Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:03:53.671Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Timing on Chemical Control of Dalmatian Toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) in California

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Guy B. Kyser  and
Joseph M. DiTomaso
Guy B. Kyser*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Joseph M. DiTomaso
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dalmatian toadflax is listed as a noxious weed in most of the western United States, but control of this species has not been extensively studied in California. Studies in other states show effective control of Dalmatian toadflax with picloram, but this herbicide is not registered for use in California. In addition, reports vary as to the optimal timing for herbicide applications. In this study we evaluated several herbicides with combined foliar and soil-residual activity at two times of application: postsenescence (fall) and rosette (winter to early spring). We applied two series of treatments (2008 and 2009 to 2010) on adjacent sites in high desert scrub of southern California. In the year of treatment and the following year, we evaluated Dalmatian toadflax cover and presence/absence of associated dominant species (≥ 5% cover). Although time of application, treatment, and timing by treatment interaction all produced significant differences in Dalmatian toadflax cover in the 2008 trial, only the high rate of aminocyclopyrachlor (280 g ae ha−1) applied to dormant plants in fall consistently reduced cover through the second year. No treatments at the rosette stage consistently produced 2 yr of control. In 2009 to 2010, treatments were more effective, probably owing to higher precipitation in spring. In both dormant and rosette applications made in 2009 to 2010, aminocyclopyrachlor (140 and 280 g ae ha−1) and aminocyclopyrachlor + chlorsulfuron (140 g ae ha−1 + 53 g ai ha−1) gave second year control; chlorsulfuron at the dormant stage (105 and 158 g ai ha−1) and aminopyralid at the rosette stage (245 g ae ha−1) also gave 2 yr of control. The treatments had only minor effects on grass species. The response of broadleaf species varied among treatments, with aminocyclopyrachlor at the high rate increasing Eriogonum spp., but greatly reducing Asteraceae species. These results provide options for the management of Dalmatian toadflax in California and other western states.

