ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Competition and critical periods in spring sugar beet cultivation
 
More details
Hide details
1
School of Advanced Agricultural Engineering, Castilla – La Mancha University, Campus Universitario s/n, E02071, Albacete, Spain
2
retired, School of Advanced Agricultural Engineering, Castilla – La Mancha University, Campus Universitario s/n, E02071, Albacete, Spain
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
José-Arturo de Juan Valero
School of Advanced Agricultural Engineering, Castilla – La Mancha University, Campus Universitario s/n, E02071, Albacete, Spain
Submission date: 2015-03-07
Acceptance date: 2015-09-03
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2015;55(4):336–342
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
High yields with low costs require that sugar beets be kept free of weeds, during critical periods, using labor or chemical treatments. Since the critical periods for this crop in Castilla – La Mancha (Spain) are unknown, the first goal of this study was to determine the effect of early and late competition on yield. The second goal was to determine the critical periods, while taking into consideration the semiarid climatic conditions of this region. Two irrigation farms located in the province of Albacete are dedicated to sugar beet cultivation. These two farms were chosen to carry out the tests March (140,000–150,000 seeds ∙ ha –1 ) and harvested in October. Two simultaneous and complementary experiments were carried out in each year and farm. Two scenarios were considered with eight different treatments each. In the first one (With Weeds Until – WWU), plots were infested by weeds up to a certain date. In the second one (Free of Weeds Until – FWU), plots were kept free of weeds up to a certain date. For each test, a randomised experi- mental blocked field was designed and there were four repetitions, each of them containing eight elemental plots (12 m 2 ). Each plot was weeded by hand or weeds were left to grow till a definite date.The results indicated that a 1% loss of yield was reached in the early competition after 14 days, while a loss of 5% was reached after a period of 41 days after it was infested. The results also indicated that in late competition, if a crop is kept clean for 124 days and it is infested afterwards, a 1% loss is reached. However, the loss increases to 5% if the plot is kept clean for 111 days. For a 1% loss the critical period is 110 days and 70 days for a 5% loss
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (22)
1.
Duranti A., Carone F. 1983. Rapporti di competitività tra pomodoro seminato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. “Petegrò”) ed infestanti. [Weed control of transplanted tomato for processing (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. “Petogro”)]. Rivista di Ortoflorofrutticoltura Italiana 67 (3): 191–207. (in Spanish).
 
2.
Friesen G.H. 1979. Weed interference in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Science 27: 11–13.
 
3.
Gutiérrez Sosa M., Reina Mulero J. 1993. Determinación del período crítico de competencia de malas hierbas en la remolacha azucarera de siembra otoñal. [Establishment of the critical period for weed competition in autumn-sown sugar beet]. p. 299–302. In: Proceedings of the 1993 Congress of the Spanish Weed Science Society, Lugo, Spain, 1–3 December 1993, 342 pp. (in Spanish).
 
4.
Huet S., Jolivet E., Messéan A. 1992. La régression non-linéarie: méthodes et applications en biologie. [The non-linear regression: methods and applications in biology]. INRA Editions, Paris, France, 236 pp. (in French).
 
5.
Kropff M.J., Spitters C.J.T., Schneiders B.J., Joenije W., Groot W.D.E. 1992. An ecophysiological model for interspecific competition, applied to the influence of Chenopodium albumL. on sugar beet. Weed Research 32 (6): 451–463.
 
6.
López Bellido L. 2003. Cultivos Industriales. [Industrial Crops]. Mundi-Prensa, Madrid, Spain, 1071 pp. (in Spanish).
 
7.
Mansilla J. 2005. Efectos agronómicos de la duración y período de competencia entre la flora arvense y la remolacha azucarera (Beta vulgaris L. var. Altissima Döll) de siembra primaveral. [Effects of agronomic duration and period of competition between flora arvense and sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L. var. Altissima Doll) spring planting]. Ph.D. thesis, Castilla – La Mancha University, Albacete, Spain, 183 pp. (in Spanish).
 
8.
Mahmoud O.M. 2013. Determination of critical period of weed competition with sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) and weed control. Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt, 147 pp.
 
