Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:04:56.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Broadleaf Herbicide Effects on Tall Fescue (Festuca arundinacea) Seedhead Density, Forage Yield, and Quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Joseph L. Moyer  and
Kenneth W. Kelley
Joseph L. Moyer
Affiliation:
Kansas State Univ., Southeast Agric. Res. Ctr., P.O. Box 316, Parsons, KS 67357
Kenneth W. Kelley
Affiliation:
Kansas State Univ., Southeast Agric. Res. Ctr., P.O. Box 316, Parsons, KS 67357
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Four broadleaf herbicides and combinations were compared for two years with mefluidide, a growth regulator, for effects on ‘Ky 31’ and ‘Fawn’ tall fescue. Seedhead densities averaged 33% of the check with 8.4 g ai/ha of metsulfuron, 17% with 70 g ai/ha of imazethapyr, and 9% with 280 g ai/ha of mefluidide, while forage yields were reduced to about 40% of the check. Forage crude protein (CP) concentrations were increased by mefluidide, imazethapyr, and 8.4 g/ha of metsulfuron. Neutral-detergent fiber (NDF) of Ky 31 but not Fawn forage was reduced by mefluidide, imazethapyr, and metsulfuron at 6.3 and 8.4 g/ha, but Fawn NDF was increased by dicamba plus 2,4-D. In vitro dry matter digestibility was increased by metsulfuron at 6.3 and 8.4 g/ha, mefluidide, and imazethapyr in one of two years. Adding 2,4-D to metsulfuron reduced some effects of metsulfuron. Total CP/ha was no more adversely affected by imazethapyr and metsulfuron than mefluidide. Imazethapyr and metsulfuron can thus be used to control weeds without reducing fescue forage value.

Keywords

Dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acidimazethapyr, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidmefluidide, N-[2,4-dimethyl-5-[[(trifluoromethyl)sulfonyl]-amino]phenyl]acetamidemetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acid2,4-D, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acidtall fescue, Festuca arundinacea SchrebCrude proteindigestibilityneutral-detergent fiberdicambaimazethapyrmefluididemetsulfuron2,4-D
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 1995 , pp. 270 - 276
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. Buckner, R. C. 1985. The Fescues. p. 233–240 in Heath, M. E., Barnes, R. F., and Metcalfe, D. S., eds. Forages, 43rd ed. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
2. Crooke, W. M. and Simpson, W. E. 1971. Determination of ammonium in Kjeldahl digests of crops by an automated procedure. J. Sci. Food Agric. 22:9–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Fales, S. L., Bohn, P. J., Hoover, R. J., and Karunanandaa, K. 1991. Modification of in-vitro digestibility and cell-wall composition of cocksfoot, ryegrass and timothy by imazethapyr. J. Sci. Food Agric. 54:71–78.Google Scholar
4. Fales, S. L., Hill, R. R., and Hoover, R. J. 1990. Chemical regulation of growth and forage quality of cool-season grasses with imazethapyr. Agron. J. 82:9–17.Google Scholar
5. Gerrish, J. R. and Dougherty, C. T. 1983. Tall fescue sward response to mefluidide and nitrogen. Agron. J. 75:895–898.Google Scholar
6. Glenn, S., Rieck, C. E., Ely, D. G., and Bush, L. P. 1980. Quality of tall fescue forage as affected by mefluidide. J. Agric. Food Chem. 28:391–393.Google Scholar
7. Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Neutral-detergent. p. 8–9 in Forage Fiber Analysis. Agric. Handbook No. 379. ARS, USDA, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
8. Harris, L. E. 1970. In vitro dry matter or organic matter digestion. p. 5001–1–5001–4 in Nutrition Research Techniques for Domestic and Wild Animals. Vol. 1. L. E. Harris, Logan, UT.Google Scholar
9. Johnson, B. J. 1991. Performance of plant growth regulators on well-maintained tall fescue turf. Georgia Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 404. 29 p.Google Scholar
10. Klingaman, T. E., King, C. A., and Oliver, L. R. 1992. Effect of application rate, weed species, and weed stage of growth on imazethapyr activity. Weed Sci. 40:227–232.Google Scholar
11. Linder, R. C. and Harley, C. P. 1942. A rapid method for the determination of nitrogen in plant tissue. Science 96:565–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Malik, N. 1990. Weed control during establishment and yield response of timothy (Phleum pratense). Weed Technol. 4:598–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Malik, N., Bowes, G. G., and Waddington, J. 1993. Residual herbicides for weed control in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) grown for seed. Weed Technol. 7:483–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. McCarty, M. K. 1979. Yield and quality of two cool-season grasses as affected by selected herbicides. Weed Sci. 27:415–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Moyer, J. L. and Lomas, L. W. 1988. Mefluidide treatment effects on tall fescue forage, and on pasture and feedlot performance of steers. Prof. Anim. Sci. 4:16–20.Google Scholar
16. Reynolds, J. H., Krueger, W. A., Walker, C. L., and Waller, J. A. 1993. Plant growth regulator effects on growth and forage quality of tall fescue. Agron. J. 85:545–548.Google Scholar
17. Robb, T. W., Ely, D. G., Rieck, C. E., Thomas, R. J., Glenn, B. P., and Glenn, S. 1982. Mefluidide treatment of tall fescue: Effect on nutrient utilization. J. Anim. Sci. 54:155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Sheaffer, C. C. and Marten, G. C. 1986. Effect of mefluidide on cool-season perennial grass forage yield and quality. Agron. J. 78:75–79.Google Scholar
19. SAS. 1988. SAS/STAT User's Guide. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
20. Turner, K. E., Paterson, J. A., Kerley, M. S., and Forwood, J. R. 1990. Mefluidide treatment of tall fescue pastures: Forage quality. J. Anim. Sci. 68:3406–3411.Google Scholar
21. Zoschke, A. 1994. Toward reduced herbicide rates and adapted weed management. Weed Technol. 8:376–386.Google Scholar