Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia

Firehun Yirefu; Tamado Tana; Abera Tafesse; Yohannes Zekarias

doi:doi:10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

| Peer-Reviewed

Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia

Firehun Yirefu, Tamado Tana, Abera Tafesse, Yohannes Zekarias

Published in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Volume 2, Issue 6)

Received: 2 December 2013 Published: 30 December 2013

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Field experiments involving sprawling and erect cultivars of sugarcane and 12 weed competition periods were conducted in randomized complete block design in four replications for two cropping seasons at three sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Sugarcane was either kept free of weeds or weeds were allowed to grow for 0, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks after planting (WAP). The sprawling sugarcane cultivars (‘B41227’ and ‘N14’) suppressed weed growth more and gave higher cane yield than the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The cane yield loss in unweeded plots compared to weed free plots ranged from 69.7% for sprawling cultivar ‘B41227’ at Methara to 83.5% at Wonji-Shoa for the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The beginning and end of critical periods of weed interference on 5% acceptable cane yield loss levels ranged from about 2.5 to 14 WAP for the erect cultivar and from 3 to 13.5 WAP for the sprawling cultivars implying the need to use herbicides or other weed control methods in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia during these periods to keep cane yield loss levels below 5%.

Published in	Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Volume 2, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
Page(s)	239-247
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2013. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Cane Yield, Critical Period of Weed Competition, Gompertz Equation, Logistic Equation, Weeks after Planting

