Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:48:11.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed control efficacy and tolerance of Canaan fir to preemergence herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2019

Jatinder S. Aulakh Open the ORCID record for Jatinder S. Aulakh [Opens in a new window]
Jatinder S. Aulakh*
Affiliation:
Assistant Weed Scientist, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, Windsor, CT, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Jatinder S. Aulakh, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, 153 Cook Hill Road, P.O. Box Number 248, Windsor, CT 06095. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

PRE herbicides are the backbone of a successful weed management program in Christmas tree production. In a 2-yr field study, weed control efficacy and tolerance of newly transplanted Canaan fir to different PRE treatments were evaluated. Herbicide treatments consisted of two rates of each of atrazine plus mesotrione plus S-metolachlor at 561 + 150 + 1,504 and 1,122 + 300 + 3,008 g ai ha−1, flumioxazin at 214 and 429 g ai ha−1, hexazinone plus sulfometuron methyl at 289 + 27 and 480 + 46 g ai ha−1, indaziflam at 20 and 41 g ai ha−1, simazine plus oryzalin at 3,366 + 1,683 and 3,366 + 3,366 g ai ha−1, and a nontreated control. Averaged over 2 yr, all PRE treatments controlled giant foxtail, large crabgrass, and redroot pigweed at least 80% throughout the summer. Only the high rates of atrazine plus mesotrione plus S-metolachlor maintained >80% season-long control of yellow foxtail. Horseweed was controlled >85% with flumioxazin at both rates and at high rates of atrazine plus mesotrione plus S-metolachlor, hexazinone plus sulfometuron methyl, and indaziflam. The season-long PRE control of both red sorrel and wild carrot was maintained ≥80% with atrazine plus mesotrione plus S-metolachlor and hexazinone plus sulfometuron methyl regardless of application rate. By 16 wk after treatment, within-row densities of weeds evaluated in this study were reduced >75% in plots treated with atrazine plus mesotrione plus S-metolachlor at both application rates or hexazinone plus sulfometuron methyl at 480 + 46 g ai ha−1. Within-row weed densities in the nontreated control plots were 50, 32, 36, 25, 27, 31, and 19 plants m−2 for large crabgrass, giant foxtail, horseweed, redroot pigweed, red sorrel, wild carrot, and yellow foxtail, respectively. No discernible injury was observed in Canaan fir with any PRE treatment in both study years.

Keywords

Robert Nurse, Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaChristmas tree toleranceleader lengthpreemergenceweed managementAtrazineflumioxazinhexazinoneindaziflammesotrioneoryzalinsimazineS-metolachlorsulfometuron methylgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm.horseweed, Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq.large crabgrass, Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop.redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus (L.)red sorrel, Rumex acetocella (L.)wild carrot, Daucus carota (L.)yellow foxtail, Setaria pumila (Poir.) Roem. & Schult.Canaan fir, Abies balsamea var. phanerolepis
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 208 - 213
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019

