Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T12:58:49.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) and Musk Thistle (Carduus nutans) Control on Grass Herbage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Patrick E. Reece  and
Robert G. Wilson
Patrick E. Reece
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Nebraska Panhandle Stn., Scottsbluff, NE 69361
Robert G. Wilson
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Nebraska Panhandle Stn., Scottsbluff, NE 69361
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All herbicide treatments controlled the initial stand of Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.] and musk thistle (Carduus nutans L.) on a subirrigated range site. Annual retreatment controlled seedlings and the few plants that emerged from surviving root remnants after the first application. Average perennial grass production on unfertilized, herbicide-treated plots increased 110, 314, and 212%/yr over unfertilized check plots during the 3-yr period of treatment, i.e., 960, 3450, and 4300 kg/ha, respectively. Grasses did not fully reoccupy the site at the end of 3 consecutive yr of excellent thistle and forb control. The increase in grass production varied considerably among several herbicide treatments that controlled thistles equally. Grass production in the third year was greater under the 3,6-dichloropicolinic acid and 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] treatment series than all other treatments. Ammonium nitrate enhanced the recovery of grass damaged by certain herbicides, but favored the competitive ability of the thistle more than that of the grasses.

Keywords

Perennial grasssubirrigated meadowherbicidesnitrogen fertilizer
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , July 1983 , pp. 488 - 492
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 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. Anonymous. 1955. Official Methods of Analysis (8th ed.), Assoc. Analyt. Chem. Washington, DC. 1008.Google Scholar
2. Baradari, M. R., Haderlie, L. C., and Wilson, R. G. 1980. Chlorflurenol effects on absorption and translocation of dicamba in Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci. 28:197–200.Google Scholar
3. Burton, G. W., Hart, R. H., and Lowrey, R. S. 1967. Improving forage quality in Bermudagrass by breeding. Crop Sci. 7:329–332.Google Scholar
4. Hartley, M. J. and James, T. K. 1979. Cost benefit of selective control of Californian thistle in pasture. Proc. N.Z. Weed Pest Control Conf. 32:245–249.Google Scholar
5. Hodgson, J. M. 1968. The nature, ecology, and control of Canada thistle. U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1386. Washington, DC. 32.Google Scholar
6. Hunter, J. H. and Smith, L. W. 1972. Environment and herbicide effects on Canada thistle ecotypes (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci. 20:163–167.Google Scholar
7. Lee, W. O. 1970. Effect of picloram on production and quality of seed in several grasses. Weed Sci. 18:170–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. McCarty, M. K. 1979. Yield and quality of two cool-season grasses as affected by selected herbicides. Weed Sci. 27:415–421.Google Scholar
9. McCarty, M. K., Scifres, C. J., Smith, A. L., and Horst, G. L. 1969. Germination and early seedling development of musk and plumeless thistle. Univ. of Neb. Res. Bull. 299. 28.Google Scholar
10. McCarty, M. K. and Scifres, C. J. 1969. Life cycle studies with musk thistle. Univ. of Neb. Res. Bull. 230. 15.Google Scholar
11. Roeth, F. W. 1979. Comparisons of dicamba, picloram, and 2,4-D for musk thistle (Carduus nutans) control. Weed Sci. 27:651–655.Google Scholar
12. Thrasher, F. P., Cooper, C. S., and Hodgson, J. M. 1963. Competition of forage species with Canada thistle as affected by irrigation and nitrogen levels. Weeds 11:136–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Tilley, J.M.A. and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassland Soc. 18:104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Wilson, R. G. 1981. Effect of Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) residue on growth of some crops. Weed Sci. 29:159–164.Google Scholar