References

[1]	Shimelis K, Ambachew D, Firehun Y. 2011. Trends of sugar industry development in Ethiopia: challenges and prospects. A paper presented on Ethiopian Science Academy Conference held on 28 -30 Nov. 2011. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[2]	ISO (International Sugar Organization). 2010. Sugar Year Book. International Sugar Organization, London. Available at URL:http://www.Isosugar.org. Accessed on 20 October 2012.
[3]	McIntyre GE. 1991. Weeds of sugarcane in Mauritius: their description and control. Kin Keong Printing, Singapore.
[4]	Abera T, Firehun Y and Solomon B. 2009. Review of sugarcane protection research in Ethiopia. pp. 409-447. In: Abraham T. (ed.) Increasing crop production through improved plant protection: Vol. 2. Plant Protection Society of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[5]	Firehun Y, Abera T, Yohannes Z, Leul M. 2009. Handbook for sugarcane pest management in Ethiopia. Apple Printing Press, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[6]	Swanton CJ, Weise SF. 1991. Integrated weed management: rationale and approach. Weed Technology 5: 657-663.
[7]	Evans SP, Knezevic SZ, Lindquist JL, Shapiro CA, Blankenship EE. 2003. Nitrogen application influences the critical period for weed control in corn. Weed Science 51:408-417.
[8]	Hall MR, Swanton CJ, Anderson GW. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Science 40:441-447.
[9]	StatSoft. 1999. STATISTICA for Windows (Tulsa: StatSoft).
[10]	Knezevic SZ, Evans SP, Blankenship EE, Van Acker RC, Lindquist JL. 2002. Critical period for weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Science 50:773-786.
[11]	Chikoye D, Ekeleme F. 2001. Weed flora and soil seed bank in fields dominated by Imperata cylindrica in the moist savannah of West Africa. Weed Research 41:475-490.
[12]	Shrestha A, Knezevic SZ, Roy RC, Ball-Coelho BR, Swanton CJ. 2002. Effect of tillage, cover crop and crop rotation on the composition of weed flora in a sandy soil. Weed Research 42:76-87.
[13]	Aregaw, A. 2000. Sugarcane production and sugar processing in Ethiopia. Proc. Curriculum Rev. Workshop. Jimma College of Agriculture, Jimma University.
[14]	Grundy AC, Mead A. 2000. Modeling weed emergence as a function of meteorological records. Weed Science 48:594-603.
[15]	Firehun Y, Tamado T. 2006. Weed flora in the Rift Valley sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia as influenced by soil types and agronomic practices. Weed Biology and Management 6:139-150.
[16]	Chikoye D, Ayeoffe F, Robert A, Abebe M, Alpha K, Friday E, Nteranya S. 2008. Response of Corn Genotypes to Weed Interference and Nitrogen in Nigeria. Weed Science 56:424-433.
[17]	Lianming C, Chuxiong G. 2003. Sugarcane pests and their control. Guangzhou Sugarcane Industry Research Institute. Guangzhou, China. p. 62.
[18]	Seeruttun S, Lutman P. 2004. Critical period of weed control in sugarcane in Mauritius. In: International Weed Science Society. Abstract book, 4th International Weed Science Congress, Durban, Republic of South Africa, 20-24 June 2004.
[19]	Ambachew D, Tariku G, Bezuneh, A, Elias, T. 2009. Performance of Ethiopian Sugar Estates in 2007/08 Cropping Season: Agricultural Operations. Proceedings of Ethiopian Sugar Industry Biannual Conference 1: 186-197.
[20]	Chauhan RS, Srivastava TK. 2002. Influence of planting techniques on growth and yield of sugarcane. Indian Journal of Weed Science 34: 318-319.
[21]	Singh D, Tomar PK. 2003. Studies on critical period of crop-weed-competition in late planted sugarcane. Indian Sugar 53: 579-583.
[22]	Muhammad Z, Asif T, Zahid C, Ashraf M. 2010. Weed-crop competition effects on growth and yield of sugarcane planted using two methods. Pakistan Journal of Botany 42: 815-823.
[23]	Taye E. 1991. Survey of weed ﬂora and evaluation of some foliage-applied herbicides in the sugarcane plantation of Wonji-Shoa and Methara. MSc. thesis. Alemaya University of Agriculture, Alemaya, Ethiopia.
[24]	Firehun Y, Tamado T, Abera T, Yohannes Z. 2012. Competitive ability of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) cultivars to weed interference in sugarcane plantation of Ethiopia. Crop Protection 32: 138-143.
[25]	Van Acker RC, Weise SF, Swanton CJ. 1993. The critical period of weed control in soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Weed Science 41:194-200.
[26]	Martin SG, Van Acker RC, Friesen LF. 2001. Critical period of weed control in spring canola. Weed Science 49:326-333.
[27]	Lindquist JL, Mortensen DA, Westra P. 1999. Stability of corn (Zea mays)–foxtail (Setaria spp.) interference relationships. Weed Science 47:195-200.
[28]	Nayamuth AR, Cheeroo-Nayamuth BF, Soopramanien GC. 1999. Agro-physiological characteristics underlying the sucrose accumulation pattern of early and late varieties. Proceedings South African Sugar Technologists Association 73:157-163.
[29]	Seeruttun S. 2008. Weed management in sugar cane: critical periods of weed competition and mechanisms of interference from Paspalum paniculatum and P. urvillei, PhD thesis, University of Pretoria. On-line PDF document; URL: http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/. Access date: 16-December 2012.
[30]	Singh G, Pant PC, Bhan VM. 1980. Studies on the critical period of weed control in spring
[31]	Punzelan FL, Cruzz De La. 1981. Effect of duration of weed competition and weed control in sugarcane. Philippines Journal of Weed Sciences 8: 15-18.
[32]	Srivastava TK, Singh AK, Srivastava SN. 2003. Critical period of weed competition in sugarcane ratoon. Indian Journal of Weed Science 34: 320-321.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Firehun Yirefu, Tamado Tana, Abera Tafesse, Yohannes Zekarias. (2013). Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2(6), 239-247. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Firehun Yirefu; Tamado Tana; Abera Tafesse; Yohannes Zekarias. Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia. Agric. For. Fish. 2013, 2(6), 239-247. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Firehun Yirefu, Tamado Tana, Abera Tafesse, Yohannes Zekarias. Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia. Agric For Fish. 2013;2(6):239-247. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17,
  author = {Firehun Yirefu and Tamado Tana and Abera Tafesse and Yohannes Zekarias},
  title = {Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia},
  journal = {Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {239-247},
  doi = {10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.aff.20130206.17},
  abstract = {Field experiments involving sprawling and erect cultivars of sugarcane and 12 weed competition periods were conducted in randomized complete block design in four replications for two cropping seasons at three sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Sugarcane was either kept free of weeds or weeds were allowed to grow for 0, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks after planting (WAP). The sprawling sugarcane cultivars (‘B41227’ and ‘N14’) suppressed weed growth more and gave higher cane yield than the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The cane yield loss in unweeded plots compared to weed free plots ranged from 69.7% for sprawling cultivar ‘B41227’ at Methara to 83.5% at Wonji-Shoa for the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The beginning and end of critical periods of weed interference on 5% acceptable cane yield loss levels ranged from about 2.5 to 14 WAP for the erect cultivar and from 3 to 13.5 WAP for the sprawling cultivars implying the need to use herbicides or other weed control methods in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia during these periods to keep cane yield loss levels below 5%.},
 year = {2013}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia
AU  - Firehun Yirefu
AU  - Tamado Tana
AU  - Abera Tafesse
AU  - Yohannes Zekarias
Y1  - 2013/12/30
PY  - 2013
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
DO  - 10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
T2  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JF  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JO  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
SP  - 239
EP  - 247
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5648
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
AB  - Field experiments involving sprawling and erect cultivars of sugarcane and 12 weed competition periods were conducted in randomized complete block design in four replications for two cropping seasons at three sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Sugarcane was either kept free of weeds or weeds were allowed to grow for 0, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks after planting (WAP). The sprawling sugarcane cultivars (‘B41227’ and ‘N14’) suppressed weed growth more and gave higher cane yield than the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The cane yield loss in unweeded plots compared to weed free plots ranged from 69.7% for sprawling cultivar ‘B41227’ at Methara to 83.5% at Wonji-Shoa for the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The beginning and end of critical periods of weed interference on 5% acceptable cane yield loss levels ranged from about 2.5 to 14 WAP for the erect cultivar and from 3 to 13.5 WAP for the sprawling cultivars implying the need to use herbicides or other weed control methods in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia during these periods to keep cane yield loss levels below 5%.
VL  - 2
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Firehun Yirefu

