Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T16:43:09.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Seed Contamination of Cotton Gin Trash

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jason K. Norsworthy,
Kenneth L. Smith,
Lawrence E. Steckel and
Clifford H. Koger
Jason K. Norsworthy
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soils, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Kenneth L. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soils, and Environmental Sciences, P.O. Box 3508, Monticello, AR 71656
Lawrence E. Steckel
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, 605 Airways Blvd., Jackson, TN 38301
Clifford H. Koger
Affiliation:
Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS 38776
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cotton gins in Arkansas, western Tennessee, and western Mississippi were sampled for weed seed contamination of gin trash in fall 2007. A total of 473 samples were collected, with 453 samples from Arkansas. The objectives of this research were to determine the weed species most frequently found in gin trash and determine what means gin operators are using to dispose of gin trash. There were 25 weed species found in the gin trash samples—11 grass and 14 broadleaf weeds. Grass and broadleaf weeds were present in 41.4 and 8.5% of the samples, respectively. The most frequently found species were large crabgrass (19.0%), barnyardgrass (14.0%), goosegrass (12.9%), red sprangletop (8.2%) and Palmer amaranth (4.2%). Viable seeds of barnyardgrass, large crabgrass, Palmer amaranth, and prickly sida were present in the surface layer (0- to 25-cm depth) of gin trash piles after 1 yr of composting. Viable Palmer amaranth seeds were present in the surface layer of gin trash piles after 2 yr of composting, but no germinable seeds were found deeper than 25 cm following 1 yr of composting. Gin trash disposal involved application of the material to crop fields during the fall or winter months; composting followed by application of the compost as mulch or a soil amendment to gardens, flower beds, or crop fields; use as cattle feed; and coverage for landfills to reduce erosion and encourage growth of vegetation. Because of the demonstrated potential for weed seed dispersal via gin trash, including composted material, development of technologies to ensure disposal of a gin-trash product free of viable weed seed are justified.

Keywords

Barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. ECHCGgoosegrass, Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. ELEINlarge crabgrass, Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. DIGSAPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats AMAPAprickly sida, Sida spinosa L. SIDSPred sprangletop, Leptochloa panicea (Retz.) Ohwi LEFFIcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Broadleaf weedsgrass weedsherbicide-resistant weedsseed dispersalseed dispersionweed control

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , December 2009, pp. 574 - 580
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

