Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:15:52.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Field Sandbur (Cenchrus spinifex) Control and Bermudagrass Response to Nicosulfuron Tank Mix Combinations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Mark A. Matocha ,
W. James Grichar  and
Charles Grymes
Mark A. Matocha*
Affiliation:
Texas AgriLife Extension Service, College Station, TX 77843
W. James Grichar
Affiliation:
Texas AgriLife Experiment Station, Beeville, TX 78102
Charles Grymes
Affiliation:
DuPont Crop Protection, Inez, TX 77968
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research was conducted in 2006 and 2007 to evaluate nicosulfuron tank-mixes for field sandbur control and crop injury to ‘Tifton 85’ and ‘Jiggs’ bermudagrass. In 2006, sequential applications of nicosulfuron + metsulfuron controlled field sandbur 86 to 90% 30 d after treatment (DAT) and 77 to 85% 90 DAT. Single applications of nicosulfuron provided less than 63% control 90 DAT. In 2007, sequential applications of nicosulfuron + metsulfuron controlled field sandbur 84 to 95% 42 DAT. Injury data showed Jiggs bermudagrass was generally more sensitive to herbicide treatment than Tifton 85. Injury to Tifton 85 bermudagrass ranged from 0 to 15%, whereas injury to Jiggs was 7 to 29% 22 DAT. Forage yield data for Jiggs showed significant reductions at the first and second harvests but no differences by the third harvest. No yield reduction was noted for Tifton 85 bermudagrass from any herbicide treatment. Results of these studies indicate that nicosulfuron + metsulfuron combinations are a viable option for field sandbur control in bermudagrass pastures.

En 2006 y 2007 se realizó una investigación para evaluar mezclas de nicosulfurón en el control de Cenchrus spinifex y los daño causados a Cynodon dactylon de var. ‘Tifton 85’ y ‘Jiggs’. En 2006, aplicaciones secuenciadas de nicosulfurón + metsulfurón controlaron Cenchrus spinifex de 86 a 90%, 30 días después del tratamiento (DAT), y de 77 a 85%, 90 DAT. Aplicaciones únicas de nicosulfurón proporcionaron menos del 63% de control a los 90 DAT. En 2007, aplicaciones secuenciadas de nicosulfurón + metsulfurón controlaron Cenchrus spinifex de 84 a 95%, 42 DAT. La cuántificación de daños mostró que el Cynodon dactylon var. Jiggs fue generalmente más sensible al tratamiento de herbicida que la Tifton 85. El daño al Cynodon dactylon var. Tifton 85 varió de 0 a 15%, mientras que en la var.Jiggs fue de 7 a 29%, 22 DAT. Los datos del rendimiento de forraje de la var. Jiggs mostró reducciones significativas en la primera y segunda cosecha, pero no hubo diferencia en la tercera. No se notó ninguna reducción en el rendimiento del Cynodon dactylon var. Tifton 85 causada por alguno de los tratamientos con herbicida. Los resultados de este estudio indican que las combinaciones de nicosulfurón + metsulfurón son una opción viable para el control de Cenchrus spinifex en praderas de Cynodon dactylon.

Keywords

Diuronmetsulfuronnicosulfuronfield sandbur, Cenchrus spinifex Cav. CCHINbermudagrass, Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. CYNDA, ‘Jiggs’, ‘Tifton 85’Bermudagrass toleranceherbicide combinationsinjuryturf
Type
Weed Management—Other Crops/Areas
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 510 - 514
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

