Do farmers manage weeds on owned and rented land differently? Evidence from US corn and soybean farms.

BACKGROUND: It has been frequently argued that growers have less incentive to manage the evolution and spread of herbicide-resistant weeds on leased than on owned land. This is because resistance management provides long-term rather than short-term benefits that operators may be less assured of capturing on land they do not own. Yet, empirical evidence supporting this argument has been lacking. RESULTS: This study reports on results from a large-scale national survey of weed management and other crop production practices on US agricultural fields. Up to 11 weed management practices were compared across owner-operated versus renter-operated fields. Analysis of survey data from corn and soybean fields did not support the hypothesis that adoption of resistance management practices is lower on rented acres. In most instances, there were no statistically significant differences in herbicide use or weed management practices on rented versus owned land. This was true at both national and regional levels of analysis. Where there were significant differences, practices associated with greater herbicide resistance management were, as often as not, more prevalent on rented than owned land. CONCLUSIONS: A useful area of future research would be to test for land tenure differences in resistance management using multivariate analysis to control for confounding effects. Unobserved farmer or land characteristics may be confounding results and masking land tenure effects. Results here, however, suggest that these other effects are dominating any obvious disincentive effects of land leasing on resistance management. Of greater concern, the adoption of key resistance management practices was low on both owned and rented land. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry.

Circadian response of annual weeds to glyphosate and glufosinate.

Five field experiments were conducted in 1998 and 1999 in Minnesota to examine the influence of time of day efficacy of glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine] and glufosinate [2-amino-4-(hydroxymethyl-phosphinyl)butanoic acid] applications on the control of annual weeds. Each experiment was designed to be a randomized complete block with four replications using plot sizes of 3 x 9 m. Glyphosate and glufosinate were applied at rates of 0.421 kg ae/ha and 0.292 kg ai/ha, respectively, with and without an additional adjuvant that consisted of 20% nonionic surfactant and 80% ammonium sulfate. All treatments were applied with water at 94 L/ha. Times of day for the application of herbicide were 06:00h, 09:00h, 12:00h, 15:00h, 18:00h, 21:00h, and 24:00h. Efficacy was evaluated 14 d after application by visual ratings. At 14 d, a circadian response to each herbicide was found, with greatest annual weed control observed with an application occurring between 09:00h and 18:00h and significantly less weed control observed with an application at 06:00h, 21:00h, or 24:00h. The addition of an adjuvant to both herbicides increased overall efficacy, but did not overcome the rhythmic time of day effect. Results of the multiple regression analysis showed that after environmental temperature, time of day was the second most important predictor of percent weed kill. Thus, circadian timing of herbicide application significantly influenced weed control with both glyphosate and glufosinate.

Circadian response of annual weeds in a natural setting to high and low application rates of four herbicides with different modes of actions.

Four herbicides [glyphosate (GLYT), an amino acid synthesis inhibitor; glufosinate (GLUF), a glutamine synthetase inhibitor; fomesafen (FOME), a protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibitor, and chlorimuron ethyl (CLIM), an acetolactate synthase inhibitor] were used to examine the influence of time of day of application on the control of a variety of annual broadleaf weeds in field studies conducted in Minnesota (five studies on GLYT and GLUF, three studies on FOME and CLIM). All herbicides were applied with an adjuvant at recommended high and low (half or quarter strength) rates every 3h between 06:00 and 24:00h local time. Visual ratings of percent weed control evaluated at 14d were analyzed by herbicide and application rate for each study and across studies for time-of-day effect by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and single cosinor. A circadian response to each herbicide was found, with greatest weed control observed between 09:00 and 18:00h. Increasing the herbicide application rate did not overcome the time-of-day effect (ANOVA: p < or = 0.008 for time-of-day effect for each herbicide and application rate). The least-squares fit of a 24h cosine was significant (p < or = 0.001) for each herbicide and application rate, with double amplitudes of 18-82% (units = % visual control) and estimated peaks (acrophases) near midday between 12:40 and 13:35h. Analysis of residuals obtained from multiple regression that included weed height, herbicide rate, temperature, and relative humidity as independent factors also found a significant time-effect by both ANOVA and cosinor for each herbicide and rate, with acrophases advancing significantly by 3 to 7h for GLYT and GLUF, but not for FOME or CLIM. These results suggest that the four herbicides, while belonging to different families with different modes of action, may reveal different peak times of efficacy when adjusting for environmental factors. Nonetheless, each displays similar circadian patterns when influenced by these factors under natural seasonal field conditions. The within-day rhythmic differences found in weed control are large enough to warrant consideration of the practical financial and environmental importance of the time-of-day that these and other herbicides are applied.