Plant Soil Environ., 2003, 49(4):183-189 | DOI: 10.17221/4111-PSE

Economic analysis of integrated weed management in field bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

E. Štefanić, I. Štefanić, A.J. Murdoch
1 Faculty of Agriculture, J.J. Strossmayer University, Osijek, Croatia
2 Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, United Kingdom

Field experiments were conducted in field bean in the north-eastern part of theRepublicofCroatiato compare weed control and crop response under different management practices within the critical period of field bean production. The practices consisted in broadcast application of labelled rate of preemergence herbicide (pre) and postemergence herbicide application: (post) broadcast, band application over the rows, and band application combined with mechanical cultivation using of different herbicide doses recommended by the manufacturer (2×, 1×, 1/2×, 1/4×, 1/8×). In 1999, weed control with pre application of pendimethalin was superior to post bentazone application due to late emergence of weeds and lack of residual herbicide control. In 2000 bentazone combined with cycloxydim controlled weeds in field bean better than pre herbicide application. Based on the results of this research, single pre or post application of herbicide did not control a broad spectrum of weeds and did not provide the commercially acceptable full season control. Reduced rates of herbicide are not advisable under high weed pressure.

Keywords: field bean; integrated weed management; reduced rate technology; economic analysis

Published: April 30, 2003  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Štefanić E, Štefanić I, Murdoch AJ. Economic analysis of integrated weed management in field bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Plant Soil Environ. 2003;49(4):183-189. doi: 10.17221/4111-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. Bostrom U. (1999): Type and time of autumn tillage with and without herbicides at reduced rates in southern Sweden. 1. Yields and weed quantity. Soil Till. Res., 50: 271– 281. Go to original source...
    2. Buhler D.D., Doll J.D., Proost R.T., Visocky M.R. (1995): Integrating mechanical weeding with reduced herbicide use in conservation tillage corn production systems. Agron. J., 87: 507–512. Go to original source...
    3. Buhler D.D., Gunsolus J.L., Ralston D.F. (1992): Integrated weed management techniques to reduce herbicide inputs in soybean. Agron. J., 84: 973–978. Go to original source...
    4. Bussan A.J., Boerboom C.M., Stoltenberg D.E. (2000): Response of Setaria faberi demographic processes to herbicide rates. Weed Sci., 48: 445–453. Go to original source...
    5. Dawnson J.H. (1964): Competition between irrigated field beans and annual weeds. Weeds, 12: 206–208. Go to original source...
    6. DeFelice M.S., Brown W.B., Aldrich R.J., Sims B.D., Judi D.T., Guethle D.R. (1989): Weed control in soybeans (Glycine max) with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci., 37: 365–374. Go to original source...
    7. Devlin D.L., Lonf J.H., Maddux L.D. (1991): Using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol., 5: 834–840. Go to original source...
    8. Donald W.W. (2000): Between-row mowing plus in-row band-applied herbicide for weed control in Glycine max. Weed Sci., 48: 487–500. Go to original source...
    9. Legere A., Schreiber M.M., Hickman M.V., Samson N. (1996): Residual weed populations: innocent bystanders or potential time bombs? 2nd Int. Weed Control Congr., Copenhagen.
    10. Malik V.S., Swanton C.J., Michaels T.E. (1993): Interaction of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars, row spacing and seeding density with annual weeds. Weed Sci., 41: 62–68. Go to original source...
    11. Renner K.A., Powell G.E. (1992): Response of navy bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) grown in rotation to clomazone, imazetaphyr, bentazone and acifluorfen. Weed Sci., 40: 127–133. Go to original source...
    12. Sandoval-Avila D.M., Michaels T.E., Murphy S.D., Swanton C.J. (1994): Effect of conservation tillage and planting pattern on performance of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in Ontario. Can. J. Plant Sci., 74: 801–805. Go to original source...
    13. SAS Inst. (1988): SAS/STAT User’s guide. Cary NC, USA.
    14. Steel R.G.D., Torrie J.H. (1980): Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.
    15. Stefanic E., Stefanic I., Murdoch A.J. (1999): The influence of different period of weediness on yield and quality of field beans in Eastern Croatia. In: Brighton Conf. Weeds: 331–336.
    16. Urwin C.A., Wilson R.G., Mortensen D.A. (1996): Response of dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars to four herbicides. Weed Technol., 10: 512–518. Go to original source...
    17. Vangessel M.J., Westra P. (1997): Economics and efficacy of postemergence spurred anoda (Anoda cristata) control in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Technol., 11: 329–334. Go to original source...
    18. Wilson R.G., Wicks G.A., Fenster C.R. (1980): Weed control in field beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in Western Nebraska. Weed Sci., 28: 295–299. Go to original source...
    19. Wooley B.L., Michaels T.E., Hall M.R., Swanton C.J. (1993): The critical period of weed control in white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Sci., 41: 180–184. Go to original source...
    20. Zhang J., Weaver S.E., Hamill A.S. (2000): Risks and reliability of using herbicides at below-labeled rates. Weed Technol., 14: 106–115. Go to original source...
    21. Zoschke A. (1994): Toward reduced herbicide rates and adapted weed management. Weed Technol., 8: 376–386. 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