**Author details**

Alexandre Ferreira da Silva1 , Leandro Galon2 , Ignacio Aspiazú3 , Evander Alves Ferreira4 , Germani Concenço5 , Edison Ulisses Ramos Júnior6 and Paulo Roberto Ribeiro Rocha7


## **References**


**7. Final comments**

104 Soybean - Pest Resistance

**Author details**

Germani Concenço5

**References**

(2000).

Alexandre Ferreira da Silva1

contribute for environmental sustainability.

1 Embrapa Milho e Sorgo, Sete Lagoas-MG, Brazil

2 Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul, Erechim-RS, Brazil

3 Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros-MG, Brazil

5 Embrapa Agropecuária Oeste, Dourados-MS, Brazil

7 Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró-RN, Brazil

6 Embrapa Soja, Londrina-PR, Brazil

, Leandro Galon2

4 Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina-MG, Brazil

[1] Vargas, L, & Roman, E. S. Controle de plantas daninhas na cultura da soja. Unaí:

[2] Ghersa, C. M, Benech-arnold, R. L, Satorre, E. H, & Martínez-ghersa, M. A. Advances in weed management strategies. Field Crops. (2000). 0378-4290, 67, 95-104.

, Edison Ulisses Ramos Júnior6

, Ignacio Aspiazú3

, Evander Alves Ferreira4

and Paulo Roberto Ribeiro Rocha7

,

The challenge of agriculture sustainability requires solving the trade-off between producing satisfying levels of agricultural products, both in terms of quantity and quality, and reducing the environmental impacts and preserving non renewable resources. Weed management is a key issue, because herbicides are the most sprayed pesticides around the world and they are some of the mostly found contaminating substances in the surface and below-ground waters. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt correct strategies for weed management, but for that it is necessary to know the ability of weed species, present in a given area, in relation to the crop, to compete for water, light and nutrients, factors responsible for decreasing crop yield. Simple measures like choosing the correct cultivar, adopting correct tillage practices, using cover crops and crop rotation are responsible for decreasing the use of herbicides and, consequently,


[17] Passini, T, & Christoffoleti, P. J. Dourado Neto D. Modelos empíricos de predição de perdas de rendimento da cultura de feijão em convivência com Brachiaria plantagi‐ nea. Planta Daninha. (2002). 0100-8358, 20(2), 181-187.

[31] Silva, A. F, Ferreira, E. A, Concenço, G, Ferreira, F. A, Aspiazu, I, Galon, L, et al. Den‐ sidades de plantas daninhas e épocas de controle sobre os componentes de produção

Weed Management in the Soybean Crop http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54596 107

[32] Ni, H, Moody, K, & Robles, R. P. Oryza sativa plant traits conferring ability against

[33] Galon, L, & Agostinetto, D. Comparison of empirical models for predicting yield loss of irrigated rice (Oryza sativa) mixed with Echinochloa spp. Crop Protection. (2009).

[34] Kissmann, K. G, & Groth, D. Plantas infestantes e nocivas. Tomo II, 2.ed. São Paulo:

[35] Rizzardi, M. A, Fleck, N. G, & Ribas, A. V. Merotto Jr A, Agostinetto D. Competição por recursos do solo entre ervas daninhas e culturas. Ciência Rural. (2001). 0103-8478,

[36] Rizzardi, M. A, Roman, E. S, Borowski, D. Z, & Marcon, R. Interferência de popula‐ ções de Euphorbia heterophylla e Ipomoea ramosissima isoladas ou em misturas so‐

[37] Griffin, B. S, Shilling, D. G, Bennett, J. M, & Currey, W. L. The influence of water stress on the physiology and competition of soybean (Glycine max) and Florida Beg‐ garweed (Desmodium tortuosum). Weed Science. (1989). 1550-2759, 37(4), 544-551.

[38] Holm, L. Weeds and water in world food production. Weed Science. (1997).

[39] Patterson, D. T, & Flint, E. P. Comparative water relations, photosynthesis, and growth of soybean (Glycine max) and seven associated weeds. Weed Science. (1983).

