Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T03:24:03.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Control in Sugar Beets by Combinations of Thiolcarbamate Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

E. F. Sullivan ,
R. L. Abrams  and
R. R. Wood
E. F. Sullivan
Affiliation:
Agricultural Experiment Station, The Great Western Sugar Company, Longmont, Colorado
R. L. Abrams
Affiliation:
Agricultural Experiment Station, The Great Western Sugar Company, Longmont, Colorado
R. R. Wood
Affiliation:
Agricultural Experiment Station, The Great Western Sugar Company, Longmont, Colorado
Get access

Abstract

The herbicides n-propyl ethyl-n-butylthiolcarbamate (PEBC), PEBC + 2,3-dichloroallyl diisopropylthiol-carbamate (DATC), PEBC + ethyl N,N-di-n-propylthiolcarbamate (EPTC), and PEBC + 2,3,3-trichloroallyl diisopropyldithiolcarbamate (CP-22819) among others produced effective control of lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), Setaria spp. and other weed species without undue injury to sugar beet seedlings. PEBC + DATC also gave control of wild oat (Avena fatua), and increased the control of lambsquarters; however, this latter effect was inversely related to the control of other broad-leaved weeds. Control equal to PEBC was produced by PEBC + EPTC with 2.5 lb. less total active ingredient per acre. The herbicide 3,6-endoxohexahydrophthalic acid (endothal) gave inferior control of weeds. None of the herbicides tested effectively controlled kochia (Kochia scoparia).

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , October 1963 , pp. 258 - 260
Copyright
Copyright © 1963 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. Alley, H. P., Chamberlain, E. W., Becker, C. F., and Costel, G. L. 1961. Weed control in sugar beets. Wyoming Agr. Expt. Sta. Mimeo Cir. No. 159.Google Scholar
2. Antognini, J. 1958. Activity of EPTC as affected by soil moisture at the time of application. Proc. NCWCC 12:398.Google Scholar
3. Ascheman, R. E., Zielke, R. C., and Stroube, E. W. 1961. Herbicides in sugar beets. Res. Rpt. NCWCC 18:69.Google Scholar
4. Ashton, F. M. and Dunster, K. 1961. The herbicidal effect of EPTC, CDEC, and CDAA on Echinochloa crusgalli with various depths of soil incorporation. Weeds 9:312–317.Google Scholar
5. Comes, R. D., Bohmont, D. W., and Alley, H. P. 1961. Movement and persistence of endothal (3,6-endoxohexahydrophthalic acid) as influenced by soil texture, temperature, and moisture levels. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol. 11:287–293.Google Scholar
6. Danielson, L. L., Gentner, W. A., and Jansen, L. L. 1961. Persistence of soil-incorporated EPTC and other carbamates. Weeds 9:469–476.Google Scholar
7. Eckroth, E. G., Holst, E. M., and Cormany, C. E. 1958. Chemical control of annual grasses in sugar beets in Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol. 10:156–164.Google Scholar
8. Nelson, R. T. 1952. Trials with herbicides for weed control in sugar beets. Proc. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol. 7:121–125.Google Scholar
9. Nelson, R. T. 1954. Grass control in sugar beet with the herbicides IPC, TCA and DCU. Proc. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol. 8:130–134.Google Scholar
10. Sexsmith, J. J. 1960. Chemical control of wild oats (Avena fatua L.) in sugar beets. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol. 11:268–278.Google Scholar
11. Sheets, T. J. 1960. Effects of soil type and time on the herbicidal activity of CDAA, CDEC, and EPTC. Weeds 7:442–448.Google Scholar