Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:45:40.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of soil temperature and tuber depth on Cyperus spp. control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Carlene A. Chase ,
Thomas R. Sinclair  and
Salvadore J. Locascio
Thomas R. Sinclair
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Gainesville, FL 32611-0965
Salvadore J. Locascio
Affiliation:
Horticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-0690
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies were conducted to determine lethal temperatures for Cyperus esculentus and Cyperus rotundus tubers using diurnal oscillations in soil temperature with maxima of 40, 45, 50, and 55 C and a minimum of 26 C. Growth of Cyperus spp. plants was faster at 40 C than at a constant temperature of 26 C. The 45 C treatment delayed Cyperus spp. emergence but was not lethal to tubers. Tuber mortality was 100% for both Cyperus spp. with the 50 and 55 C temperature regimes. Soil solarization with thermal-infrared-retentive (TIR) films resulted in higher soil temperatures than with a 30-μm low-density polyethylene (LDPE) clear film. With TIR films, greater proportions of emerged C. rotundus plants were killed by foliar scorching, and 6 wk of soil solarization was more effective at reducing C. rotundus density than with the LDPE film. Four weeks after film removal, the lowest level of control was obtained with the LDPE film. For C. rotundus tubers planted 5 and 10 cm deep, 62% control was obtained with the LDPE film, and it decreased to 32% with a 15-cm planting depth. The best residual control was 95 and 92% with the 75-and 100-μm TIR films, respectively. With the TIR films, there was no significant change in C. rotundus control with planting depth.

Keywords

Methyl bromideCyperus rotundus L. CYPRO, purple nutsedgeCyperus esculentus L. CYPES, yellow nutsedgeMethyl bromide alternativeslethal temperatureCYPESCYPRO
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 47 , Issue 4 , August 1999 , pp. 467 - 472
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the 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

Chase, C. A., Sinclair, T. R., Shilling, D. G., Locascio, S. J., and Gilreath, J. P. 1998. Light effects on nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) rhizome to shoot development: implications for control by soil solarization. Weed Sci. 46:575–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chellemi, D. O., Olson, S. M., Mitchell, D. J., Secker, I., and McSorley, R. 1997. Adaptation of soil solarization to the integrated management of soilborne of tomato under humid conditions. Phytopathology 87:250–258.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. 1983. Weed seed and seedling reductions by soil solarization with transparent polyethylene sheets. Weed Sci. 31:404–409.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Jones, J. P., Overman, A. J., et al. 1994. Nutsedge and soilborne pathogen control with alternatives to methyl bromide. Pages 7–16 in Proceedings of the Florida Tomato Institute. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. and Orcutt, D. R. 1996. Temperature Thresholds for bud sprouting in perennial weeds and seed germination in cotton. Weed Sci. 44:523–533.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M., Regev, Y., and Herzlinger, G. 1983. Solarization for weed control. Weed Sci. 31:170–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katan, J., Greenberger, A., Alon, H., and Grinstein, A. 1976. Solar heating by polyethylene mulching for the control of diseases caused by soilborne pathogens. Phytopathology 66:683–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locascio, S. J., Gilreath, J. P., Dickson, D. W., Kucharek, T. A., Jones, J. P., and Noling, J. W. 1997. Fumigant alternatives to methyl bromide for polyethylene-mulched tomato. HortScience 32:1208–1211.Google Scholar
Miles, J. E., Nishimoto, R. K., and Kawabata, O. 1996. Diurnally alternating temperatures stimulate sprouting of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) tubers. Weed Sci. 44:122–125.Google Scholar
Rubin, B. and Benjamin, A. 1983. Solar heating of the soil: effect on weed control and on soil-incorporated herbicides. Weed Sci. 31:819–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, B. and Benjamin, A. 1984. Solar heating of the soil: involvement of environmental factors in the weed control process. Weed Sci. 32:138–142.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1996. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements Through Release 6.11. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Standifer, L. C., Wilson, P. W., and Porche-Sorbet, R. 1984. Effects of solarization on soil weed seed populations. Weed Sci. 32:569–573.Google Scholar
Sun, W. H. and Nishimoto, R. K. 1997. Dormancy release of purple nutsedge tuber buds by a single thermal pulse. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 122:306–309.Google Scholar