Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry
DOI
10.55730/1300-011X.3088
Abstract
Johnson grass is one of the most dangerous and difficult to control weeds. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of different control methods on Johnson grass in tomato fields and to investigate the effect of these methods on the phenological stages and yield indicators of tomatoes. The study was carried out during the 2019 and 2020 seasons. The experiment treatments were as follows: hand hoe, mulch, preemergence herbicide pendimethalin (5 L/ha), postemergence herbicide fluazifop-P-butyl (1 L/ha), and control parcels. The number of flowers, the number of branches, and the length of the plant were determined in tomato. The yield and characteristics of the fruit were calculated and the fruits were analyzed. For Johnson grass, the time for germination, flowering, and seed maturity were determined. Plant height, fresh and dry biomass weight of weed, and rhizomes were also calculated. The results of this experiment showed that the best yield was 64.943 kg/ha in the hand hoe and the fluazifop-P-butyl treatment. The lowest density and fresh biomass of Johnson grass were detected in the fluazifop-P-butyl (217.3 stem/mm$^{2}$, 1009.4 g/m$^{2}$) and the mulch (251.7 stem/mm$^{2}$, 1355.2 g/m$^{2}$) treatments, respectively. The highest density and fresh biomass were detected in control parcels (448.8 stem/m$^{2}$, 3239.2 g/ m2), and in the pendimethalin treatment (334.2 stem/m$^{2}$, 1956.4 g/m$^{2}$), respectively. The percentage of lost yield in the control parcels was 90.1%. Hand hoe was found to be the most effective control method against Johnson grass followed by fluazifop-P-butyl, mulch, and pendimethalin.
Keywords
Johnson grass, tomato, control methods, phenological stages, loss of yield
First Page
308
Last Page
318
Recommended Citation
ÜSTÜNER, TAMER; SAKRAN, MUHAMMAD AL; and ÜSTÜNER, MENDERES
(2023)
"Effects of some control methods on Johnson grass and yield components in tomato fields,"
Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry: Vol. 47:
No.
3, Article 4.
https://doi.org/10.55730/1300-011X.3088
Available at:
https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/agriculture/vol47/iss3/4