[40] Procópio, S. O, Santos, J. B, Silva, A. A, & Costa, L. C. Análise do crescimento e efi‐ ciência no uso da água pelas culturas de soja e do feijão e por plantas daninhas. Acta

[41] Scott, H. D, & Geddes, R. D. Plant water stress of soybean (Glycine max) and com‐ mon cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum): A comparison under field conditions.

[42] Seavers, G. P, & Wright, K. J. Crop canopy development and structure influence

[43] Fleck, N. G. Balbinot Jr AA, Agostinetto D, Vidal RA. Características de plantas de cultivares de arroz irrigado relacionadas á habilidade competitiva com plantas con‐

weed suppression. Weed Research. (2002). 1365-3180, 39(4), 319-328.

correntes. Planta Daninha. (2003). 0100-8358, 21(1), 97-104.

bre a cultura de soja. Planta Daninha. (2004). 0100-8358, 22(1), 29-34.

da soja. Planta Daninha. (2008). 0100-8358, 26(1), 65-71.

weeds. Weed Science. (2000). 1550-2759, 48(2), 200-204.

0261-2194

31(4), 707-714.

1550-2759

1550-2759, 31(3), 318-323.

Scientiarum. (2002). 1679-9275, 24(5), 1345-1351.

Weed Science. (1979). 1550-2759, 27(3), 285-289.

BASF, (1999). p. 858829902


[31] Silva, A. F, Ferreira, E. A, Concenço, G, Ferreira, F. A, Aspiazu, I, Galon, L, et al. Den‐ sidades de plantas daninhas e épocas de controle sobre os componentes de produção da soja. Planta Daninha. (2008). 0100-8358, 26(1), 65-71.

[17] Passini, T, & Christoffoleti, P. J. Dourado Neto D. Modelos empíricos de predição de perdas de rendimento da cultura de feijão em convivência com Brachiaria plantagi‐

[18] Benjamin, L. R. Variation in time of seedling emergence within populations: a feature that determines individual growth and development. Advances in Agronomy.

[19] Fischer, R. A, & Miles, R. E. The role of spatial pattern in the competition between crop plants and weeds. A theoretical analysis. Mathematical Biosciences. (1973).

[20] Gurevitch, J, Scheiner, S. M, & Fox, G. A. Ecologia vegetal. Porto Alegre: Artmed;

[21] Dieleman, A, Hamill, A. S, Weise, S. F, & Swanton, C. J. Empirical models of pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Science. (1995).

[22] Carranza, P, Saavedra, M, & Garcia-torres, L. Competition between Ridolfia segetum

[23] Pires JLFCosta JA, Thomas AL. Rendimento de grãos de soja influenciado pelo arran‐ jo de plantas e níveis de adubação. Pesquisa Agropecuária Gaúcha. (1998). 0104-9070,

[24] Thomas, A. L, & Costa, J. A. Pires JLF. Rendimento de grãos de soja afetado pelo es‐ paçamento entre linhas e fertilidade do solo. Ciência Rural. (1998). 0103-8478, 28(4),

[25] Board, J. E, Harville, B. G, & Saxton, A. M. Branch dry weight in relation to yield in‐ creases in narrow-row soybean. Agronomy Journal. (1990). 2090-7656, 82(3), 540-544.

[26] Board, J. E, & Harville, B. G. A criterion for acceptance of narrow-row culture in soy‐

[27] Legere, A, & Schreiber, M. M. Competition and canopy architecture as affected by soybean (Glycine max) row width and density of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus ret‐

[28] Burnside, O. C. Soybean (Glycine max) growth as affected by weed removal, cultivar,

[29] Nice GRWBuehring NW, Shaw DR. Sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) response to shad‐ ing, soybean (Glycine max) row spacing and population in three management sys‐

[30] Young, B. G, Young, J. M, Gonzini, L. C, Hart, S. E, Wax, L. M, & Kapusta, G. Weed management in narrow- and wide-row glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max).

and sunflower. Weed Research. (1995). 1365-3180, 35(5), 369-375.

bean. Agronomy Journal. (1990). 2090-7656, 86(6), 1103-1106.

and row spacing. Weed Science. (1979). 1550-2759, 27(5), 562-564.

tems. Weed Technology. (2001). ISNN 1550-2740., 15(1), 155-162.

roflexus). Weed Science. (1989). 1550-2759, 37(1), 84-92.