Bader, M. J., Bramwell, R. K., Stewart, R. L., and Hill, G. M. 1998. Gin trash studies conducted in Georgia. Pages 1698–1699. in. P. Dugger and D. Richter, eds. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. Memphis, TN National Cotton Council of America.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E. and Rode, L. M. 1991. Effect of ensiling and rumen digestion by cattle on weed seed viability. Weed Sci 39:104–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrd, J. D., Bryson, C. T., and Westbrooks, R. G. 2004. Tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum Dunal) identification and control. Published by the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce. Available at http://www.mdac.state.ms.us/n_library/departments/bpi/pdf/bpi_tsa_fact_sheet.pdf. Accessed: September 12, 2008.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., Gimenez, A. E., York, A. C., Batts, R. B., and Wilcut, J. W. 2001. Morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) and large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) control with glyphosate and 2,4-DB mixtures in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 15:56–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., Grey, T. L., Vencill, W. K., Kichler, J. M., Webster, T. M., Brown, S. M., York, A. C., Davis, J. W., and Hanna, W. W. 2006. Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Sci 54:620–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egley, G. H. 1990. High-temperature effects on germination and survival of weed seeds in soil. Weed Sci 38:429–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funk, P. A., Armijo, C. B., Hanson, A. T., Samani, Z. A., Macias-Corral, M. A., Smith, G. B., and Riordan, J. T. 2005. Converting gin and dairy wastes to methane. Trans. ASAE 48:1197–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, E., Keisling, T. C., Oliver, L. R., and Harris, C. 2001. Two methods of composting gin trash. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Analysis 32:491–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffis, C. L. and Mote, C. R. 1978. Weed seed viability as affected by the composting cotton gin trash. Arkansas Farm Res 27:3.Google Scholar
Hilgenfeld, K. L., Martin, A. R., Mortensen, D. A., and Mason, S. C. 2004. Weed management in glyphosate resistant soybean: weed emergence patterns in relation to glyphosate treatment timing. Weed Technol 18:277–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, G., Buser, M., Harmel, D., Potter, K., and Pelletier, M. 2005a. Comparison of cotton-based hydro-mulches and conventional wood and paper hydro-mulches—study 1. J. Cotton Sci 9:121–127.Google Scholar
Holt, G., Buser, M., Harmel, D., Potter, K., and Pelletier, M. 2005b. Comparison of cotton-based hydro-mulches and conventional wood and paper hydro-mulches—study 2. J. Cotton Sci 9:128–134.Google Scholar
Holt, G. A., Barker, G. L., Baker, R. V., and Brashears, A. 2000. Characterization of cotton gin byproducts by various machinery groups used in the ginning operation. Trans. ASAE 43:1393–1400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, G. A., Buser, M. D., Harmel, R. D., Porter, K. N., Pelletier, M. G., and Duke, S. E. 2007. Weed suppression potential of dry applied mulches used in bedding plant applications: processed cotton gin by-products versus conventional wood. J. Cotton Sci 11:52–59.Google Scholar
Jackson, B. E., Wright, A. N., Cole, D. M., and Sibley, J. L. 2005. Cotton gin compost as a substrate component in container production of nursery crops. J. Environ. Hortic 23:118–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, J. B. and Rankins, D. L. Jr. 2008. Comparison of cotton gin trash and peanut hulls as low-cost roughage sources for growing beef cattle. Prof. Anim. Sci 24:40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittal, D. K., Fornes, R. E., Gilbert, R. D., and Sasser, P. E. 1979. Chemical composition of cotton dusts part I: analysis of cotton plant parts, gin trash, and weed samples. Textile Res. J. 49:364–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. 2004. Soil-applied herbicide use in wide- and narrow-row glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Crop Prot 23:1237–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. 2008. Effect of tillage intensity and herbicide programs on changes in weed species density and composition in the southeastern coastal plains of the United States. Crop Prot 27:151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Griffith, G. M., Scott, R. C., Smith, K. L., and Oliver, L. R. 2008a. Confirmation and control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Arkansas. Weed Technol 22:108–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Scott, R. C., Smith, K. L., and Oliver, L. R. 2008b. Response of northeastern Arkansas Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) accessions to glyphosate. Weed Technol 22:408–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Smith, K. L., Scott, R. C., and Gbur, E. E. 2007. Consultant perspectives on weed management needs in Arkansas cotton. Weed Technol 21:825–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papafotiou, M., Chronopoulos, J., Kargas, G., Voreakou, M., Leodaritis, N., Lagogiani, O., and Gazi, S. 2001. Cotton gin trash compost and rice hulls as growing medium components for ornamentals. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotech 76:431–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. T., Baker, R. V., and Steele, G. L. 2000. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) impacts on yield, harvesting, and ginning in dryland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 14:122–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, L. E., Main, C. L., Ellis, A. T., and Mueller, T. C. 2008. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Tennessee has low level glyphosate resistance. Weed Technol 22:119–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejada, M. and Gonzalez, J. L. 2006a. Crushed cotton gin compost effects on soil biological properties and rice yield. Eur. J. Agron 25:22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejada, M. and Gonzalez, J. L. 2006b. Crushed cotton gin compost effects on soil biological properties, nutrient leaching losses, and maize yield. Agron. J. 98:749–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejada, M. and Gonzalez, J. L. 2007. Application of different organic wastes on soil properties and wheat yield. Agron. J. 99:1597–1606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejada, M., Hernandez, M. T., and Garcia, C. 2006. Application of two organic amendments on soil restoration: effects on the soil biological properties. J. Environ. Qual 35:1010–1017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomasson, J. A. 1990. A review of cotton gin trash disposal and utilization. Pages 689–705. in Brown, J. M. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Producers Research Conference. Memphis, TN National Cotton Council of America.Google Scholar
Thomasson, J. A. and Willcutt, M. H. 1996. Wetting method for initiating composting in cotton gin waste. Appl. Eng. Agric 12:417–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2005. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 58:291–306.Google Scholar
Young, B. G. 2006. Changes in herbicide use patterns and production practices resulting from glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol 20:301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar