Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:48:41.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Oldfield Cinquefoil (Potentilla simplex) Control in Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Nanik Sriyani ,
Herbert J. Hopen  and
Larry K. Binning
Nanik Sriyani
Affiliation:
Hortic. Dep., Univ. Wisc.-Madison, WI 53706
Herbert J. Hopen
Affiliation:
Hortic. Dep., Univ. Wisc.-Madison, WI 53706
Larry K. Binning
Affiliation:
Hortic. Dep., Univ. Wisc.-Madison, WI 53706
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse and field herbicide evaluation, flooding, and soil saturation studies were conducted to investigate the control of oldfield cinquefoil in cranberry. Chlorimuron ethyl and dichlobenil were found to be promising herbicides for control of this weed in both greenhouse and field studies. The number of leaves, leaf area, shoot, root, and total dry weight of oldfield cinquefoil were reduced by dichlobenil at 1.1 to 4.5 kg ha-1 and chlorimuron ethyl at 17.5 to 35 g ha-1, at 12 wk after treatment. The higher rate of dichlobenil, however, caused reduction in cranberry height and total dry weight. Field treatment at time of cinquefoil emergence did not provide adequate weed control. Postemergence application to cinquefoil of 4.5 kg ha-1 dichlobenil, 35 g ha-1 chlorimuron ethyl, and 2.2 to 4.5 kg-1 ha terbacil reduced the number of leaves and shoot dry weight. Only terbacil at 4.5 kg ha-1 reduced cranberry shoot and fruit fresh and dry weight. Flooding for up to 72 h did not affect oldfield cinquefoil growth. At 22/18 C, 4 wk of soil saturation reduced runner development and fresh and dry weight of oldfield cinquefoil. At 13/9 C, no runners developed in either saturated or control soils, and there was no effect of soil saturation on fresh and dry weights. This suggests that oldfield cinquefoil grows better in an unsaturated soil condition, but needs a relatively warm climate to develop.

Keywords

Chlorimuron ethyl, ethyl 2-[[[[(4-chloro-6-methoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic aciddichlobenil, 2,6-dichlorobenzonitrileterbacil, 5-chloro-3-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pyrimidinedionecranberry, Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait. ‘Searles’oldfield cinquefoil, Potentilla simplex Michx. ♯ PTLSIFloodingsoil saturationchlorimuron ethyldichlobenilterbacilPTLSI
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 297 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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. Ashton, F. M., and Crafts, A. S. 1973. Mode of Action of Herbicides. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York. p. 237.Google Scholar
2. Beyer, E. M. Jr., Duffy, M. J., Hay, J. V., and Schlueter, D. D. 1988. Sulfonylureas. p. 117–189 in Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., ed. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action, Vol. 3. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York.Google Scholar
3. Curtis, J. T. 1974. The Vegetation of Wisconsin, An Ordination of Plant Communities. The Univ. of Wisc. Press, Madison, p. 525.Google Scholar
4. Dana, M. N., and Klingbeil, G. C. 1965. Cranberry Growing in Wisconsin. Ext. Serv., Coll. Agric., Univ. Wisc.-Madison.Google Scholar
5. Fuesler, T. P., Linn, D. M., and Strachan, S. D. 1988. Soil degradation of chlorimuron ethyl as affected by soil characteristics and weather. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 43:35.Google Scholar
6. Muzik, T. J. 1970. Weed Biology and Control. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York. p. 66.Google Scholar
7. Shoemaker, J. S. 1983. Small Fruit Culture. Avi Publ. Co., Westport, CT. p. 331–342.Google Scholar
8. Stang, E. J., and Dana, M. N. 1984. Wisconsin cranberry production. HortScience 19(4):478,607.Google Scholar
9. White, J. J. 1901. Cranberry Culture. Orange Judd Co., New York. p. 65.Google Scholar