HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (14) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Gaston, L.A. Articles by Reddy, K.N. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Gaston, L.A. Articles by Reddy, K.N. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Gaston, L.A. Articles by Reddy, K.N. Related Collections Structure and Properties Cotton Production Agriculture Site-Specific Analysis Spatial Distribution

Spatial Variability of Soil Properties and Weed Populations in the Mississippi Delta

^a Dep. of Agronomy, Louisiana State Univ. Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA, and formerly, USDA-ARS, SWSRU
^b USDA-ARS, Southern Weed Science Research Unit, Stoneville, MS

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Experimental semivariograms for (A) FDA activity, (B) pH, (C) organic C, (D) clay percentage, and (E) sand percentage in surface soil at Beasley. Spherical models are shown as smooth curves

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Experimental semivariograms for (A) FDA activity, (B) pH, (C) organic C, (D) clay percentage, and (E) sand percentage in surface soil at Deep Hollow. Spherical models are shown as smooth curves

View larger version (43K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Block-kriged estimates of (A) pH, (B) organic C, (C) clay percentage, and (D) sand percentage in surface soil at Beasley (legends C and D, reversed)

View larger version (32K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Block-kriged estimates of (A) pH, (B) organic C, (C) clay percentage, and (D) sand percentage in surface soil at Deep Hollow (legends C and D, reversed)

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Experimental semivariograms for total weeds at Beasley in (A) 1996 and (B) 1997 and at Deep Hollow in (C)1996 and (D) 1997. Linear models are shown as solid lines

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Block-kriged estimates of total weeds at (A) Beasley in 1996, (B) Beasley in 1997, (C) Deep Hollow in 1996, and (D) Deep Hollow in 1997

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Cross-semivariograms for normalized (A) total weeds and clay in 1996, (B) organic C in 1996, (C) clay in 1997, and (D) organic C in 1997 at Beasley. Linear models are shown as solid lines

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Density of total weeds and weeds controlled by herbicide at Beasley as affected by (A) clay and (B) organic C of soil. Weed data for 1996 and 1997 combined

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Density of total weeds and weeds controlled by herbicide at Deep Hollow as affected by (A) clay and (B) OC of soil. Weed data for 1996 and 1997 combined

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Reoccurrence of weeds at Beasley and Deep Hollow as affected by (A) clay and (B) OC content of soil. Weed data for 1996 and 1997 combined

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Relationship between weed-free plots and (A) clay and (B) OC content of soil at Beasley and Deep Hollow. Weed data for 1996 and 1997 combined