Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T15:59:57.582Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Herbicide Comparisons on Quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) Within Different Crop Competition and Tillage Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

K. Neil Harker
Affiliation:
Agric. Can. Res. Stn., Bag Service 5000, Lacombe, AB, Canada T0C 1S0
P. A. O'Sullivan
Affiliation:
Agric. Can. Res. Stn., Bag Service 5000, Lacombe, AB, Canada T0C 1S0

Abstract

Five herbicides (cloproxydim, fluazifop, haloxyfop, quizalofop, and sethoxydim) were compared from 1984 to 1988 at 250 and 400 g ha−1 for controlling quackgrass within different crop competition and tillage conditions at the Lacombe Research Station. Crop competition usually augmented quackgrass control with the herbicides in conventional-tillage plots although direct statistical comparisons were not made. Without crop competition, haloxyfop and quizalofop at 250 g ha−1 were more effective than the other herbicides in conventional tillage 1 mo after treatment (MAT). In a conventional-tillage situation on a unit active ingredient basis, the herbicides ranked in order of decreasing activity as follows: quizalofop ≥ haloxyfop > fluazifop > cloproxydim > sethoxydim. In a zero-tillage situation, none of the herbicides reduced quackgrass shoot weights by 50% 3 MAT. However, haloxyfop and quizalofop were more effective in suppressing quackgrass shoot weight than the other herbicides in the zero-tillage experiments 3 MAT.

Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 by the 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. Alberta Agriculture. 1992. Crop Protection with Chemicals. Agdex 606-1, Edmonton, Alberta. 256 pp.Google Scholar
2. Buhler, D. D. and Burnside, O. C. 1984. Herbicide activity of fluazifop-butyl, haloxyfop-methyl, and sethoxydim in soil. Weed Sci. 32:824831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Burton, J. D., Gronwald, J. W., Somers, D. A., Gengenbach, B. G., and Wyse, D. L. 1989. Inhibition of corn acetyl-CoA carboxylase by cyclohexanedione and aryloxyphenoxypropionate herbicides. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 34:7685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Dekker, J. H. and Chandler, K. 1985. Herbicide effect on the viability of quackgrass (Agropyron repens) rhizome buds. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65:10571064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Gronwald, J. W. 1991. Lipid biosynthesis inhibitors. Weed Sci. 39:435449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Harker, K. N. and Dekker, J. 1988. Effects of phenology on translocation patterns of several herbicides in quackgrass (Agropyron repens). Weed Sci. 36:463472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Harker, K. N. and Dekker, J. 1988. Temperature effects on translocation patterns of several herbicides within quackgrass (Agropyron repens). Weed Sci. 36:545552.Google Scholar
8. Hicks, C. P. and Jordan, T. N. 1984. Response of bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon), quackgrass (Agropyron repens), and wirestem muhly (Muhlenbergia frondosa) to postemergence grass herbicides. Weed Sci. 32:835841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Ivany, J. A. 1988. Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) control in potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) with fluazifop. Weed Sci. 36:363366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Johnson, B. G. and Buchholtz, K. P. 1962. The natural dormancy of vegetative buds on the rhizomes of quackgrass. Weeds 10:5357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Kirkland, K. J. 1990. Preharvest quackgrass (Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.) control. Pages 127134 in Proc. Quackgrass Symp. Oct. 24–25. London, Ontario.Google Scholar
12. Morrison, I. N., Wilcox, D., Chikoye, D., and Nawolsky, K. 1990. Quackgrass (Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.) interference in spring wheat and flax. Pages 7584 in Proc. Quackgrass Symp. Oct. 24–25. London, Ontario.Google Scholar
13. O'Donovan, J. T. 1991. Quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) interference in canola (Brassica campestris). Weed Sci. 39:397401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Rioux, R. 1982. Measuring quackgrass interference in barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:183188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Sikkema, P. H. and Dekker, J. 1987. Use of infrared thermometry in determining critical stress periods induced by quackgrass (Agropyron repens) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 35:784791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1978. Sampling of attributes-Chapter 1. Page 27 in Snedecor, G. and Cochran, W., eds. Statistical Methods. 6th ed. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
17. Stoltenberg, D. E. and Wyse, D. L. 1986. Regrowth of quackgrass (Agropyron repens) following postemergence applications of haloxyfop and sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 34:664668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Walker, K. A., Ridley, S. M., Lewis, T., and Harwood, J. L. 1989. Action of aryloxyphenoxy carboxylic acids on lipid metabolism. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:7184.Google Scholar
19. Werner, P. A. and Rioux, R. 1977. The biology of Canadian weeds. 24. Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. Can. J. Plant Sci. 57:905919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Young, F. L. and Wyse, D. L. 1980. Control of quackgrass (Agropyron repens) in soybeans (Glycine max) with HOE 29152. Weed Sci. 28:493498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Young, F. L., Wyse, D. L., and Jones, R. J. 1984. Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) interference on corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 32:226234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Zavon, J. 1987. Herbicide-resistant crops: Who would profit and how? Seed World. May:1618.Google Scholar