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

Abendroth, JA, Martin, AR, Roeth, FW (2006) Plant response to combinations of mesotrione and photosystem II inhibitors. Weed Technol 20:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, JF (2005) Evaluation of sulfometuron combinations for weed control in Christmas tree plantations. Page 38 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Washington DC: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, JF (2007) 2006 Weed management trials in Christmas trees. Page 38 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Baltimore: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, JF, Mervosh, TL (2000) Herbicide evaluations in Christmas tree plantings of fir (Abies spp.) Page 51 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Baltimore: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, JF, Mervosh, TL (2013) Pre and post budbreak applications of indaziflam in field-grown conifers. Abstract in Proceedings of the Weed Science Society of America. Baltimore: Weed Science Society of AmericaGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, JF, Newton, M (2008) Benefits of triazine herbicides in the production of ornamentals and conifer trees. Pages 225–234in LeBaron, HM, McFarland, JE, Burnside, OC, eds., The Triazine Herbicides. Amsterdam: ElsevierCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armel, GR, Wilson, HP, Richardson, RJ, Himes, TE (2003) Mesotrione, acetochlor, and atrazine for weed management in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 17:284–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bijenzadeh, E, Ghadiri, H (2006) Effect of separate and combined treatments of herbicides on weed control and corn (Zea mays) yield. Weed Technol 20: 640–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollman, SL, Kells, JJ, Penner, D (2006) Weed response to mesotrione and atrazine applied alone and in combination preemergence. Weed Technol 20:903–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brabham, CB, Debolt, S (2013) The mode of action of indaziflam. Abstract in Proceedings of the Weed Science Society of America. Baltimore: Weed Science Society of AmericaGoogle Scholar
Brown, JH, Spetich, MA, Heiligmann, RB (1989) Effects of frequency of chemical weed control on growth and quality of Christmas trees. Northern J Appl Forest 6:15–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colby, SR (1967) Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:20–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diggle, AJ, Neveand, PB, Smith, FP (2003) Herbicides used in combination can reduce the probability of herbicide resistance in finite weed populations. Weed Res 43:371–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fausey, JC (2003) Using flumioxazin on Christmas trees—a three year summary. Page 47 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Baltimore: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Heap, I (2019) The international survey of herbicide resistant weeds. Weeds resistant to EPSP synthase inhibitors. http://weedscience.org/Summary/MOA.aspx?MOAID=12. Accessed: February 18, 2019Google Scholar
Kuhns, LJ, Harpster, TL (2002) Efficacy and phytotoxicity of preemergence applications of flumioxazin and azafenidin in conifers. Pages 53–59 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Philadelphia: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Kuhns, LJ, Harpster, TL (2003) Weed control provided by fall or spring applications of flumioxazin in Christmas trees. Pages 50–55 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Baltimore: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Kuhns, LJ, Harpster, TL (2005a) Effect of the pre-mix combinations of Oust Extra and Westar on Douglas and Fraser fir. Pages 48–50 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Washington, DC: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Kuhns, LJ, Harpster, TL (2005b) Developing an herbicide program for Christmas trees Pages 55–59 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Washington, DC: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, KJ, Shropshire, C, Sikkema, PH (2014) Weed management in conventional- and no-till soybean using flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone. Weed Technol 28: 298–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peachey, E, Landgren, C, Miller, T (2017) Weed and vegetation management strategies in Christmas trees. Oregon State Univ. Bull. PNW-625. https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sites/catalog/files/project/pdf/pnw625.pdf. Accessed: March 18, 2019Google Scholar
Pesticide Management Education Program [PMEP] (1993) Oryzalin. PMEP Cornell University. http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/metiram-propoxur/oryzalin-ext.html. Accessed: September 24, 2019Google Scholar
Richardson, RJ, Zandstra, BH (2009) Weed control in Christmas trees with flumioxazin and other residual herbicides applied alone or in tank mixtures. Hort Technol 19:181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rick, SK, Martin, MJ, Ganske, DD, Holm, MF, Turner, RG (2005) Test results in eastern Christmas trees with a new blended product of sulfometuron-methyl and hexazinone. Page 54in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Washington, DC: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Ritter, RL, Kaufman, LM (1989) Giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) control in full-season no-till soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol 3:151–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosnoskie, LM, Hansen, B (2015) Mesotrione for weed control in orchards. Univ. of California Blog No. 19792. https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=19792. Accessed: April 15, 2019Google Scholar
United States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] (1980) Pesticide Regulation Standard for Metolachlor. http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/metiram-propoxur/metolachlor-ext.html#4. Accessed: July 5, 2019Google Scholar
Wei, L, Morrice, JJ, Tocco, RV, Zandstra, NH (2013) Fraser fir tolerance and weed control with hexazinone + sulfometuron-methyl. Hort Technol 23: 294–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weston, LA, Barlow, J, Ganske, D (2005) Evaluation of oust and Westar for use in Christmas tree species for season-long weed suppression. Page 53 in Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society. Washington, DC: Northeastern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Whaley, CM, Armel, GR, Wilson, HP, Himes, TE (2006) Comparison of mesotrione combinations with standard weed control programs in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 20:605–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar