Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:48:32.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Zoysiagrass Seedhead Suppression with Imidazolinone Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

James T. Brosnan ,
Greg K. Breeden ,
Matthew T. Elmore ,
Aaron J. Patton  and
Dan V. Weisenberger
James T. Brosnan*
Affiliation:
University of Tennessee, 252 Ellington Plant Science, Building 2431 Joe Johnson Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996
Greg K. Breeden
Affiliation:
University of Tennessee, 252 Ellington Plant Science, Building 2431 Joe Johnson Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996
Matthew T. Elmore
Affiliation:
University of Tennessee, 252 Ellington Plant Science, Building 2431 Joe Johnson Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996
Aaron J. Patton
Affiliation:
Purdue University, 915 West State Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Dan V. Weisenberger
Affiliation:
Purdue University, 915 West State Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Options for suppressing zoysiagrass seedheads in managed turfgrass systems are limited. Experiments were conducted in 2010 and 2011 evaluating the use of imazamox (26, 52, and 70 g ai ha−1) or imazapic (52 g ai ha−1) for ‘Zenith' and ‘Meyer' zoysiagrass seedhead suppression. Imazamox and imazapic at ≥ 52 g ai ha−1 suppressed Zenith zoysiagrass seedheads ≥ 95% at 2 to 6 wk after initial treatment (WAIT) each year. Slight injury (< 10%) was observed with these treatments; however, effective seedhead suppression resulted in increased (i.e., darker) green color from 8 to 15 WAIT each year. Relative chlorophyll index values for imazamox- and imazapic-treated plots ranged from 100 to 147% of the nontreated control in 2010 and 89 to 125% of the nontreated in 2011. On Meyer zoysiagrass, imazamox and imazapic at ≥ 52 g ha−1 reduced seedhead counts greater than 90% in both Tennessee and Indiana. However, significant (> 25%) injury was reported with these treatments at one experimental location. Although imazamox and imazapic have efficacy for zoysiagrass seedhead suppression, additional studies are needed to determine factors affecting zoysiagrass injury potential from imazamox and imazapic applications.

Las opciones para suprimir las inflorescencias de Zoysia japonica en céspedes manejados son limitadas. En 2010 y 2011 se realizaron experimentos para evaluar el uso de imazamox (26, 52 y 70 g ai ha-1) o imazapic (52 g ai ha-1) para la supresión de inflorescencias de Z. japonica ‘Zenith’ y ‘Meyer’. Imazamox e imazapic a 52 g ai ha-1 suprimió las inflorescencias de Zenith ≥95% a 2-6 semanas después del tratamiento inicial (WAIT) en cada año. Un ligero daño (<10%) fue observado con estos tratamientos. Sin embargo, la efectiva supresión de inflorescencias resultó en un incremento del color verde (i.e. más oscuro) desde 8 hasta 15 WAIT en cada año. Los valores relativos de índice de clorofila para lotes tratados con imazamox e imazapic variaron de 100 a 147% en comparación con el testigo no-tratado en 2010 y de 89 a 125% en 2011. En Meyer, imazamox e imazapic a ≥52 g ai ha-1 redujeron los conteos de inflorescencias en más de 90% en Tennessee e Indiana. Sin embargo, con estos tratamientos se reportó un daño significativo (>25%) en uno de los sitios experimentales. Aunque imazamox e imazapic muestran eficacia para la supresión de inflorescencias de Z. japonica, se necesitan estudios adicionales para determinar los factores que afectan el daño potencial de Z. japonica con aplicaciones de estos herbicidas.

Keywords

Imazamoximazapiczoysiagrass, Zoysia japonica Steud. ‘Zenith' and ‘Meyer'Golf courseJapanese lawngrassplant growth regulatorseedhead suppressionturf
Type
Weed Management—Other Crops/AREAS
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 708 - 713
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.)

