Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T21:23:33.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control of Silk Tree (Albizia julibrissin) with Aminocyclopyrachlor and Other Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Rebecca M. Koepke-Hill ,
Gregory R. Armel ,
James T. Brosnan ,
Gregory K. Breeden ,
Jose J. Vargas  and
Thomas C. Mueller
Rebecca M. Koepke-Hill
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996
Gregory R. Armel*
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996
James T. Brosnan
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996
Gregory K. Breeden
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996
Jose J. Vargas
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996
Thomas C. Mueller
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: garmel@utk.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research was conducted to determine the efficacy of aminocyclopyrachlor in comparison to glyphosate, clopyralid, fluroxypyr, and triclopyr for silk tree (commonly known as mimosa) control. In the greenhouse, aminocyclopyrachlor was applied at 8.75, 17.5, 35, and 70 g ha−1 with and without methylated seed oil (MSO) at 0.5% v/v. Efficacy of these treatments was compared to glyphosate and triclopyr at 1,350 g ha−1, fluroxypyr at 103 g ha−1, and clopyralid at 100 g ha−1. Few differences in silk tree control were detected by 28 d after treatment (DAT), as aminocyclopyrachlor with MSO controlled silk tree 87 to 100% compared to 53 to 100% for aminocyclopyrachlor without MSO. Aminocyclopyrachlor at 35 g ha−1 provided silk tree control similar to glyphosate, triclopyr, clopyralid, and fluroxypyr regardless of adjuvant. Inclusion of MSO enhanced initial activity of aminocyclopyrachlor after application. At 7 DAT, 8.75 g ha−1 of aminocyclopyrachlor plus MSO controlled silk tree similar to aminocyclopyrachlor alone at 70 g ha−1. In laboratory studies, absorption of 14C-aminocyclopyrachlor 2 h after treatment (HAT) with MSO measured 93% compared to only 62% for 14C-aminocyclopyrachlor without MSO. By 24 HAT, absorption of 14C-aminocyclopyrachlor measured 99 and 71% for applications with and without MSO, respectively. Increased foliar absorption with MSO may explain enhanced activity observed 7 DAT in greenhouse studies, as no effects in 14C-aminocyclopyrachlor translocation due to adjuvant were observed. Responses suggest MSO increased the speed of silk tree control with aminocyclopyrachlor and may also improve rainfastness of aminocyclopyrachlor applications for control of silk tree and other woody species.

Keywords

Aminocyclopyrachlorfluroxypyrglyphosatetriclopyrclopyralidsilk tree, Albizia julibrissin DurazzAbsorptionauxin mimic herbicideinvasive speciesliquid scintillation spectrometryradiolabeled herbicidesrainfastnesstranslocation
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 345 - 349
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Addlestone, B. J., Mueller, J. P., and Luginbuhl, J. M. 1999. The establishment and early growth of three leguminous tree species for use in silvopastoral systems of the southeastern USA. Agrofor. Syst. 44:253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous, . 2010a. Roundup Pro herbicide label. St. Louis, MO Monsanto Company. Pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
Anonymous, . 2010b. Garlon 3A herbicide label. Indianapolis, IN: Dow AgroSciences, LLC. Pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Anonymous, . 2010c. Stinger herbicide label. Indianapolis, IN Dow AgroSciences, LLC. Pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Anonymous, . 2010d. Vista XRT herbicide label. Indianapolis, IN Dow AgroSciences, LLC. Pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
Baron, J., Dombrowski, C., and Bratton, S. P. 1975. The status of five exotic woody plants in the Tennessee district, Great Smoky Mountains National Park. NPS-SER Research/Resources Management Report No. 2. Gatlinburg, TN Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Uplands Field Research Laboratory, Twin Creeks Area; Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Southeast Region. 26 p.Google Scholar
Bean, E. and McClellan, tech, L., eds. 1996. Tennessee Exotic Plant Management Manual [Online]. Southeast Exotic Pest Plant Council (Producer). http://www.tneppc.org/system/uploads/184/original/tn-mgt-manual.pdf. Accessed: August 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Bukun, B., Lindenmayer, R. B., Nissen, S. J., Westra, P., Shaner, D. L., and Brunk, G. 2010. Absorption and translocation of aminocyclopyrachlor and aminocyclopyrachlor-methyl ester in Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci. 58:96–102.Google Scholar
