Weed interference capacity on soybean yield
Capacidad de interferencia de las malezas en la productividad de la soya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15446/rfnam.v74n2.89705Keywords:
Glycine max, suppression, productivity, coexistence, control (en)Glycine max, supresión, productividad, control, Coexistencia (es)
Among biological factors, weeds are the most important limiting factor for crop yields, as well as increasing production costs. The aim was to determine the influence of control and coexistence of weed community on soybean crop yield and to define the period before interference, the critical period of interference prevention and the total period of interference prevention, with the comparative use of chemical and mechanical methods for weed eradication. The study was conducted in an experimental field in the 2018/2019 harvest. A randomized block with four replications was implemented as experimental design, using two methods for control. The evaluated periods were 0-10, 0-20, 0-30, 0-40, 0-50, 0-60 and 130 days after crop emergence. It was possible to observe that the use of the chemical method generated a higher yield compared to mechanical method. The period before the interference in both chemical and mechanical management was similar, approaching 20 days after crop emergence. The critical period of interference prevention was between 20-50 and 40.5 days after crop emergence in chemical and mechanical methods, respectively. The total period of interference prevention was extended to 50 and 40.5 days after crop emergence in chemical and mechanical methods, respectively. The reduction in productivity due to weed interference was 1639 kg ha-1 (55%) and 947 kg ha-1 (34.6%) in chemical and mechanical methods, respectively.
Entre los factores biológicos, la maleza es el factor restrictivo más importante del rendimiento de los cultivos, además de aumentar los costos de producción. El objetivo fue determinar la influencia del control y la coexistencia de la comunidad de malezas en el rendimiento del cultivo de soya y definir el período anterior a la interferencia, el período crítico de prevención de las interferencias y el período total de prevención de las interferencias, con el uso comparativo de métodos químicos y mecánicos para la erradicación de las malezas. El estudio se realizó en un campo experimental en la cosecha de
2018/2019. Se implementó un diseño experimental de bloque aleatorio con cuatro réplicas, utilizando dos métodos para el control. Los períodos evaluados fueron 0-10, 0-20, 0-30, 0-40, 0-50, 0-60 y 130 días después de la aparición de las plantas. Se pudo observar que el uso del método químico generó un mayor rendimiento en comparación con el método mecánico. El período anterior a la interferencia tanto en el manejo químico como mecánico fue similar, acercándose a los 20 días después de la aparición de las plantas. El período crítico de prevención de la interferencia fue entre 20-50 y 40,5 días después de la aparición de las plantas en los métodos químico y mecánico, respectivamente. El período total de prevención de la interferencia se extendió hasta los 50 y 40,5 días después de la aparición de las plantas según método químico y mecánico, respectivamente. La reducción de la productividad debida a la interferencia de las malezas fue de 1639 kg ha-1 para el método químico (55%) y 947 kg ha-1 (34,6%) para el mecánico.
References
Adegas FS, Vargas L, Gazziero DLP, Karam D, Silva AF and Agostinetto D. 2017. Impacto econômico da resistência de plantas daninhas a herbicidas no Brasil. Circular técnica 132, EmbrapaLondrina, PR. 12p. https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/162704/1/CT132-OL.pdf
Agostinetto D, Fontana LC, Vargas L, Perboni LT, Polidoro E and Silva BM. 2014. Competition periods of crabgrass with rice and soybean crops. Planta Daninha 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582014000100004
Agostinetto D, Galon L, Rigoli RP, Moraes PVD and Fontana LC. 2009. Competitividade relativa à soja em convivência com papuã (Brachiaria plantaginea). Scientia Agraria 10 (3): 185-190. http://doi.org/10.5380/rsa.v10i3.14473
Agostinetto D, Westendorff N, Zandoná RR, Ulguim AR and Langaro AC. 2020. Interference periods of Raphanus raphanistrum L. in sunflower crop. Planta Daninha 38: 8p. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-83582020380100050
Almarie AA. 2017. The critical period for weed competition in soybean Glycine max (L.) Merr. under Iraqi irrigated areas. Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science 12(4):128-132.
