Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
134 were used, but as already noted, sprays were applied with a tractor-mounted boom sprayer. One treatment'consisted'of 2' applications of Solan at the 4 pound per ~cre rate. The first of these was made about 2 "~ks after trarisplanting (July 1), and the second at la;
harvest was covered with weeds, and tomato plants were very small. Harvesting in this area was very t1me consuming, compared with either of the treated ~eas. ' Total seasonal yields, both iq ~bersand pounds of tomatoes for each variety, are s\UIlnIarized1n Table 4. All varieties except Roma produced a grea~er totalwe1ght of fruit in the treated than in the untreated. Only in the case of Roma and Homestead.61 were there slightly more fruit in the untreated than the treated. This implies that Solan did not.have an inhibiting effect on the set of fruit! The varieties Hom~stead 24, H J.370,Manalucie, val~~t and Rutgers California produeed somewhat fewer pounds of tomatoes at the 8 pound rate than at the 4 pound rate. . The fact that the other varieties produced eq4al or greater .weights of tomatoes at the 4 pound rate suggests that one is working with a good ~gin of safety when suggesting the lower rate asa commercialpract1ce. ~ Seeded Tomatoes, Exper1mentNo. 1, 12§Q Seeds of the varieties Fireball and Red Jacket were planted and Solan at the rate of 2, 4 and 6 pounds per acre was applied to the seeded areas on the day of, and 2, 5 and 7 day~ after planting. Each treatment comprised a single row 10 feet long and was replicated three times. Uhder conditions of the tel;lt, ~'stage of gr-owth" of the tomato plants varied from "not,germinated ll ·to Ilbreaking the· ground ll • Weeds at the various test intervals varied from "not germinated ll to one inch high: Results of stand counts and percent of weed control, as taken some two weeks after the last t'eatment, are ,given in Table 5. Treatments applied on the day of seeding had no eft~t on germination of either variety. Control or weeds, while partial, was far from satisfactory" Delaying the tneatment even 2 days did not reduce crop stands, a~d resulted in appreciable controa. It was noted that some weeds had germinated at the time of treatment. When applications were made 5 days after seeding, crop plants had germinated, but had, not broken the soil. Weeds had~ germinated considerably ,but were less than one inch in height., Under these conditions the stand of Fireball was reduced when Solan was applied at 4 and 6 Pounds per acre, and the variety Red Jacket was reduced only when treated at the 6 pound level.' Control of broadleaved weed species was good, but grass control was marginal. The remaining plots were treated one week after planting, at Which time weeds were one inch tal]:., and tomatoes were breaking the ground. There was a significant reduction in crop 135
- Page 83 and 84: 83 Susceptible weeds Tolerant weeds
- Page 85 and 86: 85 Marion Market 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Da
- Page 87 and 88: Table 5. Bai
- Page 89 and 90: weeding of Lima Bean. With Chemical
- Page 91 and 92: EFFECTOF HERBICIDESONQUALITYANDYIEL
- Page 93 and 94: Results Date treated: 9/6/61 Soil m
- Page 95 and 96: 95 Date planted: 915/61 Date treate
- Page 97 and 98: Table 3. Yield Data on Hanover and
- Page 99 and 100: Weeding of Carrots With 'pre-lilanU
- Page 101 and 102: 101 WEEDCONTROLSTUDIESIN SEElED ONI
- Page 103 and 104: Weather conditions at the two locat
- Page 105 and 106: In contrast to the damage noted in
- Page 107 and 108: 107 Literature Cited 1. Althaus. R.
- Page 109 and 110: Table 1. Weed control: stand of pla
- Page 111 and 112: Results and Discussion. The data, p
- Page 113 and 114: CIPO, Vegadex, and Randox Singly or
- Page 115 and 116: Table 1•. Wa. control, stand of p
- Page 117 and 118: 'Ihree experiments were conducted i
- Page 119 and 120: a- Table 2_"COIIlpartsonof' Several
- Page 121 and 122: fJ Table 3. CcBparison of Several.
- Page 123 and 124: c
- Page 125 and 126: Table 1. Seeding and Weed Counts on
- Page 127 and 128: WEEDCONTROLANDTHE IMPROVEMENT OF SE
- Page 129 and 130: Following emergence of the tomato s
- Page 131 and 132: indicates that several of the treat
- Page 133: DISCUSSIONOF RESULTS Transplant Tom
- Page 137 and 138: An additional 2 years of tests on f
- Page 139 and 140: ~ Table 2 .--l Average Number and P
- Page 141 and 142: ~ Table 4 Total Yields in Number an
- Page 143 and 144: "" ~ Table 6 Bvalu~t1.on of S&l~nto
- Page 145 and 146: of weed eoneee I without inj ury 't
- Page 147 and 148: 1. Associate Research Specialist in
- Page 149 and 150: Stulllll&ry A study was lh1tlatedto
- Page 151 and 152: Table 2. The residual effects of se
- Page 153 and 154: FURTHEROBSERVATIONS ONCONTROL OF TH
- Page 155 and 156: Table 3 - Mean per cent brake contr
- Page 157 and 158: lAssociate Research Spec1alist in W
- Page 159 and 160: PRE-E~mRGENCE WEEDCONTROLTEST IN RE
- Page 161 and 162: 161 Table 2. Tolerance of Beets and
- Page 163 and 164: 163 Results generally were good wee
- Page 165 and 166: USE OF GRANULAR CHl!H[CALAPPLICATOR
- Page 167 and 168: u.s. #1 potatoes and weed control e
- Page 169 and 170: 0' ~ Table 2. Pre-emergent weed con
- Page 171 and 172: Table 3. Post-hilling weed control
- Page 173 and 174: ~/Pe.nt>:r lITn. h.7(L T1o:oTl.,:r+
- Page 175 and 176: In table 2 are presettted weed a*1'
- Page 177 and 178: Since rec1root is only one of the I
- Page 179 and 180: w.l.th 3 and 4 Ibs. ot Randox per a
- Page 181 and 182: 181 CONTROLOF ANNUALWEEDSIN pOTATOE
- Page 183 and 184: The following comments on the vario
134<br />
were used, but as already noted, sprays were applied with a<br />
tractor-mounted boom sprayer. One treatment'consisted'of 2'<br />
applications of Solan at the 4 pound per ~cre rate. The first<br />
of these was made about 2 "~ks after trarisplanting (July 1),<br />
and the second at la;
Change language