Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:17:42.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Accurately Predicting a Herbicide's Potential

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. W. Whitworth
Affiliation:
New Mexico State University, University Park, New Mexico
W. P. Anderson
Affiliation:
New Mexico State University, University Park, New Mexico

Abstract

Field screening methods were developed which proved very reliable in accurately assessing the potential of herbicides during the first year of testing. Under conditions imposed by these methods, the herbicides usually exhibited maximum toxicity, thereby indicating which ones might be potentially hazardous in growers' fields when crop tolerance is lowered by adverse growing conditions. Of the 29 crop uses suggested by the data, 16 are registered by the USDA and are now in current use. Of these 29, 26 were indicated during the first year of testing and substantiated by data from an additional 1 to 4 years of testing.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1969 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

1. Annonymous. 1968. UC sets up herbicide screening program. Agrichemical West 11:5.Google Scholar
2. Irving, G. W. Jr. 1967. Weed control and public welfare. Weeds 15:296299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Jordan, L. S., Lyons, J. M., and Day, B. E. 1968. Factors affecting performance of preemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 16: 433462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Shaw, W. C. and Swanson, C. R. 1942. Techniques and equipment used in evaluating chemicals for their herbicidal properties. Weeds 1:352365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Taylorson, R. B. 1965. Preliminary evaluations of the tolerance of several seeded vegetables to herbicides. Georgia Agr. Exp. Sta. Mimeo. 237. 11 p.Google Scholar