Plant Soil Environ., 2003, 49(1):29-35 | DOI: 10.17221/4086-PSE

The impact of maize stand density on herbicide efficiency

M. Lešnik
Faculty of Agriculture, University of Maribor, Slovenia

The impact of maize stand density (4, 8 and 12 plants per m2) on herbicide efficiency (in %) and cob yield loss (in %) was studied in four field trials. The mixture of soil-applied herbicides (HS) isoxaflutole and S-metolachlor and the mixture of foliar-applied herbicides (HF) dicamba and rimsulfuron was applied in two dosages (100 and 75% of dose recommended by manufacturers). The 100% dose of HS was (75 g isoxaflutole + 960 ml S-metolachlor) per ha and 100% dose of HF was (12.5 g rimsulfuron + 240 ml dicamba) per ha. In all four trials, the studied factors (stand density, herbicide type and dose) had significant impact on herbicide efficiency and on maize cob yield loss. The herbicide efficiency decreased significantly, when herbicides were applied to maize of lower stand density and the maize yield losses increased. When weed population was composed predominantly of annual seed weeds higher efficiency was obtained by HS herbicides, conversely, when the weed population was composed predominantly of perennial weeds the HF herbicides provided better control. The reduction of herbicide dose always caused the significant reduction in herbicide efficiency and increase in maize yield loss.

Keywords: maize; stand density; yield loss; herbicide efficiency; isoxaflutole; S-metolachlor; dicamba; rimsulfuron

Published: January 31, 2003  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Lešnik M. The impact of maize stand density on herbicide efficiency. Plant Soil Environ. 2003;49(1):29-35. doi: 10.17221/4086-PSE.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Alm D.M., Wax L.M., Stoller E.W. (2000): Weed suppression for weed management in corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max) production systems. Weed Technol., 14: 713-717. Go to original source...
    2. Ammon H.U. (1997): Weed control in transition - from weed eradication to vegetation management. Proc. 10 th EWRS Symp. Poznan: 87-93.
    3. Ammon H.U., Garibay S., Bohren C. (1995): The use of dead or living mulch in maize and its suppression with herbicides. Proc. 9th EWRS Symp. Budapest: 527-534.
    4. Barberi P. (1997): Weed suppression by cover crops in a continuous maize cropping system. Proc. 10 th EWRS Symp. Poznan: 98.
    5. Bleiholder H. (1989): Methods for the layout and evaluation of filed trials. BASF Crop Protec. Div., Limburgerhof Germany.
    6. Donald W.W., Kitchen N.R., Sudduth K.A. (2001): Betweenrow mowing + banded herbicide to control annual weeds and reduce herbicide use in no-till soybean (Glycine max) and corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol., 15: 576-584. Go to original source...
    7. Forcella F. (1995): Meeting the challenge of reduced herbicide use through dynamic bioeconomic weed management models. Proc. 9th EWRS Symp. Budapest: 641-646.
    8. Ford G.T., Pleasant J.M. (1994): Competitive abilities of six corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids with four weed control practices. Weed Technol., 8: 123-127. Go to original source...
    9. Froud-Williams R.J. (1995): Integrated weed management: The challenge for weed science into the 21st century. Proc. 9th EWRS Symp. Budapest: 491-497.
    10. Hamil A.S., Zhang J.H. (1995): Herbicide reduction in metribuzin-based weed control programs in corn. Can. J. Plant Sci., 75: 927-933. Go to original source...
    11. Heydel L., Benoit M., Schiavon M. (1999): Reducing atrazine leaching by integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Eur. J. Agron., 11: 217-225. Go to original source...
    12. Kim D.S., Brain P., Marshall E.J.P., Caseley J.C. (2002): Modelling herbicide dose and weed density effects on crop:weed competition. Weed Res., 42: 1-13. Go to original source...
    13. Mulder T.A., Doll J.D. (1993): Integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol., 7: 382-389. Go to original source...
    14. Rola H., Domaradzki K., Banach P., Bien E. (1999): Effects of using lowered doses of herbicides to control weed infestation in cultivated fields. In: Recenz. Mat. VI. Miedzyn. Symp. Ekologiczne aspekty mechanizaciji nawozeni, ochrony roslin, uprawy gleby i zbioru roslinuprawnych, Warszawa: 137-146.
    15. Schans V.D., Weide R.Y. (1999): Strong together. Weed control in maize: combine mechanical control and low application rates of herbicides. PAV Bull.-Akkerbouw. (2): 9-11.
    16. Schans V.D., Weide R.Y. (2000): Mechanical and integrated weed control in fodder maize. PAV Bull.-Akkerbouw. (2): 1-4.
    17. Weide R.Y., Krikke A., Wijnands F. (1995): Technical and economic feasibility of mechanical weed control in arable farming in the Netherlands. Proc. 9th EWRS Symp. Budapest: 483-490.
    18. Zhang Z.H., Weaver S.E., Hamill A.S. (2000): Risks and reliability of using herbicides at below-labelled rates. Weed Technol., 14: 106-115. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content