Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:15:37.712Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Residue Management and Herbicides for Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum) Control in Kentucky Bluegrass Grown for Seed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

George W. Mueller-Warrant ,
William C. Young III ,
Thomas G. Chastain  and
S. Caprice Rosato
George W. Mueller-Warrant*
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Forage Seed Production Research Center, 3450 SW Campus Way, Corvallis, OR 97331-8539
William C. Young III
Affiliation:
Crop and Soil Science Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Thomas G. Chastain
Affiliation:
Crop and Soil Science Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
S. Caprice Rosato
Affiliation:
Crop and Soil Science Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent changes in herbicide registrations and governmental restrictions on field burning raised many management questions for Kentucky bluegrass seed producers, particularly the extent to which useful lives of their stands might be shortened by decreasing crop yields or increasing weed pressure. Tests conducted over the lives of two grass seed stands (1993–1997) evaluated three contrasting methods of postharvest residue management (vacuum sweep, bale/flail chop/rake, and field burn) and 13 herbicide treatments. Downy brome was the primary weed at both the Madras and LaGrande, OR, sites. In nontreated checks and the four least effective herbicide treatments, downy brome populations increased exponentially over time, with year-to-year increases in density averaging 13.1-fold. Competition had easily detected effects on Kentucky bluegrass seed yield at densities of 30 downy brome plants/m2, and crop stands were destroyed beyond 100 to 200 weeds/m2. Both PRE terbacil at 840 g/ha and early POST (EPOST)/late POST (LPOST) split-applied primisulfuron at 20 g/ha per application contained downy brome during the first 2 yr but not the third, when crop injury from terbacil forced reduction in terbacil rate and changes in weed populations overcame primisulfuron. PRE terbacil followed by LPOST primisulfuron, EPOST terbacil plus primisulfuron followed by LPOST primisulfuron, and EPOST/LPOST split-applied terbacil plus primisulfuron achieved excellent control of downy brome until the final years of the study, when control became increasingly erratic as primisulfuron-resistant downy brome proliferated in specific individual plots. Injury from combination terbacil plus primisulfuron treatments reduced yield relative to safest treatments in early years when downy brome population densities were low.

Keywords

Dicambametribuzinoxyfluorfenprimisulfuronterbacildowny brome, Bromus tectorum L. BROTEKentucky bluegrass, Poa pratensis L. POAPRPostharvest residue managementnonburned grass seed production
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , June 2007 , pp. 411 - 420
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

Chilcote, D. C., Youngberg, H. W., Stanwood, P. C., and Kim, S. 1980. Post-harvest residue burning effects on perennial grass development and seed yield. Pages 91–103. in Hebblethewaite, P.D. ed. Seed Production. London Buttersworth.Google Scholar
Gressel, J. and Segel, L. A. 1982. Interrelating factors controlling the rate of appearance of resistance: The outlook for the future. Pages 325–347. in LeBaron, H.M. and Gressel, J. eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants. New York John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Lee, W. O. 1965. Selective control of downy brome and rattail fescue in irrigated perennial grass seed fields in central Oregon. Weeds 13:205–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, W. O. 1966. Effect of annual applications of diuron on seed yields of perennial grasses in Oregon. U.S. Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin No. 1358. 23.Google Scholar
Lee, W. O. 1974. Field burning effects on weed control in grass seed crops. Pages 40–43. Corvallis, OR: Agricultural Experiment Station, Oregon State University, December 1974 Oregon State University Research on Field Burning, Circ. Info. 647.Google Scholar
Mallory-Smith, C., Hendrickson, P., and Mueller-Warrant, G. 1999. Cross-resistance of primisulfuron-resistant Bromus tectorum L. (downy brome) to sulfosulfuron. Weed Sci. 47:256–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller-Warrant, G. W. 1990. Control of roughstalk bluegrass (Poa trivialis) with fenoxaprop in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) grown for seed. Weed Technol. 4:250–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller-Warrant, G. W. 1998. Kentucky bluegrass variety tolerance to primisulfuron. Pages 51–52. in Young, W.C. ed. 1997 Seed Production Research at Oregon State University, USDA-ARS Cooperating, CrS 111.Google Scholar
Mueller-Warrant, G. W. and Neidlinger, T. J. 1994. Oxyfluorfen controls seedling grasses in established perennial grasses grown for seed. J. Appl. Seed Prod. 12:14–25.Google Scholar
Mueller-Warrant, G. W. and Rosato, S. C. 2002. Weed control for stand duration perennial ryegrass seed production: I. Residue removed. Agron. J. 94:1181–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, K. W. and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 2004. Physiological and molecular basis for ALS inhibitor resistance in Bromus tectorum biotypes. Weed Res. 44:71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, K. W., Mallory-Smith, C. A., Ball, D. A., and Mueller-Warrant, G. W. 2004. Ecological fitness of acetolactate synthase inhibitor-resistant and -susceptible downy brome (Bromus tectorum) biotypes. Weed Sci. 52:768–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, K. W., Mallory-Smith, C. A., and Mueller-Warrant, G. W. 2001. Growth characteristics of sulfonylurea-resistant and -susceptible downy brome biotypes. Proc. Western Soc. Weed Sci. 54:12–13.Google Scholar
Park, K. W., Mallory-Smith, C. A., Mueller-Warrant, G. W., and Ball, D. A. 2002. Point mutation confers sulfonylurea resistance to one downy brome (Bromus tectorum) biotype but not in another. Proc. Western Soc. Weed Sci. 55:11.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D., Torrie, J. H., and Dickey, D. A. 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. New York McGraw-Hill. 666.Google Scholar
Young, W. C., Youngberg, H. W., and Chilcote, D. O. 1984. Post-harvest residue management effects on seed yield in perennial grass seed production: I. The effect of less than annual burning when alternated with mechanical residue removal. J. Appl. Seed Prod. 2:41–44.Google Scholar