scholarly journals Potential Weed Management Systems for Organic Peanut Production

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Benjamin G. Mullinix
Keyword(s):  
Acetic Acid ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Clove Oil ◽  
Poor Control ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Four Levels

Abstract Studies were conducted near Tifton, GA to develop weed management systems for organic peanut production. Trials in 2004 and 2005 evaluated row patterns (two levels), remedial weed control (four levels), and cultivation (three levels). Row patterns were wide rows (91 cm apart) and narrow rows (30 cm apart). Remedial weed control was early-season applications of clove oil, citric plus acetic acid, broadcast propane flaming, and a nontreated control. Cultivation regimes were 1X or 2X sweep cultivation and a non-cultivated control. The experimental sites had heavy natural infestations of annual grasses and broadleaf weeds. None of the treatment combinations effectively controlled weeds season-long and resulting peanut yields were poor. Annual grasses were particularly troublesome due to ineffective control from flaming and citric plus acetic acid. Clove oil was slightly more effective in controlling annual grasses than the other remedial treatments, but annual grass control was still unacceptable. Dicot weeds were not effectively controlled by mid-season, although clove oil and flaming controlled the seedling weeds early season. The lack of residual weed control by the remedial weed control treatments resulted in heavy weed infestations by mid-season. Poor control of annual grasses, no residual weed control, and high cost of remedial treatments indicates that these systems of weed management in organic peanut production are not suited to sites with heavy weed infestations.

Combinations of Corn Gluten Meal, Clove Oil, and Sweep Cultivation are Ineffective for Weed Control in Organic Peanut Production

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Mark A. Boudreau ◽  
Jerry W. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Control Treatment ◽  
Clove Oil ◽  
Corn Gluten Meal ◽  
Corn Gluten ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Poor Efficacy

Weed control in organic peanut is difficult and lack of residual weed control complicates weed management efforts. Weed management systems using corn gluten meal in combination with clove oil and sweep cultivation were evaluated in a series of irrigated field trials. Corn gluten meal applied in a 30 cm band over the row at PRE, sequentially at PRE+2 wk after emergence, and PRE+2wk+4wk did not adequately control annual grasses and smallflower morningglory. Similarly, a banded application of clove oil applied POST did not adequately control weeds. The only treatment that improved overall weed control was sweep cultivation. Peanut yields were not measured in 2006 due to heavy baseline weed densities and overall poor weed control. Peanut yields were measured in 2007 and were not affected by any weed control treatment due to poor efficacy. While sweep cultivation improved weed control, weeds were controlled only in the row middles and surviving weeds in-row reduced peanut yield. Even when used in combination with sweep cultivation, corn gluten meal and clove oil were ineffective and offer little potential in a weed management system for organic peanut production.

scholarly journals A Review of Weed Management Challenges in Organic Peanut Production

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Cropping System ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Certified Organic ◽  
Mechanical Weed Control

ABSTRACT Organic peanut production is a high-risk cropping system, largely due to difficulties in managing weeds using methods acceptable for certified-organic production. In contrast with conventional peanut production that relies heavily on synthetic herbicides, organic peanut production must use an integrated system to manage weeds. The foundation for an integrated weed management system is cultural weed control which is a system of production practices that promote uniform peanut growth to suppress weeds. Cultural weed control includes practices that promote vigorous early-season peanut growth and lessen chances for weed escapes. Mechanical weed control is based on repeated cultivation using a tine weeder and sweep cultivator to control weeds before they emerge. However, weed control consistency from cultivation is affected by rainfall that can delay scheduled cultivations and hinder implement function. Handweeding is also a form of mechanical weed control that is used to supplement other weed control efforts by controlling escapes. Herbicides derived from natural products and thermal weed control using propane flaming have limited value in organic peanut production due to limited weed control spectra, specifically poor control of annual grasses and perennial weeds. Successful weed management in certified organic peanut production will depend on an integrated system, not a single form of weed control.

Perpendicular Cultivation for Improved In-Row Weed Control in Organic Peanut Production

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Jerry W. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Natural Products ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Direction Parallel ◽  
Natural Sources ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Weed Interference ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Parallel Cultivation

Intensive cultivation in organic peanut is partially effective, but in-row weed control remains problematic. In an attempt to improve in-row weed control, irrigated trials were conducted from 2011 to 2013 near Ty Ty, GA to determine the feasibility of early-season cultivation perpendicular to row direction using a tine weeder when integrated with other weed-control practices. Combinations of perpendicular cultivation (cultivation perpendicular to row direction), parallel cultivation (cultivation in the same direction of the rows), and banded applications of herbicides derived from natural sources were compared. Perpendicular cultivation improved overall weed control and peanut yield (two years of three), but this benefit was independent of weed control from any form of parallel cultivation. Additionally, tractor tire tracks from perpendicular cultivation across the rows repeatedly crushed peanut seedlings. Parallel cultivation with the tine weeder was generally more effective than parallel cultivation with sweeps, particularly for southern crabgrass and Texas millet. Herbicides derived from natural products were inconsistent in controlling dicot weeds, ineffective in controlling annual grasses, and did not protect peanut yield from weed interference.

