Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:47:13.812Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Nonchemical Methods for Paragrass (Urochloa mutica) Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sushila Chaudhari
Affiliation:
University of Florida, Range Cattle Research and Education Center, 3401 Experiment Station, Ona, FL 33865
Brent A. Sellers*
Affiliation:
University of Florida, Range Cattle Research and Education Center, 3401 Experiment Station, Ona, FL 33865
Stephen V. Rockwood
Affiliation:
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, T. M. Goodwin Waterfowl Management Area, 3200 T. M. Goodwin Road, Fellsmere, FL 32948
Jason A. Ferrell
Affiliation:
University of Florida-Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Agronomy Department, P.O. Box 110500, Gainesville, FL 32611
Gregory E. MacDonald
Affiliation:
University of Florida-Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Agronomy Department, P.O. Box 110500, Gainesville, FL 32611
Kevin E. Kenworthy
Affiliation:
University of Florida-Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Agronomy Department, P.O. Box 110500, Gainesville, FL 32611
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Paragrass is a nonnative category I invasive species in central and south Florida. This perennial grass species outcompetes native vegetation and is capable of rapid spread by vegetative reproduction. Although glyphosate and imazapyr are effective herbicides for paragrass control, the use of herbicides in certain areas may be restricted because of application timing or environmental concerns. Therefore, our objectives were to examine the effect of water depth (saturated vs. flooded) after burning or cutting, and the effect of water depth and duration after simulated roller-chopping, on paragrass regrowth under controlled conditions. In the first study, paragrass plants were cut or burned with a propane burner to 1 cm (0.39 in) above the soil surface. Plants were either watered daily (control), or were subjected to one of two water treatments: water level at the soil surface (saturated) or flooded to a depth of 44 cm. Burned-saturated or burned-flooded plants had 92% less biomass 5 wk after treatment (WAT) than cut-saturated plants. Flooding resulted in plant death regardless of the plant treatment. In the second study, simulated roller-chopping was performed by cutting paragrass stolons into one-, two-, or three-node segments; planting them into flats; and subjecting them to water treatments for 3, 7, 14, 28, and 42 d. Burning, cutting, and roller-chopping could be useful to control paragrass if subsequent flooding is applied. Future research should focus on evaluating the response of these control techniques in natural areas where water depth can be managed.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Austin, D. F. 1978. Exotic plants and their effects in southern Florida. Environ. Conserv. 5:2534.Google Scholar
Ball, P. J. 1990. Influence of subsequent flooding depth on cattail control by burning and mowing. J. Aquat. Plant Manag. 28:3236.Google Scholar
Baruch, Z. and Merida, T. 1995. Effect of drought and flooding on root anatomy in four tropical forage grasses. Int. J. Plant Sci. 156:514521.Google Scholar
Bernal, J. E. 1971. Paragrass (Brachiaria mutica (Fork.) Stapf.): methods of vegetative propagation. Revista Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario 6:149155.Google Scholar
Cameron, A. G. and Lemcke, B. 2008. Paragrass: a pasture grass for wet and flooded soils. Department of Regional Development, Primary Industry, Fisheries and Resources, Northern Territory Government, Australia. Agnote. E30. 3 p.Google Scholar
Chang-Hung, C. 1977. Phytotoxic substances in twelve subtropical grasses—additional evidence of phytotoxicity in the aqueous fractions of grass extracts. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sinica 18:131141.Google Scholar
Chaudhari, S. 2011. Influence of Chemical, Cultural and Mechanical Practices on Paragrass (Urochloa mutica) Management. M.S. thesis. Gainesville, FL University of Florida. 71 p.Google Scholar
Doren, R. F., Whiteaker, L. D., and La Rosa, A. M. 1991. Evaluation of fire as a management tool for controlling Schinus terebinthifolius as secondary successional growth on abandoned agricultural land. Environ. Manag. 15:121129.Google Scholar
Duke, J. A. 1983. Handbook of Energy Crops. http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Brachiaria_mutica.html. Accessed: July 18, 2011.Google Scholar
Ferdinands, K., Beggs, K., and Whitehead, P. 2005. Biodiversity and invasive grass species: multiple-use or monoculture? Wildl. Res. 32:447457.Google Scholar
[FLEPPC] Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. 2009. FLEPPC List of Florida's Most Invasive Species. http://www.fleppc.org/list/09PlantListfinal.pdf. Accessed: June 2010.Google Scholar
Guynn, D. C., Guynn, S. T., Wigley, T. B., and Miller, D. A. 2004. Herbicides and forest biodiversity—what do we know and where do we go from here? Wildl. Soc. Bull. 32:10851092.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Honolulu University Press of Hawaii. 609 p.Google Scholar
Hossain, M. A., Ishimine, Y., Kuramochi, H., and Akamine, H. 2002. Effect of standing water and shoot removal plus standing water regimes on growth, regrowth and biomass production of torpedograss (Panicum repens L.). Weed Biol. Manag. 2:153158.Google Scholar
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Invasive Plant Working Group. 2008. IFAS Assessment of Non-Native Plants in Florida's Natural Areas. http://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/assessment/. Accessed: July 18, 2011.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, T. T. 1984. Plant responses to flooding of soil. BioScience 34:162167.Google Scholar
Langeland, K. A., Ferrell, J. A., Sellers, B., MacDonald, G. E., and Stocker, R. K. 2009. Control of Nonnative Plants in Natural Areas of Florida. Gainesville, FL University of Florida UF/IFAS Publication SP 242. 34 p.Google Scholar
Low, T. 1997. Tropical pasture plants as weeds. Trop. Grasslands 31:337343.Google Scholar
Mislevy, P. and Quesenberry, K. H. 1999. Development and short description of grass cultivars released by the University of Florida (1892–1995). Soil Crop Sci. Fla. Proc. 58:1219.Google Scholar
Peng, S. Y. 1984. The biology and control of weeds in sugarcane. Amsterdam, The Netherlands and New York; Elsevier Science. 336 p.Google Scholar
Petersen, R. G. 1994. Agricultural Field Experiments: Design and Analysis. New York Marcel Dekker. Pp. 205260.Google Scholar
Ram, S. 2000. Role of alcohol dehydrogenase, malate dehydrogenase, and malic enzyme in flooding tolerance in Brachiaria species. J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol. 9:4547.Google Scholar
Schardt, J. D. and Schmitz, D. C. 1991. Florida aquatic plant survey 1990. Tallahassee, FL Florida Department of Natural Resources Tech. Report 91-CGA. 89 p.Google Scholar
Stone, K. R. 2010. Urochloa mutica. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/graminoid/uromut/all.html. Assessed: January 12, 2011.Google Scholar
Summers, J. E., Ratcliffe, R. G., and Jackson, M. B. 2000. Anoxia tolerance in the aquatic monocot Potamogeton pectinatus: absence of oxygen stimulates elongation in association with an unusually large Pasteur effect. J Exp. Bot. 51:14131422.Google Scholar
Wersal, R. M. and Madsen, J. D. 2011. Influences of water column nutrient loading on growth characteristics of the invasive aquatic macrophyte Myriophyllum aquaticum (Vell.) Verdc. Hydrobiologia 665:93105.Google Scholar
Wurm, P. A. S. 2007. Suppression of germination and establishment of native annual rice (Oryza meridionalis) by introduced paragrass on an Australian monsoonal floodplain. Plant Prot. Quart. 22:106112.Google Scholar