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous. 2005. Proxy growth regulator label. Bayer Publication No. Proxy-SL-042605B. Durham, NC : Bayer Environmental Sciences. p. 3.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2009a. Clearcast herbicide label. BASF Publication No. NVA 2009-04-299-0158. Research Triangle Park, NC : BASF Corporation.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2009b. Raptor herbicide label. BASF Publication No. NVA 2010-04-133-0079. Research Triangle Park, NC : BASF Corporation.Google Scholar
Baker, R. D., McCarty, L. B., Colvin, D. L., Higgins, J. M., Weinbrecht, J. S., and Moreno, J. E. 1999. Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) seedhead suppression following consecutive yearly applications of plant growth retardants. Weed Technol. 13 :378–384.Google Scholar
Beard, J. B. 1973. Turfgrass Science and Culture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice Hall. Pp. 184–187.Google Scholar
Brosnan, J. T., Breeden, G. K., Armel, G. R., and Vargas, J. J. 2011. Common bermudagrass seedhead suppression and growth regulation with fenoxaprop. Weed Technol. 25 :404–410.Google Scholar
Brosnan, J. T., Thoms, A. W., Breeden, G. K., and Sorochan, J. C. 2010. Effects of various plant growth regulators on the traffic tolerance of ‘Riviera' bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon L.). Hortscience 45 :966–970.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. J., Henderlong, P. R., Street, J. R., and Karnok, K. J. 1987. Root growth, seedhead production, and quality of annual bluegrass as affected by mefluidide and a wetting agent. Agron. J. 79 :929–934.Google Scholar
Ervin, E. H. and Ok, C. 2001. Influence of plant growth regulators on suppression and quality of ‘Meyer' zoysiagrass. J. Environ. Hortic. 19 :57–60.Google Scholar
Flessner, M. L., McCurdy, J. D., and McElroy, J. S. 2011. Tolerance of six zoysiagrass cultivars to aminocyclopyrachlor. Weed Technol. 25 :574–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goatley, J. M. Jr., Maddox, V. L., and Watkins, R. M. 1993. Growth regulation of common bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) with imazaquin and AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 7 :746–750.Google Scholar
Goatley, J. M. Jr., Maddox, V. L., and Watkins, R. M. 1996. Growth regulation of bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum Flueggé) with imazaquin and AC 263,222. Hortscience 31 :396–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goatley, J. M. Jr., Maddox, V. L., and Watkins, R. M. 1998. Bahiagrass response to a plant growth regulator as affected by mowing interval. Crop Sci. 38 :196–200.Google Scholar
Heckman, N. L., Horst, G. L., and Gaussoin, R. E. 2001. Influence of trinexapac-ethyl on specific leaf weight and chlorophyll content of Poa pratensis . Int. Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 9 :287–290.Google Scholar
Hixson, A. C., Gannon, T. W., and Yelverton, F. H. 2007. Efficacy of application placement equipment for tall fescue (Lolium arundinaceum) growth and seedhead suppression. Weed Technol. 21 :801–806.Google Scholar
Johnson, B. J. and Carrow, R. N. 1999. Tolerance of zoysiagrass (Zoysia spp.) cultivars to preemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 13 :706–712.Google Scholar
Kane, R. and Miller, L. 2003. Field testing plant growth regulators and wetting agents for annual bluegrass seedhead suppression. USGA Green Sect. Rec. 41 :21–26.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, J. E. 1989. How turfgrass biology affects responses to growth regulators. Pages 83–88 in Proceedings of the 6th International Turfgrass Research Conference, Tokyo, Japan. Fort Lauderdale, FL : International Turfgrass Society.Google Scholar
Lyman, G. T., Throssell, C. S., Johnson, M. E., Stacey, G. A., and Brown, C. D. 2007. Golf course profile describes turfgrass, landscape, and environmental stewardship features [online article]. Appl. Turfgrass Sci. DOI: .Google Scholar
McCullough, P. E., Nutt, W., Murphy, T. R., and Raymer, P. 2011. Seashore paspalum seedhead control and growth regulation with flazasulfuron and trinexapac-ethyl. Weed Technol. 25 :64–69.Google Scholar
McIntosh, M. S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75 :153–155.Google Scholar
Montgomery, D. P., Cargill, L. M., Martin, D. L., and Jamison, J. D. 1999. Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) control along Oklahoma roadsides. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52 :148–149.Google Scholar
National Turfgrass Evaluation Program. 2010. 2007 National Zoysiagrass Test: 2010 Data Progress Report NTEP No. 11–5. http://www.ntep.org/reports/zg07/zg07_11–5/zg07_11–5.htm. Accessed: June 29, 2012.Google Scholar
Patton, A. J. 2009. Selecting zoysiagrass cultivars: Turfgrass quality, growth, pest and environmental stress tolerance [online article]. Appl. Turfgrass Sci. DOI: .Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. M., Kenworthy, K. E., Engelke, M. C., Genovesi, A. D., and Quesenberry, K. H. 2009. Heritability estimates for turfgrass performance and stress response in Zoysia spp. Crop Sci. 49 :2113–2118.Google Scholar
Senseman, S. A., ed. 2007. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Lawrence, KS : Weed Science Society of America. Pp. 81–82.Google Scholar
Trappe, J. M., Karcher, D. E., Richardson, M. D., and Patton, A. J. 2011. Divot resistance varies among bermudagrass and zoysiagrass cultivars. Crop Sci. 51 :1793–1799.Google Scholar
Turgeon, A. J. 1999. Turfgrass Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall. Pp. 78–79.Google Scholar
Yelverton, F. H., McCarty, L. B., and Murphy, T. R. 1997. Effects of imazameth on the growth of Paspalum notatum Flueggé. Int. Turfgrass Soc. 8 :1085–1094.Google Scholar