Weed survey in pivot irrigated rice crop in Cachoeira do Sul - RS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X40649Keywords:
Oryza sativa L., Invasive Species, CompetitionAbstract
The survey of weed species in crops allows the identification, quantification of weed flora, its evolution in the area and helps in decision making for control of species. In this sense, the objective of this work was to survey weeds in pivot-irrigated rice fields in Cachoeira do Sul, Capané district, in the experimental area of the Rio Grandense do Arroz Institute (IRGA). Evaluations were performed by applying the 0.25 m2 square method, randomly launched sixty-eight times. Weeds in the sampled areas were removed from the soil, species identified and quantified. The evaluations were performed after the application of Gamit (preemerging), Ricer and Clincher and Imazethapyr (postemerging). Even after herbicide applications, 13 species were identified, representing the families Asteraceae, Poaceae, Malvaceae and Rubiaceae. Knowledge of the weeds present in the crop allows planning to improve control, avoiding unnecessary expense with herbicides or even using other methods to control these species.
Downloads
References
ALBUQUERQUE, J. A. A. Interferência de plantas daninhas e do feijão sobre a cultura da mandioca. 2006. 56 f. Tese (Doutorado em Fitotecnia) - Universidade Federal de Viçosa.
DUARTE, A. P.; SILVA, A. C.; DEUBER, R. Plantas infestantes em lavouras de milho safrinha, sob diferentes manejos, no médio Paranapanema. Planta Daninha,Viçosa-MG, v. 25, n. 2, p. 285-291, 2007.
ERASMO, E. A. L.; PINHEIRO, L. L. A.; COSTA, N. V. Levantamento fi tossociológico das comunidades de plantas
infestantes em áreas de produção de arroz irrigado cultivado sob diferentes sistemas de manejo. Planta Daninha, Viçosa-MG, v. 22, n. 2, p.195-201, 2004.
IRGA: Instituto Rio Grandense do Arroz: Boletim de resultados da lavoura de arroz, safra 17/18. Disponível em: <https://irga-admin.rs.gov.br/upload/arquivos/201807/30100758-boletim-final-da-safra-201-18-final.pdf>. Acesso em: 20 de julho. 2019.
LIMA, J. M. et al. Prospecção fitoquímica de Sonchus oleraceus e sua toxidade sobre o microcrustáceo Artemia salina. Planta Daninha,Viçosa-MG, v. 27, n. 1, p. 207-11, 2009.
PITELLI, R.A. Competição e manejo em culturas anuais. A Granja, Porto Alegre, n. 37, p. 111-113, 1981.
SANCHEZ-OLGUÍN, E.; ARRIETA-ESPINOZA, G.; ESPINOZA ESQUIVEL, A. M. C. Comparação do desenvolvimento vegetativo e reprodutivo do arroz-vermelho e variedades comerciais de arroz (Oriza sativa) da Costa Rica. Planta Daninha, v. 25, n. 1, p. 13-27, 2007.
SILVA, M.R.M.; DURIGAN, J.C. Períodos de interferência das plantas daninhas na cultura do arroz de terras altas. I - cultivar IAC 202. Planta Daninha, Viçosa-MG, v. 24, n. 4, p. 685-694, 2006.
SILVA, A. A. et al.Tópicos em manejo de plantas daninhas. In: Capítulo 1 - Biologia de plantas daninhas. Viçosa: Ed. UFV, p.17-61, 2007.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
