weed Sci. 3: 155–181.Google Scholar
Van Acker, R. C., Swanton, C. J., and Weise, S. F. 1993a. The critical period of weed control in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr]. Weed Sci. 41: 194–200.Google Scholar
Van Acker, R. C., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1993b. Influence from a mixed weed species stand on soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] growth. Weed Sci. 41: 194–200.Google Scholar
Weaver, S. E., Kropff, M. J., and Groeneveld, R. M. W. 1992. Use of ecophysical models for crop-weed interference: the critical period of weed interference. Weed Sci. 4: 302–307.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1980. Weed-Crop Competition: A Review. Corvallis, OR: Integrated Plant Protection Center, Oregon State University.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1988. The concept and application of the critical weed-free period. In Altieri, M. and Liebman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. pp. 145–155.Google Scholar