Ethiopian Sugar Corporation Research and Training, P.O. Box 15, Wonji, Ethiopia
Tamado Tana

Haramaya University, P.O.Box, 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia
Abera Tafesse

Ethiopian Sugar Corporation Research and Training, P.O. Box 15, Wonji, Ethiopia
Yohannes Zekarias

Ethiopian Sugar Corporation Research and Training, P.O. Box 15, Wonji, Ethiopia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Firehun Yirefu, Tamado Tana, Abera Tafesse, Yohannes Zekarias. (2013). Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2(6), 239-247. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Firehun Yirefu; Tamado Tana; Abera Tafesse; Yohannes Zekarias. Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia. Agric. For. Fish. 2013, 2(6), 239-247. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Firehun Yirefu, Tamado Tana, Abera Tafesse, Yohannes Zekarias. Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia. Agric For Fish. 2013;2(6):239-247. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17,
  author = {Firehun Yirefu and Tamado Tana and Abera Tafesse and Yohannes Zekarias},
  title = {Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia},
  journal = {Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {239-247},
  doi = {10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.aff.20130206.17},
  abstract = {Field experiments involving sprawling and erect cultivars of sugarcane and 12 weed competition periods were conducted in randomized complete block design in four replications for two cropping seasons at three sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Sugarcane was either kept free of weeds or weeds were allowed to grow for 0, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks after planting (WAP). The sprawling sugarcane cultivars (‘B41227’ and ‘N14’) suppressed weed growth more and gave higher cane yield than the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The cane yield loss in unweeded plots compared to weed free plots ranged from 69.7% for sprawling cultivar ‘B41227’ at Methara to 83.5% at Wonji-Shoa for the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The beginning and end of critical periods of weed interference on 5% acceptable cane yield loss levels ranged from about 2.5 to 14 WAP for the erect cultivar and from 3 to 13.5 WAP for the sprawling cultivars implying the need to use herbicides or other weed control methods in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia during these periods to keep cane yield loss levels below 5%.},
 year = {2013}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Weed Interference in the Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Plantations of Ethiopia
AU  - Firehun Yirefu
AU  - Tamado Tana
AU  - Abera Tafesse
AU  - Yohannes Zekarias
Y1  - 2013/12/30
PY  - 2013
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
DO  - 10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
T2  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JF  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JO  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
SP  - 239
EP  - 247
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5648
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20130206.17
AB  - Field experiments involving sprawling and erect cultivars of sugarcane and 12 weed competition periods were conducted in randomized complete block design in four replications for two cropping seasons at three sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Sugarcane was either kept free of weeds or weeds were allowed to grow for 0, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks after planting (WAP). The sprawling sugarcane cultivars (‘B41227’ and ‘N14’) suppressed weed growth more and gave higher cane yield than the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The cane yield loss in unweeded plots compared to weed free plots ranged from 69.7% for sprawling cultivar ‘B41227’ at Methara to 83.5% at Wonji-Shoa for the erect cultivar ‘NCo334’. The beginning and end of critical periods of weed interference on 5% acceptable cane yield loss levels ranged from about 2.5 to 14 WAP for the erect cultivar and from 3 to 13.5 WAP for the sprawling cultivars implying the need to use herbicides or other weed control methods in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia during these periods to keep cane yield loss levels below 5%.
VL  - 2
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download