Integrating cultivation using a tine weeder with herbicides in conventional peanut production

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 374-379
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Xuelin Luo
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Rainfall Events ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Effective Component

AbstractResearch from the 1980s reported sweep cultivation being a cost-effective component in an integrated system to manage weeds in peanut. Previous weed management research conducted on organic peanut indicated that repeated cultivation with a tine weeder was an effective component in that production system. Studies were conducted in Tifton, GA, from 2014 through 2017 to determine whether tine weeding can be integrated with herbicides in conventional peanut production to supplement herbicides. Experiments evaluated a factorial arrangement of eight herbicide combinations and two levels of cultivation using a tine weeder. Herbicides were labeled rates of ethalfluralin PRE, S-metolachlor PRE, imazapic POST, ethalfluralin PRE + S-metolachlor PRE, ethalfluralin PRE + imazapic POST, S-metolachlor PRE + imazapic POST, ethalfluralin PRE + S-metolachlor PRE + imazapic POST, and a nontreated control. The herbicides chosen were based on knowledge of the weed species composition at the research sites and their common use in peanut. Cultivation regimes were cultivation with a tine weeder (six times at weekly intervals) and a noncultivated control. Benefits of tine weeding supplementing control from herbicides varied according to herbicide and weed species. For example, annual grasses were effectively controlled (88% to 97%) by ethalfluralin or S-metolachlor and did not need cultivation to supplement control provided by the herbicides. However, imazapic alone did not effectively control (54% to 75%) annual grasses and needed supplemental control from cultivation with the tine weeder. Similarly, imazapic effectively controlled (84% to 93%) smallflower morningglory and did not require cultivation to supplement control from the herbicide. However, cultivation with the tine weeder improved smallflower morningglory control (76% to 95%) when supplementing ethalfluralin or S-metolachlor. Peanut yields did not respond to any of the herbicide combinations integrated with cultivation using the tine weeder. During the time period when peanut was cultivated, there was greater total rainfall and more days of rainfall events in 2014 and 2017 compared with the other years. Rainfall and wet soils reduced the performance and weed control benefits of the tine weeder. This highlights the risk of depending on cultivation for weed control.

Weed Management in Peanuts

EDIS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratap Devkota
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Application Rate ◽  
Good Management ◽  
Peanut Production

Successful weed control in peanuts involves use of good management practices in all phases of peanut production. This 11-page document lists herbicide products registered for use in Florida peanut production, their mode of actions group, application rate per acre and per season, and reentry interval. It also discusses the performance of these herbicides on several weeds under Florida conditions. Written by J. A. Ferrell, G. E. MacDonald, and P. Devkota, and published by the UF/IFAS Agronomy Department, revised May 2020.

Peanut Response to Naturally-Derived Herbicides Used in Organic Crop Production

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Benjamin G. Mullinix ◽  
Mark A. Boudreau
Keyword(s):  
Acetic Acid ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Clove Oil ◽  
Phytotoxic Effects ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Organic Crop Production ◽  
Significant Injury

Abstract Weed-free irrigated trials were conducted in 2004 and 2005 to quantify phytotoxic effects of herbicides with the potential to be used in organic peanut production. Clove oil and citric plus acetic acid were each applied at vegetative emergence of peanut (VE), two weeks after VE (2 wk), four weeks after VE (4 wk), sequentially VE/2 wk, sequentially VE/4 wk, sequentially VE/2 wk/4 wk, and a nontreated control. Clove oil was more injurious (maximum of 28% visual injury) than citric plus acetic acid (maximum of 4% visual injury), with significant injury occurring with clove oil applied at 4-wk or sequentially. Citric plus acetic acid caused minimal peanut injury. There were no consistent effects of clove oil on peanut yield, although sequential applications of clove oil tended to reduce peanut yield. Peanut yield was not affected by citric plus acetic acid.

Efficacy Comparison of Some New Natural-Product Herbicides for Weed Control at Two Growth Stages

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 431-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussein F. H. Abouziena ◽  
Ahmad A. M. Omar ◽  
Shiv D. Sharma ◽  
Megh Singh
Keyword(s):  
Acetic Acid ◽  
Citric Acid ◽  
Natural Product ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Clove Oil ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Natural Herbicides ◽  
Redroot Pigweed ◽  
Wild Mustard

