ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Evaluation of chemical weed control strategies in biomass sorghum
Euro Pannacci 1, A,C-F  
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Euro Pannacci   

Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, University of Perugia, Borgo XX Giugno, 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy
Submission date: 2018-03-23
Acceptance date: 2018-09-06
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2018;58(4):404–412
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Two field experimental trials were carried out in central Italy, in 2005 and 2006, on biomass sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] in order to assess weed control efficacy and selectivity to the crop of some pre- and post-emergence herbicides applied at different doses and in different mixtures. All herbicides showed good selectivity to the crop, although postemergence treatments showed higher transitory phytotoxicity effects than pre-emergence treatments, especially when high temperatures occurred after treatments, decreasing the selectivity of leaf herbicides (i.e. MCPA, 2,4-D, bromoxynil and dicamba). Considering pre-emergence applications, terbuthylazine alone against broadleaves or in mixtures at low doses with s-metolachlor against mixed infestations (grasses + broadleaves), seemed to be the best options to obtain a good selectivity to the sorghum and a high weed control level. Aclonifen showed some limits in terms of weed spectrum and could be recommended only against simplified broadleaf weed infestations without the presence of less susceptible weeds, like Amaranthus retroflexus, Portulaca oleracea and Solanum nigrum. Propachlor seemed not to be advisable due to the low efficacy against all the major broadleaf warmseason weed species in the Mediterranean areas. Considering post-emergence applications, all treatments gave quite similar results in terms of weed control, although, the mixture of terbuthylazine + bromoxynil seemed to be the best option due to bromoxinil’s higher efficacy than other foliar herbicides, such as MCPA, 2,4-D and dicamba, which can increase the efficacy of terbuthylazine alone especially under dry weather conditions. There were no significant differences in sorghum biomass between herbicide treatments, although, the more selective pre-emergence treatments showed, on average, a higher biomass yield value than the less selective post-emergence treatments. For these reasons, biomass values seemed to be more related to herbicide selectivity than to herbicide efficacy, especially in cases of scarce competitiveness of weed flora.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (29)
1.
Bonciarelli U., Onofri A., Benincasa P., Farneselli M., Guiducci M., Pannacci E., Tosti G., Tei F. 2016. Long-term evaluation of productivity, stability and sustainability for cropping systems in Mediterranean rainfed conditions. European Journal of Agronomy 77: 146–155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.....
 
2.
Chinnusamy N., Chinnagounder C., Krishnan P.N. 2013. Evaluation of weed control efficacy and seed cotton yield in glyphosate tolerant transgenic cotton. American Journal of Plant Sciences 4 (6): 1159–1163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2....
 
3.
Covarelli G., Onofri A., Marroni M.G. 1993. Ricerche sperimentali sul diserbo del sorgo. L’Informatore Agrario 25: 67–72.
 
4.
Covarelli L., Pannacci E., Beccari G., D’Errico F.P., Tosi L. 2010. Two-year investigations on the integrated control of weeds and root parasites in Virginia bright tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) in central Italy. Crop Protection 29 (8): 783–788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
 
5.
EWRC 1964. European Weed Research Council. Report of the 3rd and 4th meetings of EWRC. Committee of Methods in Weed Research. Weed Research 4 (1): 88.
 
6.
Everaarts A.P. 1993. Effects of competition with weeds on the growth, development and yield of sorghum. Journal of Agricultural Science 120 (2): 187–196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S00218....
 
7.
Habyarimana E., Laureti D., De Ninno M., Lorenzoni C. 2004. Performances of biomass sorghum under different water regimes in Mediterranean region. Industrial Crop and Products 20 (1): 23–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indc....
 
8.
Hallam A., Anderson I.C., Buxton D.R. 2001. Comparative economic analysis of perennial, annual, and intercrops for biomass production. Biomass and Bioenergy 21 (6): 407–424. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-....
 
9.
Haskins B. 2012. Using pre-emergent herbicides in conservation farming systems – weed management. NSW DPI, District Agronomist, Hillston, Broadacre Cropping Unit, pages 20. [Available on: https://www.google.it/url?sa=t... ].ved=0ahUKEwjphqmM7_3ZAhUuMewKHekkDLUQFggsMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dpi.nsw.gov.au%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0003%2F431247%2F.
 
