Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T09:01:58.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of indaziflam on native species in natural areas and rangeland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2019

Shannon L. Clark Open the ORCID record for Shannon L. Clark [Opens in a new window] ,
Derek J. Sebastian Open the ORCID record for Derek J. Sebastian [Opens in a new window] ,
Scott J. Nissen  and
James R. Sebastian
Shannon L. Clark*
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Derek J. Sebastian
Affiliation:
Western Area Sales Manager, Bayer Vegetation Management, Bayer U.S., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
Scott J. Nissen
Affiliation:
Professor and Extension Specialist, Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
James R. Sebastian
Affiliation:
Weed Resource Specialist, Boulder County Parks and Open Space, Longmont, CO, USA
*
*Author for correspondence: Shannon L. Clark, Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1177. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Minimizing the negative ecological impacts of exotic plant invasions is one goal of land management. Using selective herbicides is one strategy to achieve this goal; however, the unintended consequences of this strategy are not always fully understood. The recently introduced herbicide indaziflam has a mode of action not previously used in non-crop weed management. Thus, there is limited information about the impacts of this active ingredient when applied alone or in combination with other non-crop herbicides. The objective of this research was to evaluate native species tolerance to indaziflam and imazapic applied alone and with other broadleaf herbicides. Replicated field plots were established at two locations in Colorado with a diverse mix of native forbs and grasses. Species richness and abundance were compared between the nontreated control plots and plots where indaziflam and imazapic were applied alone and in combination with picloram and aminocyclopyrachlor. Species richness and abundance did not decrease when indaziflam or imazapic were applied alone; however, species abundance was reduced by treatments containing picloram and aminocyclopyrachlor. Species richness was only impacted at one site 1 yr after treatment (YAT) by these broadleaf herbicides. Decreases in abundance were mainly due to reductions in forbs that resulted in a corresponding increase in grass cover. Our data suggest that indaziflam will control downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.) for multiple years without reduction in perennial species richness or abundance. If B. tectorum is present with perennial broadleaf weeds requiring the addition of herbicides like picloram or aminocyclopyrachlor, forb abundance could be reduced, and in some cases there could be a temporary reduction in perennial species richness.

Keywords

James K. Leary, Jane M. Mangold, Montana State UniversityAbundanceBromus tectorumherbicide tolerancerangeland weedsspecies richness
Type
Research Article
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 60 - 67
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

