Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T22:11:17.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Smutgrass (Sporobolus poiretii) Control in Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) Pastures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

B. J. Brecke
B. J. Brecke*
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Center, Jay, FL 32565
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dalapon (2,2-dichloropropionic acid), tebuthiuron {N-[5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl]-N,N′-dimethylurea}, and hexazinone [3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione] were evaluated for smutgrass [Sporobolus poiretii (R.&S.) Hitchc] control in bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum Flugge.) pastures. Dalapon and hexazinone provided the best smutgrass control but injured the bahiagrass. Forage treated with hexazinone at 1.7 kg/ha or less recovered within 6 months; however, the effects of the initial injury from dalapon at 2.2 kg/ha could be detected for as long as 2 yr after treatment. Dogfennel [Eupatorium capillifolium (Lam.) Small] and broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus L.) replaced smutgrass and bahiagrass removed by dalapon. Higher rates of tebuthiuron than hexazinone (3.4 vs. 1.1 kg/ha) were required to control smutgrass adequately.

Keywords

Forage grass injurydalapontebuthiuronhexazinone
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 29 , Issue 5 , September 1981 , pp. 553 - 555
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

1. Currey, W. L., Parrado, R., and Jones, D. W. 1973. Seed characteristics of smutgrass (Sporobolus poiretii . Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. of Fla. Proc. 32:53–54.Google Scholar
2. Currey, W. L., Persad, N. K., Mislevy, P., Jones, D. W., and Mott, G. O. 1977. Comparisons of forage quality for smutgrass and Pensacola bahiagrass. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:376.Google Scholar
3. Hitchcock, A. S. 1950. Manual of the grasses of the United States. 2nd Ed. U.S. Dep. Agric. Misc. Publ. 200. 1051 pp.Google Scholar
4. McCaleb, J. E., and Hodges, E. M. 1971. Smutgrass control at Range Cattle Station; Ona, Florida. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:182–186.Google Scholar
5. McCaleb, J. E., Hodges, E. M., and Kirk, W. G. 1963. Smutgrass control. Fla. Agric. Exp. Stn. Cir. S-149. 10 pp.Google Scholar
6. Meyer, R. E., and Baur, J. R. 1979. Smutgrass (Sporobolus poiretii) control in pastures with herbicides. Weed Sci. 27:361–366.Google Scholar
7. Mislevy, P., and Currey, W. L. 1980. Smutgrass (Sporobolus poiretii) control in South Florida. Weed Sci. 28:316–320.Google Scholar
8. Mislevy, P., Currey, W. L., and Brecke, B. J. 1980. Herbicide and cultural practices in smutgrass (Sporobolus poiretii) control. Weed Sci. 28:585–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar