Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:55:31.348Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Impact of Herbicides Applied Annually for Twenty-three Years in a Deciduous Orchard

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Chester L. Foy
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol., Physiol. and Weed Sci., Virginia Polytech. Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061
Charles R. Drake
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol., Physiol. and Weed Sci., Virginia Polytech. Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061
Carlton L. Pirkey
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol., Physiol. and Weed Sci., Virginia Polytech. Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061

Abstract

A semi- and high-density apple and peach orchard was established at Blacksburg, VA. Starting 1 yr after transplanting, tree rows were treated with paraquat, 2,4-D, or amitrole plus simazine for 4 yr. Thereafter, diuron, simazine, or terbacil was applied in conjunction with paraquat or glyphosate. During the 12th growing season, young trees planted between existing trees failed to make proper growth. Oat bioassay of soils collected from treated rows revealed that the tree row topsoil (0 to 7.5 cm) produced less oat biomass than did deeper row soils (to 30 cm) or soils of corresponding depths from adjacent non-treated tall fescue sod alleyways. Poor growth of trees may have been related to other factors (competition from older trees, drought conditions, etc.) since herbicide residues in the upper 7.5 cm would have little effect on tree roots below this depth. After 3 yr the trees developed normally. Tree rows became heavily infested with weeds 1 yr following cessation of 23 yr of consecutive herbicide treatments.

Type
Note
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 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. Foy, C. L., Harrison, S. B., and Witt, H. L. 1994. Herbicide effects on weed control and shoot growth of young apple (Malus sylvestris) and peach (Prunus persica) trees. Weed Technol. 8:840848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Kahn, S. U. and Marriage, P. B. 1979. Residues of simazine and hydroxysimazine in an orchard soil. Weed Sci. 27:238241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Majek, B. A. and Welker, W. V. Jr. 1990. Toxicity of residual herbicides to peaches (Primus persica) and the interaction with soil mounding. Weed Technol. 4:105108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Marriage, P. B., Kahn, S. U., and Saidak, W. J. 1977. Persistence and movement of terbacil in peach orchard soil after repeated annual applications. Weed Res. 17:115119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Marriage, P. B. and Saidak, W. J. 1976. Simazine and linuron residues in peach orchard soil after repealed annual applications. Can. J. Soil Sci. 56.111114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Marriage, P. B., Saidak, W. J., and Von Stryk, F. G. 1975. Residues of atrazine, simazine, linuron, and diuron after annual applications in a peach orchard. Weed Res. 15:373379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Skroch, W. A., Sheet, T. J., and Monaco, T. J. 1975. Weed populations and herbicide residues in apple orchards after five years. Weed Sci. 23:5357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Skroch, W. A., Sheets, T. J., and Smith, J. W. 1971. Herbicide effectiveness, soil residues and phytotoxicity to peach trees. Weed Sci. 19:257260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar