Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T19:58:45.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plant Cover Changes Following Herbicide Applications in Orchards

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Oscar E. Schubert
Oscar E. Schubert*
Affiliation:
Hort., Div. of Plant Sci., West Virginia Univ., Morgantown, West Virginia 26506
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Single applications of 4.48 and 22.4 kg/ha of the ester formulation of (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4,5-T ester), 2,4,5-T amine, and 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid (silvex) to the ground cover and soil under apple (Malus sylvestris Mill.) trees significantly reduced the proportion of broadleaf plants to grasses. After six annual applications of these herbicides, the ground cover consisted of almost pure stands of grasses. Six applications of 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol (dinoseb) + oil at 4.2 kg/ha + 374 L/ha and five times this rate decreased the proportion of broadleaf weeds to grasses, but one application did not change the proportion. One and six annual applications of dinoseb amine at 16.8 and 84 kg/ha significantly reduced the percentage of broadleaf weeds. One application of 3-amino-s-triazole (amitrole) at 4.48 kg/ha and six annual applications of amitrole at 22.4 kg/ha significantly decreased the percentage of broadleaf weeds. Six annual applications of 2,2-dichloropropionic acid (dalapon) + dinoseb amine at 47.6 + 84 kg/ha significantly increased the percentage of broadleaf weeds, especially mouseear chickweed (Cerastium vulgatum L.) and red sorrel (Rumex acetosella L.). Six annual applications of ammonium sulfamate (AMS) at 168 and 840 kg/ha increased the proportion of grasses to broadleaf weeds as did a single application at 168 kg/ha. AMS caused phytotoxic symptoms on young apple replants at the 168-kg/ha rate and also on mature trees at the 840-kg/ha rate. No phytotoxic symptoms were noted with the other herbicides applied.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , January 1972 , pp. 124 - 127
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. Curtis, O. F. Jr. 1968. New herbicides and problem weeds. New York State Hort. Soc. 113:259–263.Google Scholar
2. Lange, A. H., Elmore, C. L., Morehead, G. W., Stilwell, E. K., McRitchie, S. M., Chaney, D. H., Smith, J. J., Hendricks, L. C., Carlson, C. V., and Roberts, K. O. 1967. Weed control in apples and pears. Univ. of California Agr. Ext. Serv. Prog. Rep. AXT-285:1–17.Google Scholar
3. Lord, W. J., Damon, R. A. Jr., and Gersten, B. 1968. Effects of simazine alone and in combination with hay or plastic mulch on ‘McIntosh’ apple trees and accumulation of simazine residues. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 93:62–70.Google Scholar
4. Lord, W. J., Vlach, E. F., and Damon, R. A. Jr. 1967. Response of ‘Jerseyland’ peach trees to three consecutive yearly herbicide applications of simazine and dalapon alone and in combination. HortScience 2:146–148.Google Scholar
5. Putnam, A. R. 1969. The consequences of repeated herbicide applications in new fruit plantings. Michigan State Hort. Soc. 99th Annu. Rep. pp. 64–65.Google Scholar
6. Putnam, A. R. and Price, H. C. 1969. Tolerance of rootstocks and established Malus, Pyrus, and Prunus trees to terbacil. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 94:655–658.Google Scholar
7. Schubert, O. E. 1959. Effect of recommended and excessive rates of certain herbicides to apple trees of varying ages. Proc. Northeast. Weed Contr. Conf. 13:62–63.Google Scholar
8. Schubert, O. E. and Amato, V. A. 1957. Chemical weed control—is it practical for young orchards? West Virginia Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 393(3):4–5.Google Scholar
9. Skroch, W. A. 1970. Weed population shifts in apple orchards. Proc. So. Weed Sci. Soc. 23:217.Google Scholar