10.
Jursík M., Soukup J., Holec J., Andr J., Hamouzová K. 2015. Efficacy and selectivity of pre-emergent sunflower herbicides under different soil moisture conditions. Plant Protection Science 51 (4): 214–222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/82/20....
 
11.
Jursík M., Fendrychová V., Kolářová M., Andr J., Soukup J. 2017. Optimising Clearfield and ExpressSun sunflower technologies for Central European conditions. Plant Protection Science 53 (4): 265–272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/2/201....
 
12.
Kaczmarek S. 2017. A study on Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench response to split application of herbicides. Journal of Plant Protection Research 57 (2): 152–157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jppr-2....
 
13.
Knezevic S.Z., Horak M.J., Vanderlip R.L. 1997. Relative time of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) emergence is critical in pigweed-sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] competition. Weed Science 45 (4): 502–508.
 
14.
Kozak M., Krzanowski W., Tartanus M. 2012. Use of the correlation coefficient in agricultural sciences: problems, pitfalls and how to deal with them. Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences 84 (4): 1147–1156.
 
15.
Limon-Ortega A., Mason S.C., Martin A.R. 1998. Production practices improve grain sorghum and pearl millet competitiveness with weeds. Agronomy Journal 90 (2): 227–232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj....
 
16.
Maarel van der E. 1979. Transformation of cover-abundance values in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. Vegetatio 39 (2): 97–114. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00....
 
17.
Miller F.R., Mcbee G.G. 1993. Genetics and management of physiological systems of sorghum for biomass production. Biomass and Bioenergy 5 (1): 41–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0961-9....
 
18.
Onofri A., Pannacci E. 2014. Spreadsheet tools for biometry classes in crop science programmes. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science 9: 3–13.
 
19.
Pannacci E., Bartolini S. 2016. Evaluation of sorghum hybrids for biomass production in central Italy. Biomass and Bioenergy 88: 135–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biom....
 
20.
Pannacci E., Graziani F., Covarelli G. 2007. Use of herbicide mixtures for pre and post-emergence weed control in sunflower (Helianthus annuus). Crop Protection 26: 1150–1157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
 
21.
Pannacci E., Onofri A. 2016. Alternatives to terbuthylazine for chemical weed control in maize. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science 11 (1): 51–63.
 
22.
Pannacci E., Tei F. 2014. Effects of mechanical and chemical methods on weed control, weed seed rain and crop yield in maize, sunflower and soyabean. Crop Protection 64: 51–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
 
23.
Pannacci E. 2016. Optimization of foramsulfuron doses for post-emergence weed control in maize (Zea mays L.). Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 14 (3): e1005. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5424/sjar....
 
24.
Peerzada A.M., Ali H.H., Chauhan B.S. 2017. Weed management in sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] using crop competition: A review. Crop Protection 95: 74–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
 
25.
Regassa T.H., Wortmann C.S. 2014. Sweet sorghum as a bioenergy crop: literature review. Biomass and Bioenergy 64: 348–355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016j.biomb....
 
26.
Regulation. 2011. Commission implementing regulation (EU) No 820/2011 of 16 August 2011. Official Journal of the European Union 17.8.2011, L 209/18-23. [Available on: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal...].
 
27.
Silva C., Ferreira da Silva A., Gonzaga do Vale W., Galon L., Petter F.A., May A., Karam D. 2014. Interferência de plantas daninhas na cultura do sorgo sacarino. [Weed interference in the sweet sorghum crop]. Bragantia 73 (4): 438–445. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678....
 
28.
Traore S., Manson S.C., Martin A.R., Mortensen D.A., Spotanski J.J. 2003. Velvetleaf interference effects on yield and growth of grain sorghum. Agronomy Journal 95 (6): 1602–1607. DOI: https://doi.org/doi:10.2134/ag....
 
29.
Vencill W.K., Banks P.A. 1994. Effects of tillage systems and weed management on weed populations in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Science 42 (4): 541–547.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345