Balbinot CR, Dariva PA, Sordi A, Lajús CR, Cericato A, Luz GL and Klein C. 2016. Período crítico de interferência das plantas daninhas na cultura do milho. Unoesc & Ciência, CET Joaçaba 7(2): 211-218. https://portalperiodicos.unoesc.edu.br/acet/article/view/7705/pdf
Brighenti AM and Oliveira MF. 2011. Biologia de plantas daninhas. In: Biologia e manejo de plantas daninhas. Curitiba: Omnipax, 348 p.
Danilussi MTY, Albrecht AJP, Albrecht LP, Lorenzetti JB, Bauer FE and Barroso AAM. 2019. Redução da produtividade e nível de dano econômico de Digitaria insularis em soja. Anais do V Congresso brasileiro de fitossanidade. http://fitossanidade.fcav.unesp.br/seer/index.php/anaisconbraf/issue/view/1
Jakelaitis A, Ferreira LR, Silva AA, Agnes EL, Miranda GV and Machado AFL. 2003. Dinâmica populacional de plantas daninhas sob diferentes sistemas de manejo nas culturas de milho e feijão. Planta Daninha 21(1):71-79. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582003000100009
Maciel AD, Arf O, Silva MG. Da Sá ME. De; Salatiér B, Andrade JAC and Sobrinho EB. 2004. Comportamento do milho consorciado com feijão em sistema de plantio direto. Acta Scientiarum Agronomy 26(3): 309-314. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v26i3.1828
Nonemacher F, Galon L, Santin CO, Forte CT, Fiabane RC, Winter FL, Agazzi LR, Basso FJM and Perin RRK. 2017. Herbicide association applied to control weeds in glyphosate-resistant soybean. Revista Brasileira de Herbicidas 16(2): 142. https://doi.org/10.7824/rbh.v16i2.529
Oliveira MF and Brighenti AM. 2018. Controle de plantas daninhas. Métodos físico, mecânico, cultural, biológico e alelopatia. 1ª ed. Embrapa Milho e Sorgo, Brasília-DF, 178p.
Radosevich SR, Holt JS and Ghersa CM. 2007. Ecology of weeds and invasive plants: relationship to agriculture and natural resource management. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience, 454 p.
Rizzardi MA, Roman ES, Borowski DZ and Marcon R. 2004. Interferência de populações de Euphorbia heterophylla e Ipomoea ramosissima isoladas ou em misturas sobre a cultura de soja. Planta Daninha 22(1): 29-34. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582004000100004
Scherner ABM. 2016. Vertical distribution and composition of weed seeds within the plough layer after eleven years of contrasting crop rotation and tillage schemes. Soil and Tillage Research 161: 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2016.04.005
Silva AAP, Neto AMO, Guerra N, Helvig EO and Maciel CDG. 2015. Períodos de interferência entre ervas daninhas e culturas de soja RRTM na área do Centro Oeste do estado brasileiro do Paraná. Planta Daninha 33(4). https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582015000400009
Silva AAP, Neto AMO, Naiara G, Karpinski R and Maciel CDG. 2016. Períodos de interferência de plantas daninhas no trigo precoce no Centro-Oeste do Paraná. Planta Daninha 34(2). https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582016340200010
Silva AF, Concenço G, Aspiazú I, Ferreira EA, Galon L, Freitas MAM, Silva AA and Ferreira FA. 2009. Período anterior à interferência na cultura da soja-rr em condições de baixa, média e alta infestação. Planta Daninha 27(1): 57-66. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582009000100009
Souza PAM, Souza JEB and Filho JM. 2018. Associação do herbicida clethodim em pós emergente ao glyphosate no controle de plantas daninhas em soja. VIII Semana Agronômica-A Ciência na Redução das Desigualdades do Campo. http://anais.unievangelica.edu.br/index.php/safaeg/article/view/381
Souza RG, Cardoso DBO, Mamede MC, Hamawaki OT and Souza LB. 2019. Desempenho agronômico de soja, sob interferência de plantas infestantes. Cultura Agronômica 28(2): 194-203. https://doi.org/10.32929/2446-8355.2019v28n2p194-203
Stall WM and Dusky JA. 2006. Weed control in leafy vegetables (lettuce, endive, escarole and spinach). EDIS 28: 4. https://journals.flvc.org/edis/article/view/116208
Streck EV, Kämpf N, Dalmolin RSD, Klamt E, Nascimento PC Do, Giasson E and Pinto LFS. 2018. Solos do Rio Grande do Sul. UFRGS: EMATER/RS-ASCAR, Porto Alegre 3: 251.
