WEED INTERFERENCE IN CARROT YIELD IN TWO LOCALIZED IRRIGATION SYSTEMS

REGINALDO, LAÍS TEREZA RÊGO TORQUATO; LINS, HAMURÁBI ANIZIO; SOUSA, MATHEUS DE FREITAS; TEÓFILO, TALIANE MARIA DA SILVA; MENDONÇA, VANDER; SILVA, DANIEL VALADÃO

doi:10.1590/1983-21252021v34n113rc

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Agronomy • Rev. Caatinga 34 (1) • Jan-Mar 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252021v34n113rc copy

WEED INTERFERENCE IN CARROT YIELD IN TWO LOCALIZED IRRIGATION SYSTEMS

INTERFERÊNCIA DE PLANTAS DANINHAS NA PRODUTIVIDADE DA CENOURA EM DOIS SISTEMAS DE IRRIGAÇÃO LOCALIZADA

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Weed interference is one of the factors that reduces carrot yield considerably. The aim of this study was to determine the periods of weed interference in carrots cultivated under two localized irrigation systems. The experiment used a completely randomized block design, with three replications, using the split plot scheme. The plots consisted of two irrigation systems (drip and micro sprinkler) and the subplots corresponded to the duration of coexistence of the crop with weeds, comprising periods of control (weed -free) or coexistence (with weeds) (0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 120 days after emergence (DAE) of the crop). Considering a yield loss of 2.5%, 5%, and 10% in marketable carrots, the beginning and end of the critical period of weed control (CPWC) was determined by adjusting a sigmoid model to the relative production data. The presence of the weed community throughout the crop cycle resulted in yield losses of up to 98%. The CPWP varied for the irrigation systems used. Carrot cultivation with and without competition, under the micro sprinkler irrigation system showed a higher yield than with the drip system. Considering a yield loss of 5%, the CPWC was 23 DAE and 7 DAE in the drip irrigation and micro sprinkler irrigation systems, respectively.

Keywords:
Daucus carota L; Competition; Interference period; Drip; Micro sprinkler

Treatments	Weed interference period	Number of fields	Duration of living with weeds
	(DAE)		(Days)
	Weed-free period
1	120 days (Without competition)	6	0
2	WFP until 10 days	1	110
3	WFP until 20 days	2	100
4	WFP until 30 days	3	90
5	WFP until 40 days	4	80
6	WFP until 50 days	5	70
	Weeds period
1	120 days (With competition)	0	120
2	WP until 10 days	5	10
3	WP until 20 days	4	20
4	WP until 30 days	3	30
5	WP until 40 days	2	40
6	WP until 50 days	1	50

Acceptable Loss of Productivity (%)	Irrigation system	Weed Interference Periods
Acceptable Loss of Productivity (%)	Irrigation system	PPI^* * Days after emergency (DAE).	CPWC	TPIP ^* * Days after emergency (DAE).
2.5	Drip	3	26	29
2.5	Micro sprinkler	17	11	28
5	Drip	4	23	27
5	Micro sprinkler	20	7	27
10	Drip	7	19	26
10	Micro sprinkler	25	0	25

DAE*	Number of non-commercial roots		Non-commercial root weight (Kg)
DAE*	Drip	Micro sprinkler	Drip	Micro sprinkler
10	1.2 Aa	7.33 aA	0.146 aA	0.104 aA
20	17.66 aA	9.33 aA	1.69 bA	0.476 aA
30	53.66 bA	38.33 aA	3.16 bA	3.206 bA
40	61.33 bA	66.00 bA	5.758 cA	8.532 cA
50	71.00 bA	71.33 bA	5.954 cA	8.706 cA
120	118.33 cA	86.67 bA	9.312 dA	11.133 cA

Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido Avenida Francisco Mota, número 572, Bairro Presidente Costa e Silva, Cep: 5962-5900, Telefone: 55 (84) 3317-8297 - Mossoró - RN - Brazil
E-mail: caatinga@ufersa.edu.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author

	pH	P	K	Na⁺	Ca⁺²	Mg⁺²	Al⁺³	H+Al	SB	CTC	V	M
	(H₂O)		(mg dm^-3)				(cmol_c dm^-3)				%
Soil	5.90	6.3	50.3	5.8	1.10	0.6	0.20	2.31	1.85	4.16	45	10

	Sigmoidal 4 parameters
	Parameters				RQME	R²	AICc
	y0	A	x0	b	RQME	R²	AICc
Weed-free	2.07	100.18	21.12	-2.56	0.13	0.98	142.54^* * Indicates model chosen according to Akaike criteria for selection of aligned models. ** y0: lower limit, x:0 inflection point of the model, a: upper limit, b: slope of the model.
Weedy	0.17	112.51	23.14	11.23	0.14	0.99
	Sigmoidal Gompertz
	Parameters				RQME	R²	AICc
	y0	A	x0	b	RQME	R²	AICc
Weed-free	2.78	99.76	19.87	-2.49	0.36	0.96	151.39
Weedy	0.83	136.54	26.14	22.17	0.35	0.97
	Logistic sigmoidal
	Parameters				RQME	R²	AICc
	y0	A	x0	b	RQME	R²	AICc
Weed-free	2.76	99.81	20.85	-10.98	0.49	0.95	158.31
Weedy	2.98	97.67	25.26	2.58	0.44	0.97

	Sigmoidal 4 parameters
	Parameters				RQME	R²	AICc
	y0	A	x0	b	RQME	R²	AICc
Weed-free	0.78	101.14	19.26	-2.23	0.23	0.99	131.61^* * Indicates model chosen according to Akaike criteria for selection of aligned models. ** y0: lower limit, x0: inflection point of the model, a: upper limit, b: slope of the model
Weedy	0.6	99.72	35.74	4.65	0.21	0.99
	Sigmoidal Gompertz
	Parameters				RQME	R²	AICc
	y0	A	x0	b	RQME	R²	AICc
Weed-free	0	101.51	18.12	-3.13	0.56	0.98	132.04
Weedy	2.91	100.45	38.21	6.18	0.55	0.99
	Logistic sigmoidal
	Parameters				RQME	R²	AICc
	y0	A	x0	b	RQME	R²	AICc
Weed-free	0.35	98.8	35.58	-7.77	0.69	0.98	132.83
Weedy	0.12	101	19.31	9.06	0.91	0.98