Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:25:12.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fomesafen Crop Tolerance and Weed Control in Processing Tomato

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2017

Mohsen Mohseni-Moghadam Open the ORCID record for Mohsen Mohseni-Moghadam [Opens in a new window]  and
Douglas Doohan
Mohsen Mohseni-Moghadam
Affiliation:
Research Associate, The Center for Applied Genetic Technologies, University of Georgia, 111 Riverbend Road, Athens, GA 30602
Douglas Doohan*
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Horticulture and Crop Science, 1680 Madison Avenue, The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, OH 44691
*
*Corresponding author’s E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at the North Central Agricultural Research Station in Fremont, OH in 2009 and 2010 to evaluate the tolerance of tomato to fomesafen and the efficacy of this herbicide on weed control. The crop was machine-transplanted in June 5, 2009 and June 3, 2010. Herbicide treatments were applied using a CO2 pressurized (276 kPa) backpack sprayer with 8002VS nozzle tips delivering 234 L ha−1. Pre-transplant (PRETP) treatments were applied on June 4, 2009, and May 27, 2010. Treatments included fomesafen at 280, 350, 420, 560, and 840 g ai ha−1. Minimal crop injury was observed 7 and 14 d after treatment (DAT) in plots treated with fomesafen at 840 g ha−1 both years. None of the treatments caused crop injury either year at 42 DAT. Fomesafen at the highest rate provided acceptable annual grass, common purslane, and redroot pigweed control 42 DAT. Tomato yield was not reduced by the application of fomesafen. Registration of fomesafen herbicide would provide tomato growers an opportunity to control weeds caused by late emergence or poor initial control following a burndown herbicide application in tomato.

Keywords

Fomesafentomato, Solanum lycopersicum L.Crop toleranceherbicide efficacy
Type
Weed Management-Other Crops/Areas
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , June 2017 , pp. 441 - 446
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor for this paper: Steve Fennimore, University of California, Davis.

References

Literature Cited

Adalid, A, Roselló, S, Nuez, F (2004) Breeding tomatoes for their high nutritional value. Recent Res Dev Plant Sci 2:33–52 Google Scholar
Anonymous (2014) OARDC Weather System. http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/newweather/stationinfo.asp?id=1. Accessed February 21, 2015Google Scholar
Boyd, NS (2015) Evaluation of preemergence herbicides for purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control in tomato. Weed Technol 29:480–487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campiglia, E, Radicetti, E, Maneinelli, R (2012) Weed control strategies and yield response in a pepper crop (Capsicum annuum L.) mulched with hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth.) and oat (Avena sativa L.) residues. Crop Prot 33:65–73 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmer, SG, Nyquist, WE, Walker, WM (1989) Least significant differences for combined analyses of experiments with two- and three-factor treatment designs. Agron J 81:665–672 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudhari, S, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW, Jordan, DL, Gunter, CC, Basinger, NT, Louws, FJ (2016) Response of eggplant (Solanum melongena) grafted onto tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) rootstock to herbicides. Weed Technol 30:207–216 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devkota, P, Norwsorthy, JK, Rainey, R (2013) Comparison of allyl isothiocyanate and metham sodium with methyl bromide for weed control in polyethylene-mulched bell pepper. Weed Technol 27:468–474 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friesen, GH (1979) Weed interference in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Sci 27:11–13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frusciante, L, Carli, P, Maria, R, Ercolano, S, Pernice, R, Matteo, AD, Fogliano, V, Pellegrini, N (2007) Antioxidant nutritional quality of tomato. Mol Nutr Food Res 51:609–617 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garvey, PV Jr, Meyers, SL, Monks, DW (2013) Influence of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) on the critical period for weed control in plasticulture-grown tomato. Weed Technol 27:165–170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, DH, Talbert, RE (1993) Imazaquin, chlorimuron, and fomesafen may injure rotational vegetables and sunflower (Helianthus annuus). Weed Technol 7:573–577 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemble, JM, Tyson, TW, Curtis, LM (2004) Guide to Commercial Staked Tomato Production in Alabama. Auburn, AL: Auburn University Cooperative Extension Service Google Scholar
Lament, WJ (1993) Plastic mulches for the production of vegetable crops. Hort Technol 3:35–39 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGiffen, ME, Masiunas, JB, Hesketh, J (1992) Competition for light between tomatoes and nightshades (Solanum nigrum and S. ptycanthum). Weed Sci 40:220–226 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[NASS] National Agricultural Statistics Service (2014) Statistics by Subject. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/results/5EE4DA57-5396-3AC8-BD1F-FB4B5653D983. Accessed August 15, 2016Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Oliver, MJ, Jha, P, Malik, M, Buckelew, JK, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW (2008) Palmer amaranth and large crabgrass growth with plasticulture-grown bell pepper. Weed Technol 22:296–302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, DE, Soltani, N, Hamill, AS, Sikkema, PH (2006) Weed control in processing tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) with rimsulfuron and thifensulfuron applied alone or with chlorothalonil or copper pesticides. HortScience 41:1295–1297 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, DC, Cook, WP, Cranberry, D (1996) Plasticulture of Commercial Vegetables. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Services Pub. AG-489. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State UniversityGoogle Scholar
Sant, CC (2014) Evaluation of PRE and POST Applied Herbicides along with Cover Crop Residue for Control of Escape Weed Species in Tomato Production Systems. Master’s thesis. Auburn, AL: Auburn University. 67 pGoogle Scholar
Shrefler, MT, Brandenberger, L, Webber, CL (2013) Evaluation of Reflex (fomesafen) herbicide for watermelon in Oklahoma. Page 12 in Southern Region of the American Society for Horticultural Science, February 1–5, 2013. Orlando, Florida: American Society for Horticultural ScienceGoogle Scholar
Trader, BW, Wilson, HP, Hagood, ES, Hines, TE (2009) Halosulfuron resistance in smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus) populations. Weed Technol 23:460–464 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, SE, Smits, N, Tan, CS (1987) Estimating yield losses of tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum) caused by nightshade (Solanum spp.) interference. Weed Sci 35:163–168 CrossRefGoogle Scholar