Yield of glyphosate-resistant sugar beets and efﬁciency of weed management systems with glyphosate and conventional herbicides under German and Polish crop production
Henrike Nichterlein , Anja Matzk , Leszek Kordas , Josef Kraus , Carsten Stibbe
AbstractIn sugar beet production, weed control is one of the most important and most expensive practices to ensure yield. Since glyphosate-resistant sugar beets are not yet approved for cultivation in the EU, little commercial experience exists with these sugar beets in Europe. Experimental field trials were conducted at five environments (Germany, Poland, 2010, 2011) to compare the effects of glyphosate with the effects of conventional weed control programs on the development of weeds, weed control efficiency and yield. The results show that the glyphosate weed control programs compared to the conventional methods decreased not only the number of herbicide applications but equally in magnitude decreased the dosage of active ingredients. The results also showed effective weed control with glyphosate when the weed covering was greater and sugar beets had a later growth stage of four true leaves. Glyphosate-resistant sugar beets applied with the glyphosate herbicide two or three times had an increase in white sugar yield from 4 to 18 % in comparison to the high dosage conventional herbicide systems. In summary, under glyphosate management sugar beets can positively contribute to the increasingly demanding requirements regarding efficient sugar beet cultivation and to the demands by society and politics to reduce the use of chemical plant protection products in the environment. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
|Journal series||Transgenic Research, ISSN 0962-8819, (A 25 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||0.55|
|Keywords in English||Glyphosate; Herbicide resistance; Sugar beet; Weed control; White sugar yield|
|ASJC Classification||; ; ;|
|Score|| = 25.0, 18-03-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
= 25.0, 18-03-2020, ArticleFromJournal
|Publication indicators||= 4; = 5; : 2013 = 0.866; : 2013 = 2.281 (2) - 2013=2.298 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.