Abatzoglou, JT, Kolden, CA (2011) Climate change in western US deserts: potential for increased wildfire and invasive annual grasses. Rangeland Ecol Manag 64:471–478 Google Scholar
Anderson, MJ (2001) Permutation tests for univariate or multivariate analysis of variance and regression. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:626–639 Google Scholar
Anderson, MJ, Gorley, RN, Clarke, RK (2008) Permanova+ for Primer: guide to software and statistical methods. Plymouth, UK: Primer-E Limited Google Scholar
Anderson, MJ, Walsh, DC (2013) PERMANOVA, ANOSIM, and the Mantel test in the face of heterogeneous dispersions: what null hypothesis are you testing? Ecol Monogr 83:557–574 Google Scholar
Anonymous (1996) Plateau® herbicide, for weed control, native grass establishment and turf growth suppression on roadsides and other noncrop areas. PE47013. Parsippany, NJ: American Cyanamid Company. 17 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2011a) Indaziflam 500 SC herbicide product label. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer CropScience. 11 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2011b) Indaziflam 74SC herbicide product label. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer Environmental Science. 16 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016) Esplanade® 200SC supplemental label- for release or restoration of desirable vegetation. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer Environmental Science. 2 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2018) Tordon® 22k herbicide product label. Indianapolis, IN: Dow AgroSciences. 11 pGoogle Scholar
Arnold, WR, Santelmann, PW (1966) The response of native grasses and forbs to picloram. Weeds 14:74–76 Google Scholar
Beck, KG (2009) Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum) and Japanese Brome (Bromus japonicus) Biology, Ecology, and Management. http://mining.state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/DownybromeandJapanesebromeliteraturereviewColoradoDRMSDec09.pdf. Accessed: July 21, 2018Google Scholar
Beran, DD, Masters, RA, Gaussoin, RE (1999) Grassland legume establishment with imazethapyr and imazapic. Agron J 91:592–596 Google Scholar
Billings, WD (1994) Ecological Impacts of Cheatgrass and Resultant Fire on Ecosystems in the Western Great Basin. General Technical Rep INT-GTR-313. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_int/int_gtr313/int_gtr313_022_030.pdf. Accessed: July 18, 2018Google Scholar
Brabham, C, Lei, L, Gu, Y, Stork, J, Barrett, M, DeBolt, S (2014) Indaziflam herbicidal action: a potent cellulose biosynthesis inhibitor. Plant Physiol 166:1177–1185 Google Scholar
Bray, JR, Curtis, JT (1957) An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol Monogr 27:325–349 Google Scholar
Carter, TR, Lym, RG (2018) Native forb response to aminocyclopyrachlor. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 11:56–60 Google Scholar
Chambers, JC, Pyke, DA, Maestas, JD, Pellant, M, Boyd, CS, Campbell, SB, Espinosa, S, Havlina, DW, Mayer, KE, Wuenschel, A (2014) Using Resistance and Resilience Concepts to Reduce Impacts of Invasive Annual Grasses and Altered Fire Regimes on the Sagebrush Ecosystem and Greater Sage-Grouse: A Strategic Multi-scale Approach. General Technical Rep RMRS-GTR-326. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr326.pdf. Accessed: July 18, 2018Google Scholar
Clarke, KR, Gorley, RN, 2015. PRIMER v7: User Manual/Tutorial. Plymouth, UK: PRIMER-E. 296p Google Scholar
Davies, KW, Sheley, RL (2011) Promoting native vegetation and diversity in exotic annual grass infestations. Ecol Restor 19:159–165 Google Scholar
Davison, JC, Smith, EG (2007) Imazapic provides 2-year control of weedy annuals in a seeded Great Basin fuelbreak. Native Plants J 8:91–96 Google Scholar
Diamond, JM, Call, CA, Devoe, N (2012) Effects of targeted grazing and prescribed burning on community and seed dynamics of a downy brome (Bromus tectorum)–dominated landscape. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 5:259–269 Google Scholar
DiTomaso, JM, Masters, RA, Peterson, VF (2010) Rangeland invasive plant management. Rangelands 32:43–47 Google Scholar
Duncan, CA, Jachetta, JJ, Brown, ML, Carrithers, VF, Clark, JK, DiTomaso, JM, Lym, RG, McDaniel, KC, Renz, MJ, Rice, PM (2004) Assessing the economic, environmental, and societal losses from invasive plants on rangeland and wildlands. Weed Technol 18:1411–1416 Google Scholar
Elseroad, AC, Rudd, NT (2011) Can imazapic increase native species abundance in cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) invaded native plant communities? Rangeland Ecol Manag 64:641–648 Google Scholar
Evans, RA, Eckert, RE, Burgess, KL, Young, JA (1969) Downy brome control by soil-active herbicides for revegetation of rangelands. Weed Sci 17:166–169 Google Scholar
Greet, BJ, Mealor, BA, Kniss, AR (2016) Response of Delphinium occidentale and associated vegetation to aminocyclopyrachlor. Rangeland Ecol Manag 69:474–480 Google Scholar
Kelley, WK, Fernandez-Gimenez, ME, Brown, CS (2013) Managing downy brome (Bromus tectorum) in the Central Rockies: land manager perspectives. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 6:521–535 Google Scholar
Knapp, PA (1996) Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L) dominance in the Great Basin Desert: history, persistence, and influences to human activities. Global Environ Chang 6:37–52 Google Scholar