There is an urgent need to accelerate the development and implementation of effective organic-compliant herbicides that are environmentally safe and that help the producer meet increasing consumer demand for organic products. Therefore, greenhouse experiments were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of acetic acid (5%), acetic acid (30%), citric acid (10%), citric acid (5%) + garlic (0.2%), citric acid (10%) + garlic (0.2%), clove oil (45.6%), and corn gluten meal (CGM) compounds as natural-product herbicides for weed control. The herbicides were applied to the broadleaf weeds stranglervine, wild mustard, black nightshade, sicklepod, velvetleaf, and redroot pigweed and to narrowleaf weeds crowfootgrass, Johnsongrass, annual ryegrass, goosegrass, green foxtail, and yellow nutsedge. The herbicides were applied POST at two weed growth stages, namely, two to four and four to six true-leaf stages. CGM was applied PPI in two soil types. Citric acid (5%) + garlic (0.2%) had the greatest control (98%) of younger broadleaf weeds, followed by acetic acid (30%) > CGM > citric acid (10%) > acetic acid (5%) > citric acid (10%) + garlic (0.2%), and clove oil. Wild mustard was most sensitive to these herbicides, whereas redroot pigweed was the least sensitive. Herbicides did not control narrowleaf weeds except for acetic acid (30%) when applied early POST (EPOST) and CGM. Acetic acid (30%) was phytotoxic to all broadleaf weeds and most narrowleaf weeds when applied EPOST. Delayed application until the four- to six-leaf stage significantly reduced efficacy; acetic acid was less sensitive to growth stage than other herbicides. These results will help to determine effective natural herbicides for controlling weeds in organic farming.

Weed Management with Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Based Systems in PHY 485 WRF Cotton

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared R. Whitaker ◽  
Alan C. York ◽  
David L. Jordan ◽  
A. Stanley Culpepper
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Fiber Quality ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Crop Tolerance ◽  
The North ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Resistance Trait ◽  
Cotton Belt

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth has become a serious pest in parts of the Cotton Belt. Some GR cotton cultivars also contain the WideStrike™ insect resistance trait, which confers tolerance to glufosinate. Use of glufosinate-based management systems in such cultivars could be an option for managing GR Palmer amaranth. The objective of this study was to evaluate crop tolerance and weed control with glyphosate-based and glufosinate-based systems in PHY 485 WRF cotton. The North Carolina field experiment compared glyphosate and glufosinate alone and in mixtures applied twice before four- to six-leaf cotton. Additional treatments included glyphosate and glufosinate mixed withS-metolachlor or pyrithiobac applied to one- to two-leaf cotton followed by glyphosate or glufosinate alone on four- to six-leaf cotton. All treatments received a residual lay-by application. Excellent weed control was observed from all treatments on most weed species. Glyphosate was more effective than glufosinate on glyphosate-susceptible (GS) Palmer amaranth and annual grasses, while glufosinate was more effective on GR Palmer amaranth. Annual grass and GS Palmer amaranth control by glyphosate plus glufosinate was often less than control by glyphosate alone but similar to or greater than control by glufosinate alone, while mixtures were more effective than either herbicide alone on GR Palmer amaranth. Glufosinate caused minor and transient injury to the crop, but no differences in cotton yield or fiber quality were noted. This research demonstrates glufosinate can be applied early in the season to PHY 485 WRF cotton without concern for significant adverse effects on the crop. Although glufosinate is often less effective than glyphosate on GS Palmer amaranth, GR Palmer amaranth can be controlled with well-timed applications of glufosinate. Use of glufosinate in cultivars with the WideStrike trait could fill a significant void in current weed management programs for GR Palmer amaranth in cotton.

Alternatives to Atrazine for Weed Management in Processing Sweet Corn

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zubeyde Filiz Arslan ◽  
Martin M. Williams ◽  
Roger Becker ◽  
Vincent A. Fritz ◽  
R. Ed Peachey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Application Timing ◽  
Production Areas

Atrazine has been the most widely used herbicide in North American processing sweet corn for decades; however, increased restrictions in recent years have reduced or eliminated atrazine use in certain production areas. The objective of this study was to identify the best stakeholder-derived weed management alternatives to atrazine in processing sweet corn. In field trials throughout the major production areas of processing sweet corn, including three states over 4 yr, 12 atrazine-free weed management treatments were compared to three standard atrazine-containing treatments and a weed-free check. Treatments varied with respect to herbicide mode of action, herbicide application timing, and interrow cultivation. All treatments included a PRE application of dimethenamid. No single weed species occurred across all sites; however, weeds observed in two or more sites included common lambsquarters, giant ragweed, morningglory species, velvetleaf, and wild-proso millet. Standard treatments containing both atrazine and mesotrione POST provided the most efficacious weed control among treatments and resulted in crop yields comparable to the weed-free check, thus demonstrating the value of atrazine in sweet corn production systems. Timely interrow cultivation in atrazine-free treatments did not consistently improve weed control. Only two atrazine-free treatments consistently resulted in weed control and crop yield comparable to standard treatments with atrazine POST: treatments with tembotrione POST either with or without interrow cultivation. Additional atrazine-free treatments with topramezone applied POST worked well in Oregon where small-seeded weed species were prevalent. This work demonstrates that certain atrazine-free weed management systems, based on input from the sweet corn growers and processors who would adopt this technology, are comparable in performance to standard atrazine-containing weed management systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document