We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Herbicides have been a primary means of managing undesirable brush on grazing lands across the southwestern United States for decades. Continued encroachment of honey mesquite and huisache on grazing lands warrants evaluation of treatment life and economics of current and experimental treatments. Treatment life is defined as the time between treatment application and when canopy cover of undesirable brush returns to a competitive level with native forage grasses (i.e., 25% canopy cover for mesquite and 30% canopy cover for huisache). Treatment life of industry-standard herbicides was compared with that of aminocyclopyrachlor plus triclopyr amine (ACP+T) from 10 broadcast-applied honey mesquite and five broadcast-applied huisache trials established from 2007 through 2013 across Texas. On average, the treatment life of industry standard treatments (IST) for huisache was 3 yr. In comparison, huisache canopy cover was only 2.5% in plots treated with ACP+T 3 yr after treatment. The average treatment life of IST for honey mesquite was 8.6 yr, whereas plots treated with ACP+T had just 2% mesquite canopy cover at that time. Improved treatment life of ACP+T compared with IST life was due to higher mortality resulting in more consistent brush canopy reduction. The net present values (NPVs) of ACP+T and IST for both huisache and mesquite were similar until the treatment life of the IST application was reached (3 yr for huisache and 8.6 yr for honey mesquite). At that point, NPVs of the programs diverged as a result of brush competition with desirable forage grasses and additional input costs associated with theoretical follow-up IST necessary to maintain optimum livestock forage production. The ACP+T treatments did not warrant a sequential application over the 12-yr analysis for huisache or 20-yr analysis for honey mesquite that this research covered. These results indicate ACP+T provides cost-effective, long-term control of honey mesquite and huisache.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.