Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T16:22:35.648Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Granular vs. Liquid Formulations of Picloram, HRS 587, Fenac, and 2,3,6-TBA for Control of Field Bindweed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Dwane E. Lavake ,
Allen F. Wiese  and
E. Wayne Chenault
Dwane E. Lavake
Affiliation:
Texas A&M University, U. S. Dep. of Agr. Southwestern Great Plains Research Center, Bushland, Texas
Allen F. Wiese
Affiliation:
Texas A&M University, U. S. Dep. of Agr. Southwestern Great Plains Research Center, Bushland, Texas
E. Wayne Chenault
Affiliation:
Texas A&M University, U. S. Dep. of Agr. Southwestern Great Plains Research Center, Bushland, Texas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Better field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.) control was obtained from granular formulations of 2,3,6-trichlorobenzyloxypropanol (hereinafter referred to as HRS 587), 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloropicolinic acid (picloram), (2,3,6-trichlorophenyl)acetic acid (fenac), and 2,3,6-trichlorobenzoic acid (2,3,6-TBA) than with equivalent amounts of liquid formulations. Two years after application, a granular formulation of picloram at 1 lb/A was as effective as a liquid formulation at 3 lb/A. One and 2 years after application, granular formulations of HRS 587, fenac and 2,3,6-TBA at 10 lb/A gave field bindweed control equal to that obtained with 20 lb/A of liquid formulations of these chemicals. Incorporation did not greatly affect the toxicity of either the liquid or granular formulations of the four herbicides. Increased effectiveness of granular formulations appeared to be associated with longer persistence in the soil.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , May 1970 , pp. 341 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 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. Burnside, O. C., Wicks, G. A., and Fenster, C. R. 1963. The effect of rainfall and soil type on the disappearance of 2,3,6-TBA. Weeds 11:45–47.Google Scholar
2. Dowler, Clyde C., Sand, Paul F., and Robinson, E. L. 1963. The effect of soil type on preplanting soil-incorporated herbicides for witchweed control. Weeds 11:276–279.Google Scholar
3. Hall, R. C., Giam, C. S., and Merkle, M. G. 1968. The photolytic degradation of picloram. Weed Res. 8:292–297.Google Scholar
4. Phillips, W. M. 1959. New chemicals to control field bindweed. Kansas Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 408. 5 p.Google Scholar
5. Phillips, W. M. 1959. Residual herbicidal activity of some chloro-substituted benzoic acids in soil. Weeds 7:284–294.Google Scholar
6. Phillips, W. M. 1960. The chloro-substituted benzoic acids for control of field bindweed. Weeds 8:63–70.Google Scholar
7. Phillips, W. M. 1968. Persistence and movement of 2,3,6-TBA in soil. Weed Sci. 16:144–148.Google Scholar
8. Wiese, A. F. and Rea, H. E. 1961. Control of field bindweed and other perennial weeds with benzoic and phenylacetic acids. Weeds 9:423–428.Google Scholar
9. Wiese, A. F. and Rea, H. E. 1958. Preliminary results with 2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid for eradicating perennial weeds. Proc. No. Centr. Weed Contr. Conf. 15:21.Google Scholar