Weed Technology. (2001). 1550-2740, 15(1), 112-121.

nea. Planta Daninha. (2002). 0100-8358, 20(2), 181-187.

(1990). 978-0-12000-795-0

(2009). p. 8-53631-918-6

1550-2759, 43(4), 612-618.

0025-5564

106 Soybean - Pest Resistance

4(2), 183-188.

543-546.


[44] Merotto Jr AFischer AJ, Vidal RA. Perspectives for using light quality knowledge as an advanced ecophysiological weed management tool. Planta Daninha. (2009). 0100-8358, 27(2), 407-419.

[57] Silva, A. A, Ferreira, F. A, Ferreira, L. R, & Santos, J. B. Métodos de controle de plan‐ tas daninhas. In: Silva AA, Silva JF. (Eds.). Tópicos em manejo de plantas daninhas.

Weed Management in the Soybean Crop http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54596 109

[58] Chauhan, B. S, Singh, R. G, & Mahajan, G. Ecology and management of weeds under conservation agriculture: A review. Crop Protection. (2012). 0261-2194, 38, 57-65.

[59] Locke, M. A, Reddy, K. N, & Zablotowicz, R. M. Weed management in conservation crop production systems. Weed Biology and Management. (2002). 1445-6664, 2,

[60] Lyon, D. J, Miller, S. D, & Wicks, G. A. The future of herbicides in weed control sys‐ tems of great plains. Journal of Production Agriculture. (1996). 0890-8524, 9, 209-215.

[61] Swanton, C. J, Shrestha, A, Roy, R. C, Ball-coelho, B. R, & Knezevic, S. Z. Effect of tillage systems, N, and cover crop on the composition of weed flora. Weed Science.

[62] Kelley, K. W. Long Jr JH, Todd TC. Long-term crop rotations affect soybean yield, seed weight, and soil chemical properties. Field Crops Research. (2003). 0378-4290,

[63] Crookston, R. K, Kurle, J. E, Copeland, P. J, Ford, J. H, & Lueschen, W. E. Rotational cropping sequence affects yield of corn and soybean. Agronomy Journal. (1991).

[64] Meese, B. G, Carter, P. R, Oplinger, E. S, & Pendleton, J. W. Corn/soybean rotation effect as influenced by tillage, nitrogen, and hybrid/cultivar. Journal of Production

[65] West, T. D, Griffith, D. R, Steinhardt, G. C, Kladivko, E. J, & Parsons, S. D. Effect of tillage and rotation on agronomic performance of corn and soybean: twenty-year study on dark silty clay loam soil. Journal of Production Agriculture. (1996).

[66] Herbert, S. J, & Litchfield, G. V. Growth response of short-season soybean to varia‐ tions in row spacing and density. Field Crops Research. (1984). 0378-4290, 9, 163-171.

[67] Anaele, A. O, & Bishnoi, U. R. Effects of tillage, weed control method and row spac‐ ing on soybean yield and certain soil properties. Soil and Tillage Research. (1992).

[68] Knezevic, S. Z, Evans, S. P, & Mainz, M. Row spacing influences the critical timing for weed removal in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technology. (2003). 1550-2740,

[69] Teasdale, J. R. Contribution of cover crops to weed management in sustainable agri‐ cultural systems. Journal of Production Agriculture. (1996). 0890-8524, 475-479.

Viçosa: Universidade Federal de Viçosa; (2007). 978-8-57269-275-5, 64-82.

123-132.

83(1), 41-50.

1435-0645, 83, 108-113.

0890-8524, 9, 241-248.

0167-1987, 23(4), 333-340.

17(4), 666-673.

Agriculture. (1991). 0890-8524, 4, 74-80.