Vargas L, Adegas F, Gazziero D, Karam D, Agostinetto D and Silva WT. 2016. Resistência de plantas daninhas a herbicidas no brasil: histórico, distribuição, impacto econômico, manejo e prevenção. In: A era glyphosate: agricultura, meio ambiente e homem. Londrina: Midiograf II CAP 20: 219-239.
Velini ED. 1997. Interferências entre plantas daninhas e cultivadas. In: Simpósio Sobre Herbicidas e Plantas Daninhas. Embrapa-CPAO, Dourados 29-41 p. (Embrapa-CPAO. Documentos, 13)
Vivian R, Silva AA, Gimenes JM, Fagan EB, Ruiz ST and Labonia V. 2008. Dormência em sementes de plantas daninhas como mecanismo de sobrevivência–breve revisão. Planta Daninha 26(3): 695-706. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582008000300026
Werle R, Sandell LD, Buhler DD and Hartzler RG. 2014. Predicting emergence of 23 summer annual weed species. Weed Science 62(2): 267-279. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-13-00116.1
Zandoná RR, Agostinetto D, Silva BM, Ruchel Q and Fraga DS. 2018. Interference periods in soybean crop as affected by emergence times of weeds. Planta Daninha 36:11. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-83582018360100045
How to Cite
APA
ACM
ACS
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
MLA
Turabian
Vancouver
Download Citation
CrossRef Cited-by
1. David Richard, Laura Leimbrock-Rosch, Sabine Keßler, Evelyne Stoll, Stéphanie Zimmer. (2023). Soybean yield response to different mechanical weed control methods in organic agriculture in Luxembourg. European Journal of Agronomy, 147, p.126842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2023.126842.
2. Eduardo Roncatto, Arthur A.M. Barroso, Alfredo J.P. Albrecht, Bruna D. Novello, Renan G. Silva, Caroline B.W. Backes. (2023). Shortening critical period of weed control at soybean by residual herbicide mixtures. Advances in Weed Science, 41 https://doi.org/10.51694/AdvWeedSci/2023;41:00009.
3. Guilherme B.P. Braz, Denis F. Biffe, Jamil Constantin, Rubem S. de Oliveira, Sergio de O. Procópio, Gabriel dos Reis, João H.R. Barion. (2025). Goosegrass management challenges in Brazil: the ongoing battle against herbicide resistance. Advances in Weed Science, 43 https://doi.org/10.51694/AdvWeedSci/2025;43:00033.
4. Muhammad Awais Arshad, Rana Nadeem Abbas, Rania Baloch, Ali Ahmad, Usman Zulfiqar, Fasih Ullah Haider, Hossam S. El-Beltagi, Mashael Daghash Alqahtani, P. V. Vara Prasad. (2026). Enhancing soybean (Glycine max L.) yield and quality through optimized weed-free periods and sowing techniques. Frontiers in Plant Science, 17 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2026.1700878.
Dimensions
PlumX
Article abstract page views
Downloads
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Eduardo Carlos Rüdell, Iuri Dalla Santa Petrolli, Fernando Machado dos Santos, Dieferson Frandaloso, Diécson Ruy Orsolin da Silva

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The journal allows the author(s) to maintain the exploitation rights (copyright) of their articles without restrictions. The author(s) accept the distribution of their articles on the web and in paper support (25 copies per issue) under open access at local, regional, and international levels. The full paper will be included and disseminated through the Portal of Journals and Institutional Repository of the Universidad Nacional de Colombia, and in all the specialized databases that the journal considers pertinent for its indexation, to provide visibility and positioning to the article. All articles must comply with Colombian and international legislation, related to copyright.
Author Commitments
The author(s) undertake to assign the rights of printing and reprinting of the material published to the journal Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía Medellín. Any quotation of the articles published in the journal should be made given the respective credits to the journal and its content. In case content duplication of the journal or its partial or total publication in another language, there must be written permission of the Director.
Content Responsibility
The Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and the journal are not necessarily responsible or in solidarity with the concepts issued in the published articles, whose responsibility will be entirely the author or the authors.






