Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ...
Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ... Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ...
80 EFFECTS OF PLANTING AND TERMINATION DATE ON COVER CROP BIOMASS AND SUBSEQUENT WEED SUPPRESSION USING ROLLER/CRIMPER TECHNOLOGY. S.B. Mirsky, W.S. Curran, and M.R. Ryan, The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park. ABSTRACT Mechanical weed control with high tillage and cultivation frequency are typical weed management strategies for reduced pesticide or organic producers. Improving soil quality, namely increasing soil organic matter levels, is a goal that is frequently highlighted by producers. However, despite greater return of organic matter to the soil, the increased number of disturbances inherent to these cropping systems often results in a zero net gain or loss of soil organic matter. Rolling/crimping cover crops, as opposed to residue incorporation, has been suggested as a means of reducing tillage, weed populations, and herbicides used to control the cover crops. The objective of this experiment was to test the effects of planting and termination dates on rye (Secale cereale) cover crop biomass production and ensuing weed control. Efficacy of mechanical control of rye at different developmental growth stages was also tested. Planting of rye cultivars were seeded 10 days apart from August 25-October 15 (six planting dates and a control with no rye planting). Spring termination of cover crops occurred on 5/1, 5/10, 5/20, and 5/30. Rye biomass was sampled prior to each termination date, and weed population size was measured four and eight weeks after each termination date. Rye biomass increased with each 10 day delay in termination, and decreased with progressively later planting dates. Cover crop biomass ranged from 2150 to 11,025 kg ha -1 . Weed populations densities decreased with increasing delay in cover crop termination date. Complete weed control was achieved at the May 30 termination date 8 weeks after cover crop rolling in the 2005 field site. A comprehensive characterization of the relationship between cover crop biomass accumulation, growing degree days, and subsequent weed suppression will enhance success and adoption of cover crop technology. 62
81 EFFECTS OF FLOATING ROW COVER ON WEED EMERGENCE AND STALE SEED BED PERFORMANCE. D.C. Brainard, R.R. Bellinder and V. Kumar, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY. ABSTRACT Floating row covers can be valuable for season extension and for protecting crops from insects such as flea beetles. However, row covers complicate weed management since they improve conditions for germination and growth of weeds, and require removal for cultivation or herbicide applications. The objectives of this research were to (i) assess the effect of floating row covers on soil temperature and weed emergence, and (ii) to evaluate whether a stale seed bed used either alone or in combination with row cover before crop planting could reduce weed emergence after crop planting. Four field trials were conducted in central NY beginning in either late May or early July, 2005 and 2006. No crops were grown, but crop planting was simulated using a Monosem seeder. Each trial consisted of a total of six treatments arranged in RCBD. After simulated crop planting, plots were either left bare, or covered with floating row cover (Agribon 19). For each of these post-planting treatments, three pre-planting treatments were examined: (i) a conventional (CONV) treatment in which plots were harrowed immediately before simulated crop planting, (ii) a stale seed bed (SSB) treatment in which beds were prepared 2-3 wk in advance, and emerged weeds killed with Roundup (0.05 lbs ai/A) immediately before simulated crop planting, and (iii) a stale seed bed with row cover (SSB+RC) treatment, which was the same as the SSB treatment, except that plots were covered with floating row cover before simulated crop planting. Average soil temperatures (at 3 cm depth over a two wk interval) ranged from 0 to 3.5 C higher under the floating row cover compared to bare soil, with an average difference of 2.2 C. Temperature differences were highest in mid afternoon and on sunny days, reaching as much as 12 C. Higher temperatures under row covers resulted in 2- to 200-fold increases in weed emergence before simulated crop planting compared to bare soil, depending on trial and weed species. Averaged over all trials, weed emergence two wk after simulated crop planting was reduced 38% in SSB treatments, and 61% in SSB+RC treatments compared to CONV treatments. In two trials, SSB+RC treatments resulted in greater than 90% reduction in weed emergence compared to CONV controls. Our results demonstrate that (i) when used after crop planting, floating row covers can exacerbate weed management problems through stimulation of weed emergence, but that (ii) when used before crop planting, floating row covers can enhance the performance of stale seed beds and reduce emergence of weeds with the crop. 63
- Page 30 and 31: 30 EMERGENCE AND PERFORMANCE OF TWO
- Page 32 and 33: 32 CARFENTRAZONE AND QUINCLORAC FOR
- Page 34 and 35: 34 2006 NEWSS SUMMER WEED CONTEST R