9.
Meier U., Bachmann L., Buhtz, Hack H., Klose R., Märländer B., Weber E. 1993. Phänologische Entwicklungsstadien der Beta-Rüben (Beta vulgaris L. ssp.). Codierung und Beschreibung nachdeerweiterten BBCH-Skala (mit Abbildungen). [Phenological growth stages of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L. ssp.). Codification and description according to the general BBCH scale (with figures)]. Nachrichtenblatt des Deutschen Pflanzenschutzdienstes 45: 37–41. (in German).
 
10.
Mobarak O.M., Galal A.H., Mekky M.S., Motagally F.M.F. 2012. Various methods for determining the critical period of weedcompetition to sugar beet 90: 4. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of Field Crops Facing Future Challenges, Giza, Egypt, 28–30 August 2012, 15 pp.
 
11.
Mohler C.L., Galford A.E. 1997. Weed seedling emergence and seed survival: separating the effects of seed position and soil modification by tillage. Weed Research 37 (3): 147–155.
 
12.
Odero D.C., Mesbah A.O., Miller S.D., Kniss A.R. 2009. Venice mallow (Hibiscus trionum) interference in sugar beet. Weed Technology 23 (4): 581–585.
 
13.
Odero D.C., Mesbah A.O., Miller S.D., Kniss A.R. 2010. Wild buckwheat (Polygonum convolvulus) interference in sugar beet. Weed Technology 24 (1): 59–63.
 
14.
Pardo Iglesias A. 1990. La competencia de las malas hierbas con el cultivo de la cebolla (Allium cepa L.) en siembra directa: Predicción de pérdidas y escarda química. [Competition between weeds and direct seeded onion (Allium cepa L.):Predicting losses and chemical weeding]. Ph.D. thesis, Higher Technical School of Agricultural Engineering of Madrid, Polytechnic University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain, 157 pp. (in Spanish).
 
15.
Pujadas Salva A. 1986. Flora arvense y ruderal de la provincia de Córdoba. [Agrestal and ruderal flora in Córdoba (Spain)]. Ph.D. thesis, The Higher Technical School of Agricultural Engineering, University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain, 629 pp. (in Spanish).
 
16.
Recasens J. 1994. Flora arvense en los cultivos de frutales. [Weed flora in fruit crops]. Phytoma 63: 57–62. (in Spanish).
 
17.
Romero R., Zúnica L. R. 1993. Estadística (Proyecto de Innovación Educativa). [Statistics (Educational Innovation Project)]. UPV, Servicio de Publicaciones, SPUPV-94637, Valencia, Spain, 213 pp. (in Spanish)Saavedra M. 1987. Estudio de las comunidades de flora arvense (malas hierbas) en el Valle Medio del Guadalquivir. [Weed flora in the Middle Valley of the Guadalquivir, Spain]. Ph.D. thesis, The Higher Technical School of Agricultural Engineering, University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain, 207 pp. (in Spanish).
 
18.
Salehi F., Esfandiari H., Mashhadi H. R. 2006. Critical period of weed control in sugar beet in Shaheekord Region. Iranian Journal of Weed Science 2 (2): 1–12.
 
19.
Scott R.K., Wilcockson S.J., Moisey F.R. 1979. The effects of time of weed removal on growth and yield of sugar beet. Journal of Agriculture Science 93 (3): 693–709.
 
20.
Suso M.L., Cavero J., Fernández-Quintanilla C., González-An-dújar J.L., González-Ponce R., Medina A., Pardo A., Salas M.L., Sánchez del Árco M.J., Santin I., Torner C., Zaragoza C. 1999. Conclusiones de los trabajos sobre la competencia de las malas hierbas con los cultivos de regadío en España. [Conclusions of some Spanish works on weed and irrigated crop competition]. p. 213–219. In: Proceedings of the 7th Spanish Weed Science Congress Logroño, Spain, 23–25.November 1999, 462 pp. (in Spanish).
 
21.
Weaver S.E., Tan C.S. 1983. Critical period of weed interference in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum): growth analysis. Weed Science 31 (4): 476–481.
 
22.
Weaver S.E. 1984. Critical period of weed competition in three vegetable crops in relation to management practices. Weed Research 24 (5): 317–325.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345