(1999). 1550-2759, 47, 454-461.


[57] Silva, A. A, Ferreira, F. A, Ferreira, L. R, & Santos, J. B. Métodos de controle de plan‐ tas daninhas. In: Silva AA, Silva JF. (Eds.). Tópicos em manejo de plantas daninhas. Viçosa: Universidade Federal de Viçosa; (2007). 978-8-57269-275-5, 64-82.

[44] Merotto Jr AFischer AJ, Vidal RA. Perspectives for using light quality knowledge as an advanced ecophysiological weed management tool. Planta Daninha. (2009).

[45] Santos, J. B, Procópio, S. O, Silva, A. A, & Costa, L. C. Captação e aproveitamento da radiação solar pelas culturas da soja e do feijão e por plantas daninhas. Bragantia.

[46] Procópio, S. O, Santos, J. B, Pires, F. R, Silva, A. A, & Mendonça, E. S. Absorção e uti‐ lização do nitrogênio pelas culturas da soja e do feijão e por plantas daninhas. Planta

[47] Anghinoni, I, Volkart, K, Fattore, C, & Ernani, P. R. Morfologia de raízes e cinética da absorção de nutrientes em diversas espécies e genótipos de plantas.Revista Brasileira

[48] Seibert, A. C, & Pearce, R. B. Growth analysis of weed and crop species with refer‐

[49] Balbinot Jr AAFleck NG, Agostinetto D, Rizzardi MA, Merotto Jr A, Vidal RA. Veloc‐ idade de emergência e crescimento inicial de cultivares de arroz irrigado influencia‐ do a competitividade com as plantas daninhas. Planta Daninha. (2001). 0100-8358,

[50] Procópio, S. O, Santos, J. B, Pires, F. R, Silva, A. A, & Mendonça, E. S. Absorção e uti‐ lização do fósforo pelas culturas da soja e do feijão e por plantas daninhas. Revista

[51] Silva, A. F, Concenço, G, Aspiazú, I, & Ferreira, E. A. Freitas MA Silva, AA, et al. Pe‐ ríodo anterior a interferência na cultura da soja-RR em condições de baixa, média e

[52] Knezevic, S. Z, Evans, S, & Blankenship, E. E. Acker RCV, Lindquist JL. Critical peri‐ od for weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Science. (2002). 1550-2759,

[53] Silva, A. F, Concenço, G, Aspiazú, I, Ferreira, E. A, Galon, L, et al. Interferência de plantas daninhas em diferentes densidades no crescimento da soja. Planta Daninha.

[54] Meschede, D. K. Oliveira Jr RS, Constantin J, Scapim CA. Período Crítico de Interfer‐ ência de Euphorbia heterophylla na cultura da soja sobre baixa densidade de semea‐

[55] Carvalho, F. T, & Velini, E. D. Período de interferência de plantas daninhas na cul‐ tura da soja. I- Cultivar IAC-11. Planta Daninha. (2001). 0100-8358, 19(3), 317-322.

[56] Hart, R. D. El subsistema malezas. In: Hart RD. ed. Conceptos básicos sobre agroe‐

ence to seed weight. Weed Science. (1993). 1550-2759, 41(1), 52-56.

Brasileira de Ciência do Solo. (2005). 0100-0683, 29, 911-921.

alta infestação. Planta Daninha. (2009). 0100-8358, 27(1), 57-66.

dura. Planta Daninha. (2002). 0100-8358, 20(3), 382-387.

cossistemas. Turrialba: CATIE, (1985). , 103-110.

0100-8358, 27(2), 407-419.

108 Soybean - Pest Resistance

(2003). 0006-8705, 62(1), 147-153.

de Ciência do Solo (1989). 0100-0683

Daninha. (2004). 0100-8358

19(3), 305-316.

50, 773-786.

(2009). 0100-8358, 27(1), 75-84.


[70] Ateh, C. M, & Doll, J. D. Spring-planted winter rye (Secale cereale) as a living mulch to control weeds in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technology. (1996). 1550-2740, 10, 347-353.

