Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T19:32:25.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selective Application of Herbicides for Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) Control in Birdsfoot Trefoil (Lotus corniculatus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Chris M. Boerboom  and
Donald L. Wyse
Chris M. Boerboom
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. Plant Genet., Univ. Minn., St. Paul, MN 55108
Donald L. Wyse
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. Plant Genet., Univ. Minn., St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense [L.] Scop. # CIRAR] is a major weed problem in birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L. ‘Norcen’) seed production in northern Minnesota. Several systemic herbicides applied with selective applicators (roller and ropewick) were evaluated for Canada thistle control in birdsfoot trefoil. Picloram (4-amino-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid), clopyralid (3,6-dichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid), and glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine] controlled Canada thistle better than MCPA [(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acid] and dicamba (3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid). Glyphosate and MCPA did not injure birdsfoot trefoil foliage or bloom, whereas, picloram, clopyralid, and dicamba injured both. Although selective applications of glyphosate controlled Canada thistle for a short term with the least birdsfoot trefoil injury, long-term Canada thistle control in birdsfoot trefoil does not appear feasible with selective herbicide applications.

Keywords

Ropewick applicatorroller applicatorCIRAR
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , April 1988 , pp. 183 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Armor, R. L., and Harris, R. V. 1977. Control of Cirsium arvense (L) Scop. by herbicides and mowing. Weed Res. 17:303–309.Google Scholar
2. Cramer, G. L., and Burnside, O. C. 1981. Control of common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca). Weed Sci. 29:636–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Fawcett, R. S., and Becker, R. L. 1980. Hemp dogbane control with glyphosate in selective applicators. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:55.Google Scholar
4. Hanselka, C. W., Smith, K., and Wright, O. 1984. The use of rope-wick applicators for the control of Yankee weed (Eupatorium compositifolium). Proe. Am. Forage Grassland Council, p. 186–190.Google Scholar
5. Kirkland, K. J. 1977. Glyphosate for the control of Canada thistle on summer fallow. Can. J. Plant Sci. 57:1015–1017.Google Scholar
6. Lym, R. G., and Messersmith, C. G. 1981. Perennial weed control in pasture using roller and wick applicators. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 36:42–43.Google Scholar
7. Lym, R. G., and Messersmith, C. G. 1982. Roller and wick application for leafy spurge control. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 39:60–64.Google Scholar
8. Meeklah, F. A., and Mitchell, R. B. 1984. Evaluation of herbicides for control of California thistle. Proc. 37th New Zealand Weed Pest Control Conf., p. 20–23.Google Scholar
9. Messersmith, C. G., and Lym, R. G. 1985. Roller application of picloram for leafy spurge control in pastures. Weed Sci. 33:258–262.Google Scholar
10. Ogg, A. G. 1975. Control of Canada thistle and field bindweed in asparagus. Weed Sci. 23:458–461.Google Scholar
11. Reece, P. E., and Wilson, R. G. 1983. Effect of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and musk thistle (Carduus nutans) control on grass herbage. Weed Sci. 31:488–492.Google Scholar