Anonymous 2009a. Accent herbicide specimen label. Wilmington, DE: DuPont. 13 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2009b. Metsulfuron 60 EG herbicide specimen label. Cary, NC: Arysta. 30 p.Google Scholar
Bhowmik, P. C., O'Toole, B. M., and Andaloro, J. 1992. Effects of nicosulfuron on quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 6:52–56.Google Scholar
Bradley, K. W., Hagood, E. S. Jr., Love, K. P., and Heidel, R. D. 2004. Response of biennial and perennial weeds to selected herbicides and prepackaged herbicide combinations in grass pastures and hay fields. Weed Technol. 18:795–800.Google Scholar
Bridges, D. C., Murphy, T. R., and Grey, T. L. 2001. Bermudagrass response to Oasis. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:64–65 [Abstract].Google Scholar
Bunnell, B. T., Baker, R. D., McCarty, L. B., Hall, D. W., and Colvin, D. L. 2003. Differential response of five bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) cultivars to metsulfuron. Weed Technol. 17:550–553.Google Scholar
Burton, G. W., Gates, R. N., and Hill, G. M. 1993. Registration of Tifton 85 bermudagrass. Crop Sci. 33:644–645.Google Scholar
Darwent, A. L. and Lefkovitch, L. P. 1995. Control of several perennial weeds in creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra) grown for seed. Weed Technol. 9:294–300.Google Scholar
Dobbels, A. F. and Kapusta, G. 1993. Postemergence weed control in corn (Zea mays) with nicosulfuron combinations. Weed Technol. 7:844–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1975. Gould, F. W. The grasses of Texas. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. 653 p.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Baumann, P. A., Baughman, T. A., and Nerada, J. D. 2008. Weed control and bermudagrass tolerance to imazapic plus 2,4-D. Weed Technol. 22:97–100.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Jaks, A. J., and Nerada, J. D. 2000. Field sandbur (Cenchrus pauciflorus) control in pastures using Gramoxone, Rounup Ultra, or Touchdown. Tex. J. Agric. Nat. Resourc. 13:1–7.Google Scholar
Hill, G. M., Gates, R. N., and West, J. W. 2001. Advances in bermudagrass research involving new cultivars for beef and dairy production. J. Anim. Sci. 79 (E suppl.):E48–E58.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plunknett, D. L., Pancho, J. W., and Herberger, J. P. 1991. The world's worst weeds. distribution and biology. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing. 609 p.Google Scholar
Johnson, B. J. 1987. Turfgrass species response to herbicides applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 1:305–311.Google Scholar
Kelly, S. T. and Coats, G. E. 2000. Postemergence herbicide options for Virginia buttonweed (Diodia virginiana) control. Weed Technol. 14:246–251.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. E. and Bovey, R. W. 1990. Influence of sulfonylurea and other herbicides on selected woody and herbaceous species. Weed Sci. 38:249–255.Google Scholar
Mislevy, P. and Martin, F. G. 2006. Biomass yield and forage nutritive value of Cynodon grasses harvested monthly. Proc. Soil Crop Soc. Fla. 65:9–14.Google Scholar
Rosales-Robles, E. 1993. Postemergence shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) control in corn (Zea mays) in northern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Weed Technol. 7:930–934.Google Scholar
Sanders, D. E., Strahan, R. E., and Gentry, G. T. 2001. Weed control with Plateau (imazapic) and Oasis (imazapic + 2,4-D) in hybrid bermudagrass hay production. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:74–75. [Abstract].Google Scholar
2007. Senseman, S. A. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 458 p.Google Scholar
Taliaferro, C. M., Rouquette, F. M. Jr., and Mislevy, P. 2004. Bermudagrass and stargrass. Pages 417–438. In Moser, L. E., Burson, B. L., and Sollenberger, L. E. eds. Warm-season (C4) grasses. Monograph 45. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Tredaway-Ducar, J. A., Barnett, J. W. Jr., Mask, D. B., and Byrd, J. D. Jr. 2001. Oasis for pasture weed management in Florida and Mississippi. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:66–67.Google Scholar
Walker, R. H., Wehtje, G., and Richburg, J. S. III. 1998. Interference and control of large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) and southern sandbur (Cenchrus echinatus) in forage bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon). Weed Technol. 12:707–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, L. S., Gannon, T. W., and Yelverton, F. H. 2005. Efficacy of recently registered sulfonylurea herbicides for broadleaf weed control in warm season turf. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 58:115. [Abstract].Google Scholar
Warren, L. S. Jr., Yelverton, F. H., Gannon, T. W., and Hinton, J. D. 2002. Imazapic effects on quality and yield of bermudagrass hay. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:45. [Abstract].Google Scholar