Kyser, GB, DiTomaso, JM, Doran, MP, Orloff, SB, Wilson, RG, Lancaster, DL, Lile, DF, Porath, ML (2007) Control of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) and other annual grasses with imazapic. Weed Technol 21:66–75 Google Scholar
Kyser, GB, Wilson, RG, Zhang, J, DiTomaso, JM (2013) Herbicide-assisted restoration of Great Basin sagebrush steppe infested with medusahead and downy brome. Rangeland Ecol Manag 66:588–596 Google Scholar
Mack, RN (1981) Invasion of Bromus tectorum L. into western North America: an ecological chronicle. Agro-Ecosystems 7:145–165 Google Scholar
Mack, RN, Pyke, DA (1983) The demography of Bromus tectorum: variation in time and space. J Ecol 1:69–93 Google Scholar
Mangold, J, Parkinson, H, Duncan, C, Rice, P, Davis, E, Menalled, F (2013) Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) control with imazapic on Montana grasslands. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 6:554–558 Google Scholar
Monaco, TA, Osmond, TM, Dewey, SA (2005) Medusahead control with fall and spring-applied herbicides on northern Utah foothills. Weed Technol 19:653–658 Google Scholar
Monaco, TA, Mangold, JM, Mealor, BA, Mealor, RD, Brown, CS (2017) Downy brome control and impacts on perennial grass abundance: a systematic review spanning 64 years. Rangeland Ecol Manag 70:396–404 Google Scholar
Morris, C, Monaco, TA, Rigby, CW (2009) Variable impacts of imazapic rate on downy brome (Bromus tectorum) and seeded species in two rangeland communities. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 2:110–119 Google Scholar
Ortega, YK, Pearson, DE (2011) Long-term effects of weed control with picloram along a gradient of spotted knapweed invasion. Rangeland Ecol Manag 64:67–77 Google Scholar
Price, R, Parker, KW, Hull, AG Jr. (1948) Range practices and problems. Grass: The Yearbook of Agriculture 1948. U.S. Department of Agriculture, p 557–560Google Scholar
R Core Team (2017) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org Accessed: April 30, 2018Google Scholar
Sebastian, DJ, Fleming, MB, Patterson, EL, Sebastian, JR, Nissen, SJ (2017a) Indaziflam: a new cellulose‐biosynthesis‐inhibiting herbicide provides long‐term control of invasive winter annual grasses. Pest Manag Sci 73:2149–2162 Google Scholar
Sebastian, DJ, Nissen, SJ, Sebastian, JR, Beck, KG (2017b) Seed bank depletion: the key to long-term downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.) management. Rangeland Ecol Manag 70:477–483 Google Scholar
Sebastian, DJ, Nissen, SJ, Westra, P, Shaner, DL, Butters, G (2017c) Influence of soil properties and soil moisture on the efficacy of indaziflam and flumioxazin on Kochia scoparia L. Pest Manag Sci 73:444–451 Google Scholar
Sebastian, DJ, Sebastian, JR, Nissen, SJ, Beck, KG (2016) A potential new herbicide for invasive annual grass control on rangeland. Rangeland Ecol Manag 69:195–198 Google Scholar
Shinn, SL, Thill, DC (2002) The response of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), annual grasses, and smooth brome (Bromus inermis) to imazapic and picloram. Weed Technol 16:366–370 Google Scholar
Tateno, M, Brabham, C, DeBolt, S (2016) Cellulose biosynthesis inhibitors—a multifunctional toolbox. J Exp Bot 67:533–542 Google Scholar
Thacker, E, Ralphs, MH, Monaco, TA (2009) Seeding cool-season grasses to suppress broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae), downy brome (Bromus tectorum), and weedy forbs. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 2:237–246 Google Scholar
Thill, DC, Beck, KG, Callihan, RH (1984) The biology of downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Weed Sci 32:7–12 Google Scholar
Thilmony, BM, Lym, RG (2017) Effect of aminocyclopyrachlor on native prairie species in the Northern Great Plains. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 10:201–209 Google Scholar
[USDA-NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2014) Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed: April 30, 2018Google Scholar
Wagner, V, Nelson, CR (2014) Herbicides can negatively affect seed performance in native plants. Ecol Restor 22:288–291 Google Scholar
Warg, SA (1938) Life History and Economic Studies on Bromus tectorum. Master’s thesis. Missoula, MT: University of Montana. 38 pGoogle Scholar
Western Regional Climate Center (2018) Cooperative Climatological Data Summaries. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/climatedata/climsum. Accessed: April 30, 2018Google Scholar
Whisenant, SG (1990) Changing fire frequencies on Idaho’s Snake River Plains: ecological and management implications. Pages 4–10 in McArthur ED, Romney EM, Smith SD, Tueller PT, eds. Proceedings of the Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station General Technical Report INT–276. 351 pGoogle Scholar
Whitson, TD, Koch, DW (1998) Control of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) with herbicides and perennial grass competition. Weed Technol 1:391–396 Google Scholar
Whitson, TD, Majerus, ME, Hall, RD, Jenkins, JD (1997) Effects of herbicides on grass seed production and downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Weed Technol 1:644–648 Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Image

Clark et al. supplementary material

Clark et al. supplementary material 1

Download Clark et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 298.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Clark et al. supplementary material

Clark et al. supplementary material 2

Download Clark et al. supplementary material(File)
File 18.4 KB