[84] Puricelli, E, & Tuesca, D. Weed density and diversity under glyphosate-resistant crop

Weed Management in the Soybean Crop http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54596 111

[85] Tuesca, D, & Puricelli, E. Effect of tillage systems and herbicide treatments on weed abundance and diversity in a glyphosate resistant crop rotation. Crop Protection.

[86] Arregui, M. C, Scotta, R, & Sánchez, D. Improved weed control with broadleaved herbicides in glyphosate-tolerant soybean (Glycine max). Crop Protection. (2006).

[87] Ellis, J. M, & Griffin, J. L. Benefits of soil-applied herbicides in glyphosate-resistant

[88] Reddy, K. N. Weed control in soybean (Glycine max) with cloransulam and diclosu‐

[89] Harger, A. G, Wax, L. M, Bollero, G. A, & Simmons, F. W. Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis Sauer) management with soil-applied herbicides in soybean (Gly‐

[90] Norsworthy, J. K. Broadleavedweedcontrol in wide-row soybean (Glycine max) us‐ ing conventional and glyphosate herbicide programmes. Crop Protection. (2004).

[91] Deytieux, V, Nemecek, T, Knuchel, R. F, Gaillard, G, & Munier-jolain, N. M. Is the weed management efficient for reducing environmental impacts of crop systems? A case study based on life cycle assessment. Europ. J. Agronomy. (2012). 1161-0301, 36,

[92] Wilson, R. S, Hooker, N, Tucker, M, Lejeune, J, & Doohan, D. Targeting the famer de‐ cision making process: A pathway to increased adoption of integrated weed manage‐

[93] Harker, K. N, Clayton, G. W, Blackshaw, R. E, Donovan, O, & Stevenson, J. T. FC. Seeding rate, herbicide timing and competitive hybrids contribute to integrated weed management in canola (Brassica napus). Canadian Journal of Plant Science. (2003).

[94] Bernads, M. L, Gaussoin, R. E, Klein, R. N, Knezevic, S. Z, Lyon, D, Sandell, L. D, et al. Guide for weed management in Nebraska. EC-130. Lincoln, NE. Extension, Uni‐

[95] Powles, S. B, & Shaner, D. L. Hebicide resistance and world grains. ((2001). CRC-

[96] Ferreira, E. A, Germani, C, Vargas, L, Silva, A. A, & Galon, L. Resistência de Lolium multiflorum ao Glyphosate. In: Agostinetto D, Vargas L. Resistência de plantas dani‐

soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technology. (2002). 1550-2740, 16, 541-547.

cine max (L.) Merr.) Crop Protection. (2002). 0261-2194, 21(4), 277-283.

sequences. Crop Protection, (2005). 0261-2194, 2, 533-542.

lam. Weed Technology. (2000). 1550-2740, 14, 293-297.

ment. Crop Protection. (2009). 0261-2194, 28, 756-764.

(2007). 0261-2194, 26(12), 1765-1770.

0261-2194, 25(7), 653-656.

0261-2194, 23(12), 1229-1235.

0008-4220, 83, 433-440.

versity of Nebraska- Lincoln; (2009).

Press, Printed in the USA, 328p. ISBN/84932-2197

nhas no Brasil. Passo Fundo: Gráfica Berthier; , 271-289.

55-65.


[84] Puricelli, E, & Tuesca, D. Weed density and diversity under glyphosate-resistant crop sequences. Crop Protection, (2005). 0261-2194, 2, 533-542.

[70] Ateh, C. M, & Doll, J. D. Spring-planted winter rye (Secale cereale) as a living mulch to control weeds in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technology. (1996). 1550-2740, 10,

[71] Liebl, R, Simmons, F. W, Wax, L. M, & Stoller, E. W. Effect of rye (Secale cereale) mulch on weed control and soil moisture in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technolo‐

[72] Moore, M. J, Gillespie, T. J, & Swanton, C. J. Effect of cover crop mulches on weed emergence, weed biomass, and soybean (Glycine max) development. Weed Technol‐

[73] Samarajeewa KBDPHoriuchi T, Oba S. Finger millet (Eleucine corocana L. Gaertn.) as a cover crop on weed control, growth and yield of soybean under different tillage

[74] Correia, N. M, Durigan, J. C, & Klink, U. P. Influence of type and amount of crop res‐ idues on weed emergence. Planta Daninha. (2006). 0100-8358, 24(2), 245-253.