Cothran, J. R. 2004. Treasured ornamentals of southern gardens—Michaux's lasting legacy. Castanea. Occ. Pap. 2:149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demers, C. and Long, A. 2002. Controlling invasive exotic plants in north Florida forests. SS-FOR19. Gainesville, FL University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Florida Cooperative Extension Service. 9 p.Google Scholar
Diggs, G. M. Jr., Lipscomb, B. L., and O'Kennon, R. J. 1999. Illustrated flora of north-central Texas. Sida Botanical Miscellany, No. 16. Fort Worth, TX Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 1626 p.Google Scholar
Duncan, W. H. and Duncan, M. B. 1988. Trees of the southeastern United States. Athens, GA The University of Georgia Press. 322 p.Google Scholar
Ensbey, R. 2009. Noxious and Environmental Weed Control Handbook: A Guide to Weed Control in Non-Crop, Aquatic and Bushland Situations. 4th ed. Grafton, New South Wales NSW Industry and Investment. Grafton.Google Scholar
Godt, M.J.W. and Hamrick, J. L. 1997. Estimation of mating system parameters of Albizia julibrissin (Fabaceae). For. Gene. 4:217–221.Google Scholar
Gogue, G. J. and Emino, E. R. 1979. Seed coat scarification of Albizia julibrissin Durazz. by natural mechanisms. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 104:421–423.Google Scholar
Hart, C. R., Hatler, W., and Schneider, C. 2009. Effects of application timing of aminocyclopyrachlor on mesquite. Pages 89–90 in Rangeland Research and Demonstrations Handbook. AgriLife Extension. College Station, TX Texas A&M.Google Scholar
Hunsche, M., Schmitz-Eiberger, M., and Noga, G. 2008. Seed oil ethoxylate adjuvants and their influence on retention and rainfastness of the contact fungicide mancozeb. Acta Hort. 772:403–406.Google Scholar
Kitchen, L. M., Rieck, C. E., and Witt, W. W. 1980. Absorption and translocation of 14C-fosamine by three woody plant species. Weed Res. 20:285–289.Google Scholar
McIntosh, M. S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75:153–155.Google Scholar
McLeod, D. E. 1988. Vegetation patterns, floristics, and environmental relationships in the Black and Craggy Mountains of North Carolina. Dissertation. Chapel Hill, NC University of North Carolina. 222 p.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. 2009. Albizia julibrissin . In: Fire Effects Information System [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/. Accessed: August 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Miller, J. H. 2003. Nonnative invasive plants of southern forests: a field guide for identification and control. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-62. Asheville, NC U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 93 p.Google Scholar
Morey, P. R. and Dahl, B. E. 1980. Inhibition of mesquite (Prosopsis julifolora var. glandulosa) growth by fosamine. Weed Sci. 28:251–255.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D., Skrzypczak, G. A., and Gillepsie, G. R. 1986. Absorption and translocation of herbicides with lipid compounds. Weed Sci. 34:564–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrotta, J. A., Wick, H. L., and Walters, G. A. 2008. Albizia Durazz. Pages 227–229 in Bonner, F. T., Karrfait, R. P., and Nisley, R. G., eds. The Woody Plant Seed Manual. Agric. Handbook 727. Washington, DC U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.Google Scholar
Pitman, W. D. 2008. Establishment and regrowth of Albizia julibrissin on Louisiana USA coastal plain soils. Agrofor. Sys. 74:259–266.Google Scholar
Ross, M. A. and Lembi, C. A. 1985. Applied weed science. Burgess Publishing Company. Mineapolis, MN. 340 p.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems (SAS). 2006. Procedures guide. Release 9.1.3. 2nd ed. Cary, NC SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Swearingen, J., Reshetiloff, K., Slattery, B., and Zwicker, S. 2002. Plant invaders of mid-Atlantic natural areas. Washington, DC U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service; Fish and Wildlife Service. 82 p.Google Scholar
Thompson, W. M., Nissen, S. J., and Masters, R. A. 1996. Adjuvant effects on imazethapyr, 2,4-D and picloram absorption by leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Weed Sci. 44:469–475.Google Scholar
Turner, R. G., Claus, J. S., Hidalgo, E., Holliday, M. J., and Armel, G. R. 2009. Technical introduction of the new DuPont vegetation management herbicide aminocyclopyrachlor. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 49:405.Google Scholar
Weber, E. 2003. Invasive plant species of the world: a reference guide to environmental weeds. Cambridge, MA CABI Publishing. 548 p.Google Scholar
Wick, H. L., and Walters, G. A. 1974. Albizia, albizia. Pages 203–205 in Schopmeyer, tech, C. S. 1974. coord. Seeds of Woody Plants in the United States. Agric. Handbook 450. Washington, DC U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.Google Scholar