Science Alert
Curve Top
Asian Journal of Agricultural Research
  Year: 2010 | Volume: 4 | Issue: 2 | Page No.: 80-86
DOI: 10.3923/ajar.2010.80.86
Facebook Twitter Digg Reddit Linkedin StumbleUpon E-mail

Critical Period for Weed Control in Corn in the South-West of Iran

H. Ghanizadeh, S. Lorzadeh and N. Ariannia

The Critical Period for Weed Control (CPWC) identifies the phase of the crop growth cycle when weed interference results in unacceptable yield losses. Field study was conducted in 2008 in the University of Shushtar at the South-West of Iran to determine CPWC of corn using a randomized complete block design with 12 treatments and 3 replications. The experiments consisted of 2 sets of treatments. In the first set, the crop was kept weed-free until the growth stages of V3, V6, V9, V13 and VT (based on phonological stages of corn development). In the second set, weeds were permitted to grow within the crop until the above-mentioned growth stages. The CPWC was determined with the use of 5 and 10% acceptable yield loss levels by non-linear regression method and fitting Logistic and Gompertz nonlinear equations to relative yield data. Increasing the duration of weed interference decreased corn yield significantly. The CPWC for weed control was from 5- to 9-leaf stage (17-36 DAP) to prevent yield losses of 5%. This period to prevent yield losses of 10% was 6- to 8-leaf stage (21-29 DAP). Results from this experiment suggest that weed control should be carried out between fifth to ninth leaf stages to provide maximum grain yield.
PDF Fulltext XML References Citation Report Citation
  •    Engineering Core/hallow Shell Nanomaterials to Load Herbicide Active Ingredient for Controlled Release
  •    Evaluating Weeds Competitive Ability in a Corn Field in Southern West of Iran
  •    Validation of a Model Relating Crop Yield and Weed Time of Emergence and Removal
How to cite this article:

H. Ghanizadeh, S. Lorzadeh and N. Ariannia, 2010. Critical Period for Weed Control in Corn in the South-West of Iran. Asian Journal of Agricultural Research, 4: 80-86.

DOI: 10.3923/ajar.2010.80.86






Curve Bottom