[75] Barnes, J. P, & Putnam, A. R. Rye residues contribute to weed suppression in no-till‐ age cropping systems. Journal of Chemical Ecology. (1983). 0098-0331, 9, 1045-1057.

[76] Bhowmika, P. C. Inderjit. Challenges and opportunities in implementing allelopathy for natural weed management. Crop Protection. (2003). 0261-2194, 22(4), 661-671. [77] Trezzi, M. M, & Vidal, R. A. Potential of sorghum and pearl millet cover crops in weed suppression in the field: II- Mulching effect. Planta Daninha. (2004). 0100-8358,

[78] Jakelaitis, A, Ferreira, L. R, Silva, A. A, Agnes, E. L, & Miranda, G. V. Machado AFL. Weed population dynamics under different corn and bean production systems. Plan‐

[79] Gazziero DLPPrete CEC, Sumiya M. Manejo de Bidens subalternan aos herbicidas in‐ ibidores da acetolactato sintase. Planta Danihna. (2003). 0100-8358, 21(2), 283-291. [80] Charudattan, R, & Dinoor, A. Biological control of weeds using plant pathogens: ac‐ complishments and limitations. Crop Protection. (2000). 0261-2194, 0261-2194.

[81] Zimdahl, R. L. WEEDS/Weed Technology and Control. IN: Murphy DJ, Thomas B, Murray BG. Encyclopedia of Applied Plant Sciences. 978-0-12227-050-5Academic

[82] Oliveira Jr RSConstantin JI, Costa JM, Cavalieri SD, Arantes JGZ, Alonso DG, et al. Interaction between burndown systems and post-emergence weed control affecting soybean development and yield. Planta daninha. (2006). 0100-8358, 24(4), 721-732. [83] Procópio, S. O, & Pires, F. R. Menezes CCE, Barroso ALL, Moraes RV, Silva MVV et al. Efeitos de dessecantes no controle de plantas daninhas na cultura da soja. Planta

systems. Soil and Tillage Research. (2006). 0167-1987, 0167-1987.

347-353.

110 Soybean - Pest Resistance

22(1), 1-10.

Press, (2000). p.

gy. (1992). 1550-2740, 6, 838-846.

ogy. (1994). 1550-2740, 8, 512-518.

ta Daninha. (2003). 0100-8358, 21(1), 71-79.

Daninha. (2006). 0100-8358, 24(1), 193-197.


[97] Rodrigues, B. N, & Almeida, F. S. Guia de Herbicidas, 4 ed., Londrina: (1998). p. 859053211

**Chapter 5**

**Arthropod Fauna Associated to Soybean in Croatia**

The importance of soybean (*Glycine max* (L.) Merr.), as today's world leading oil and protein crop, is increasing in Croatia. As a plant species, soybean was registered for the first time in Croatia in 1876. Soybean is relatively new field crop for Croatia. It was grown for the first time in 1910 but, starting with 1970s it became important field crop [1]. In 1981, soybean was cultivated on an area of 3.381 ha. Since that time the area cultivated by soybean has in‐ creased considerably, and productivity has also risen steadily. Figure 1 presents the trends

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004\* 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

© 2013 Bažok et al.; licensee InTech. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

© 2013 Bažok et al.; licensee InTech. This is a paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Area harvested (ha) Total production (t)

year

\*only agricultural enterprises without small farms are included

**Figure 1.** Harvested area and total production of soybean in Croatia, 1993-2010

Renata Bažok, Maja Čačija, Ana Gajger and

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

in soybean production in Croatia in the period 1993-2010 [2].

0

50,000

**harvested area**

**-**

**ha; total production t**

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

Tomislav Kos

**1. Introduction**

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54521

