The effect of duration of annual weed competition on sugar beet yield was determined during 1990-1992 in Zarghan and Fassa regions, Fars – Iran. A randomized complete block design (RCBD) with 7 treatments in 4 replications was used. Each plot consisted of 6 rows, 10 meters long and 61 cm distance between rows. The treatments were the following: 1- One hand-weeding at 5 weeks after planting 2- One hand-weeding at 8 weeks after planting 3- One hand-weeding at 10 weeks after planting 4- Two hand-weeding at 5 and 8 weeks after planting 5- Three hand-weeding at 5 and 8 weeks after planting 6- weed-free for the whole period of growth 7- Weedy for the whole period of growth. The results showed that sugar beet yield was highly affected by the duration of weed competition. The weed-free plots yielded 30% and 62% more than the weed plots, for Zarghan and Fassa, respectively. Maximum yield was obtained when sugar beet field was hand-weeded for the whole period of growth. However, there was no significant difference between the weed-free plots for the whole season and the two other periodically hand-weeded plots (either two times at 5 and 8 weeks after planting or three times at 5, 8 and 10 weeks after planting). It is concluded that two hand-weedings at 5 and 8 weeks after sugar beet planting are enough to have and acceptable yield under the conditions of these experiments.
Farsinejad, K., & Farahbakhsh, A. (1996). Studies on the duration of annual weed competition on sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet, 11(1), 13-19. doi: 10.22092/jsb.1996.116525
MLA
K. Farsinejad; A.N. Farahbakhsh. "Studies on the duration of annual weed competition on sugar beet". Journal of Sugar Beet, 11, 1, 1996, 13-19. doi: 10.22092/jsb.1996.116525
HARVARD
Farsinejad, K., Farahbakhsh, A. (1996). 'Studies on the duration of annual weed competition on sugar beet', Journal of Sugar Beet, 11(1), pp. 13-19. doi: 10.22092/jsb.1996.116525
VANCOUVER
Farsinejad, K., Farahbakhsh, A. Studies on the duration of annual weed competition on sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet, 1996; 11(1): 13-19. doi: 10.22092/jsb.1996.116525