Keywords

AminocyclopyrachloraminopyralidchlorsulfuronpicloramDalmatian toadflax, Linaria dalmatica (L.) Mill. subsp. dalmatica LINDAEriogonum spp.Herbicideinvasivephenologyweed control
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 362 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Alex, J. F. 1962. The taxonomy, history, and distribution of Linaria dalmatica. Can. J. Bot. 40:295–307.Google Scholar
Alms, J. K., Moechnig, M. J., Vos, D. A., and Deneke, D. L. 2012. Yellow toadflax control with fall herbicide application. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 65:23–24.Google Scholar
Daniel, J. T., Cantlon, J. D., Turner, R., and Beck, K. G. 2010. Control of Dalmatian and yellow toadflax over five years in northern Colorado and southern Wyoming. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 63:5.Google Scholar
Davis, F. S., Merkle, M. G., and Bovey, R. W. 1968. Effect of moisture stress on the absorption and transport of herbicides in woody plants. Botanical Gazette 129:183–189.Google Scholar
Docherty, Z. 1982. Self-incompatibility in Linaria . Heredity 49:349–352.Google Scholar
Dodge, R. S., Fulé, P. Z., and Sieg, C. H. 2008. Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) response to wildfire in a southwestern USA forest. Ecoscience 15:213–222.Google Scholar
Duncan, C. A., Dewey, S. A., and Halstvedt, M. B. 1999. The effect of picloram and picloram plus 2,4-D on Dalmatian toadflax control. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 52:73–74.Google Scholar
Ferrell, M. A. and Whitson, T. D. 1989. Dalmatian toadflax control in rangeland. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep., 46 p.Google Scholar
Gates, D. H. and Robocker, W. C. 1960. Revegetation with adapted grasses in competition with Dalmatian toadflax and St. Johnswort. J. Range Manag. 13:322–326.Google Scholar
Hanson, D. E., Beck, K. G., and Sebastian, J. R. 1989. Dalmatian toadflax control in rangeland, Livermore, CO. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep., Pp. 31–32.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. S. and Sheley, R. L. 2003. Prescribed fire effects on Dalmatian toadflax. J. Range Manag. 56:193–197.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. S. and Sheley, R. L. 2005. The effect of picloram and chlorsulfuron application on Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria genistifolia) on prescribed burns. Weed Technol. 19:319–324.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. S. and Sing, S. 2006. Ecology and Management of Dalmatian Toadflax (Linaria dalmatica (L.) Mill.). US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, Invasive Species Technical Note No. MT-3. Bozeman, MT. 9 p.Google Scholar
Jamieson, M. A. and Bowers, M. D. 2010. Iridoid glycoside variation in the invasive plant Dalmatian toadflax, Linaria dalmatica (Plantaginaceae), and sequestration by the biological control agent, Calophasia lunula . J. Chem. Ecol. 36:70–79.Google Scholar
Jenks, B. M. 2012. Yellow toadflax control in rangeland with DPX-MAT28. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 65:23.Google Scholar
Kjær, C. and Elmegaard, N. 1996. Effect of herbicide treatment on host plant quality for a leaf-eating beetle. Pestic. Sci. 47:319–325.Google Scholar
Lacey, J. and Olson, B. 1991. Environmental and economic impacts of noxious range weeds. Pages 5–16 in James, L. F., Evans, J. O., Ralphs, M. H., and Child, R. D., eds. Noxious Range Weeds. Boulder, CO Westview.Google Scholar
Lajeunesse, S. E. 1999. Dalmatian and yellow toadflax. Pages 202–216 in Sheley, R. L. and Petroff, J. K., eds. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Corvallis Oregon State University Press.Google Scholar
Lajeunesse, S. E., Fay, P. K., Cooksey, D., Lacey, J. R., Nowierski, R. M., and Zamora, D. 1993. Dalmatian and yellow toadflax: weeds of pasture and rangeland. Bozeman Extension Service, Montana State University. 13 p.Google Scholar
Lange, A. W. 1958. Dalmatian toadflax—a possible rival of goatweed as a serious range weed. Weeds 6:68–70.Google Scholar
Lauridson, T. C., Wilson, R. G., and Haderlie, L. C. 1983. Effect of moisture stress on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) control. Weed Sci. 31:674–680.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Azlin, W. R. 1978. Effects of environment on the toxicity of glyphosate to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 26:605–608.Google Scholar
Morrison, R. G., Lownds, N. K., and Sterling, T. M. 1995. Picloram uptake, translocation, and efficacy in relation to water status of Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens). Weed Sci. 43:34–39.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D. and Woznica, Z. 1985. Environment and chlorsulfuron phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 33:395–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robocker, W. C. 1968. Control of Dalmatian toadflax. J. Range Manag. 21:94–98.Google Scholar
Robocker, W. C. 1970. Seed characteristics and seedling emergence of Dalmatian toadflax. Weed Sci. 18:720–725.Google Scholar
Robocker, W. C. 1974. Life history, ecology, and control of Dalmatian toadflax? Pullman Washington Agricultural Experiment Station, Washington State University Technical Bulletin 79. 20 p.Google Scholar
Robocker, W. C., Schirman, R., and Zamora, B. A. 1972. Carbohydrate reserves in roots of Dalmatian toadflax. Weed Sci. 20:212–214.Google Scholar
Rose, K. K., Hild, A. L., Whitson, T. D., Koch, D. W., and van Tassell, L. 2001. Competitive effects of cool-season grasses on re-establishment of three weed species. Weed Technol. 15:885–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sebastian, J. R. and Beck, K. G. 2010a. Yellow toadflax control in Colorado. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep., 30–31.Google Scholar
Sebastian, J. R. and Beck, K. G. 2010b. Yellow toadflax control in Colorado with aminocyclopyrachlor. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep., 32–33.Google Scholar
Sebastian, J. R., Beck, K. G., Sebastian, D., and Rodgers, S. 2012. Using aminocyclopyrachlor to control Dalmatian toadflax and promote native plant community recovery and diversity. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 65:51–52.Google Scholar
Sterling, T. M. and Lownds, N. K. 1992. Picloram absorption by broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) leaf tissue. Weed Sci. 40:390–394.Google Scholar
Wallace, J. and Prather, T. 2009. Dalmatian toadflax control using low rates of chlorsulfuron and two surfactants. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep., 41 p.Google Scholar
Wallace, J. and Prather, T. 2012. Yellow toadflax control with combinations of aminocyclopyrachlor and sulfonylureas at two application timings. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep., 14 p.Google Scholar
Ward, S. M., Fleischmann, C. E., Turner, M. F., and Sing, S. E. 2009. Hybridization between invasive populations of Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) and yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris). Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 2:369–378.Google Scholar
Wilson, L. M., Sing, S. E., Piper, G. L., Hansen, R. W., de Clerck-Floate, R., MacKinnon, D. K., and Randall, C. B. 2005. Biology and Biological Control of Dalmatian and Yellow Toadflax. Morgantown, WV USDA Forest Service, FHTET-05013. 116 p.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. 1999. Biostatistical Analysis. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice Hall. Pp. 273–281.Google Scholar