- Page 36 and 37: 36 INVASIVE AQUATIC WEEDS IN NORTH
- Page 38 and 39: 38 AMMONIUM PELARGONATE AS A BIOHER
- Page 40 and 41: 40 TRINEXAPAC-ETHYL INFLUENCES EFFI
- Page 42 and 43: 42 Table 1. Insect feeding damage,
- Page 44 and 45: 44 WEED CONTROL WITH TOPRAMEZONE PR
- Page 46 and 47: 46 ROTARY HOE EFFICACY IN CORN: INF
- Page 48 and 49: 48 ALFALFA/GRASS FORAGE MIXTURES US
- Page 50 and 51: 50 CONTROL OF NEW WEED SPECIES IN T
- Page 52 and 53: 52 Table 1. Results of 2006 contain
- Page 54 and 55: 54 TOLERANCES OF ORNAMENTAL SHRUBS
- Page 56 and 57: 56 2006 WEED MANAGEMENT TRIALS IN C
- Page 58 and 59: 58 THE RESPONSE OF FIELD AND CONTAI
- Page 60 and 61: 60 THE EFFICACY AND CROP TOLERANCE
- Page 62 and 63: 62 Table 2. Plant quality ratings o
- Page 64 and 65: 64 EVALUATION OF PROLINE-LINKED PEN
- Page 66 and 67: 66 ANNUAL BLUEGRASS AND DOLLAR SPOT
- Page 68 and 69: 68 Table 1. Autumn 2005 versus spri
- Page 70 and 71: 70 A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF THE NON-N
- Page 72 and 73: 72 native species, covering and smo
- Page 74 and 75: 74 EFFECTS OF BUCKWHEAT RESIDUE ON
- Page 76 and 77: 76 Japanese knotweed control 28 DAT
- Page 78 and 79: 78 ENHANCED TOLERANCE TO WEED COMPE
- Page 82 and 83: 82 A UNIFYING FRAMEWORK FOR SPECIES
- Page 84 and 85: 84 BIOLOGY OF MULTIFLORA ROSE: AN I
- Page 86 and 87: 86 AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION. M.J. Van
- Page 88 and 89: 88 HERBICIDE COMPARISON IN WET BLAD
- Page 90 and 91: 90 Table 1. Morrow's honeysuckle (L
- Page 92 and 93: 92 EVALUATION OF HERBICIDES FOR CON
- Page 94 and 95: 94 EVALUATION OF HERBICIDES FOR CON
- Page 96 and 97: 96 HOT WATER SYSTEMS FOR VEGETATION
- Page 98 and 99: 98 SEEDHEAD SUPPRESSION OF ANNUAL B
- Page 100 and 101: 100 ROUGHSTALK BLUEGRASS CONTROL WI
- Page 102 and 103: 102 EFFECT OF DEW AND GRANULAR FORM
- Page 104 and 105: 104 USE OF TRICLOPYR TO REDUCE ANTI
- Page 106 and 107: 106 YELLOW NUTSEDGE CONTROL WITH SU
- Page 108 and 109: 108 PRE AND POST EMERGENT ANNUAL BL
- Page 110 and 111: 110 PUMPKIN RESPONSE TO HALOSUFSULF
- Page 112 and 113: 112 Figure 1. Grass cover following
- Page 114 and 115: 114 CHEMICAL CONTROL OF APPLE ROOT
- Page 116 and 117: 116 STRAWBERRY PLANTING YEAR WEED C
- Page 118 and 119: 118 WEED CONTROL IN NO-TILL PUMPKIN
- Page 120 and 121: 120 NATURAL PRODUCT POTENTIAL FOR W
- Page 122 and 123: 122 THE IR-4 PROJECT: UPDATE ON HER
- Page 124 and 125: 124 PEDIGREE OF A PESTICIDE. D.R. S
- Page 126 and 127: 126 SEEDHEAD SUPPRESSION OF ANNUAL
- Page 128 and 129: 128 APPLICATIONS FOR SULFENTRAZONE
80<br />
EFFECTS OF PLANTING AND TERMINATION DATE ON COVER CROP BIOMASS<br />
AND SUBSEQUENT WEED SUPPRESSION USING ROLLER/CRIMPER<br />
TECHNOLOGY. S.B. Mirsky, W.S. Curran, and M.R. Ryan, The Pennsylvania State<br />
Univ., University Park.<br />
ABSTRACT<br />
Mechanical weed control with high tillage and cultivation frequency are typical<br />
weed management strategies for reduced pesticide or organic producers. Improving<br />
soil quality, namely increasing soil organic matter levels, is a goal that is frequently<br />
highlighted by producers. However, despite greater return <strong>of</strong> organic matter to <strong>the</strong> soil,<br />
<strong>the</strong> increased number <strong>of</strong> disturbances inherent to <strong>the</strong>se cropping systems <strong>of</strong>ten results<br />
in a zero net gain or loss <strong>of</strong> soil organic matter. Rolling/crimping cover crops, as<br />
opposed to residue incorporation, has been suggested as a means <strong>of</strong> reducing tillage,<br />
weed populations, and herbicides used to control <strong>the</strong> cover crops. The objective <strong>of</strong> this<br />
experiment was to test <strong>the</strong> effects <strong>of</strong> planting and termination dates on rye (Secale<br />
cereale) cover crop biomass production and ensuing weed control. Efficacy <strong>of</strong><br />
mechanical control <strong>of</strong> rye at different developmental growth stages was also tested.<br />
Planting <strong>of</strong> rye cultivars were seeded 10 days apart from August 25-October 15 (six<br />
planting dates and a control with no rye planting). Spring termination <strong>of</strong> cover crops<br />
occurred on 5/1, 5/10, 5/20, and 5/30. Rye biomass was sampled prior to each<br />
termination date, and weed population size was measured four and eight weeks after<br />
each termination date. Rye biomass increased with each 10 day delay in termination,<br />
and decreased with progressively later planting dates. Cover crop biomass ranged from<br />
2150 to 11,025 kg ha -1 . Weed populations densities decreased with increasing delay in<br />
cover crop termination date. Complete weed control was achieved at <strong>the</strong> May 30<br />
termination date 8 weeks after cover crop rolling in <strong>the</strong> 2005 field site. A<br />
comprehensive characterization <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> relationship between cover crop biomass<br />
accumulation, growing degree days, and subsequent weed suppression will enhance<br />
success and adoption <strong>of</strong> cover crop technology.<br />
62
Change language