Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T11:18:06.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Control Strategies for Forage Legumes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Najib Malik  and
John Waddington
Najib Malik
Affiliation:
Res. Stn., Agric. Can., Box 1240, Melfort, Sask. SOE 1AO
John Waddington
Affiliation:
Res. Stn., Agric. Can., Box 1030, Swift Current, Sask. S9H 3X2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tolerance and subsequent yield response of established alfalfa, red clover, alsike clover, sainfoin, birdsfoot trefoil, and cicer milkvetch to sethoxydim and fluazifop spring applied and to hexazinone, metribuzin, and terbacil fall applied were determined in a field study. All legumes tolerated sethoxydim. Fluazifop was safe on all legumes except sainfoin. Alfalfa and cicer milkvetch tolerated hexazinone, metribuzin, and terbacil. Alfalfa dry matter yield was not affected by any of the herbicide treatments, but cumulative cicer milkvetch yield increased 9% over a 3-yr period with hexazinone applications. Sainfoin yield increased 20% with hexazinone and terbacil treatment. Hexazinone injured red clover and reduced yield. Alsike clover was the most susceptible legume to the residual herbicides. Weed dry matter yield associated with the legumes indicated that alfalfa and sainfoin were the most and the least competitive species, respectively. Plots treated with hexazinone contained the least amount of weeds, regardless of the legume species. Field peas seeded in rotation was not affected by herbicide residues; however, residues from terbacil applied at 1.0 kg/ha reduced seed yield of lentils.

Keywords

Fluazifop, (±)-2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]oxy]phenoxy]propanoic acid)hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-(1H,3H)-dionemetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onesethoxydim, 2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-oneterbacil, 5-chloro-3-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pyrimidinedione)alfalfa, Medicago sativa L. #4 MEDSAalsike clover, Trifolium hybridum L. # TRFHYbirdsfoot trefoil, Lotus corniculatus L. # LOTCOcicer milkvetch, Astragalus cicer L. # ASACIred clover, Trifolium pratense L. # TRFPRsainfoin, Onobrychis viciafolia Scop. # ONBVIAlfalfared cloveralsike cloversainfoinbirdsfoot trefoilcicer milkvetchfluazifophexazinonesethoxydimterbacilmetribuzin
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 1989 , pp. 288 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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

1. Alberta Agriculture. 1988. Guide to crop protection in Alberta. Agdex 606-1.Google Scholar
2. Cosgrove, D. R., and Barrett, M. 1987. Effects of weed control in established alfalfa (Medicago sativa) on forage yield and quality. Weed Sci. 35:564–567.Google Scholar
3. Fawcett, R. S., and Harvey, R. G. 1978. Field comparison of seven dinitroaniline herbicides for alfalfa (Medicago sativa) seedling establishment. Weed Sci. 26:123–127.Google Scholar
4. Leroux, G. D., and Harvey, R. G. 1983. Influence of date and method of metribuzin application for quackgrass control in alfalfa. Agron. J. 75:741–744.Google Scholar
5. Leroux, G. D., and Harvey, R. G. 1986. Comparison of fall-applied pronamide with spring-applied sethoxydim for quackgrass (Agropyron repens) control in established alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Weed Sci. 34:444–448.Google Scholar
6. Saskatchewan Agriculture. 1988. Chemical weed control in cereal, oilseed, pulse and forage crops. Agdex 641.Google Scholar
7. Sheafer, C. C., and Wyse, D. L. 1982. Common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) control in alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Weed Sci. 30:216–220.Google Scholar
8. Singh, B., and Salunkhe, D. K. 1970. Some metabolic responses of bush bean plants to a subherbicidal concentration of certain s-triazine compounds. Can. J. Bot. 48:2213–2217.Google Scholar
9. Waddington, J. 1978. Reaction of sainfoin (Onobrychis viciaefolia) seedlings to four herbicides applied after emergence. Weed Sci. 26:175–178.Google Scholar
10. Waddington, J. 1978. The effects of weed control practices on alfalfa forage quality. Proc. 2nd Int. Green Crop Drying Congr., Univ. Sask. p. 130–136.Google Scholar
11. Waddington, J. 1985. Weed control in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) grown for seed. Weed Sci. 33:411–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Waddington, J. 1987. Effects of herbicides and their application time on alfalfa forage production. Can. J. Plant Sci. 67:849–852.Google Scholar
13. Waddington, J., Gebhardt, J., and Pulkinen, D. A. 1976. Forage yield and quality of alfalfa following late fall applications of 2,4-D or 2,4-DB. Can. J. Plant Sci. 56:929–934.Google Scholar
14. Waddington, J., Cessna, A. J., Moyer, J. R., and Holt, N. W. 1986. Sainfoin establishment and production on trifluralin-treated soils and herbicide residues in green forage and hay. Can. J. Plant Sci. 66:103–109.Google Scholar
15. Wilson, R. G. 1986. Weed control in irrigated seedling alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Weed Sci. 34:423–426.Google Scholar
16. Winton, K. T., and Stritzke, J. F. 1985. Evaluation of early-season and postharvest herbicide treatments on alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Weed Sci. 33:708–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar