Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
) ) Table 3 Results of an Application of Solan on Commercial Scale for Control of : t .•Weeds in Transplant Tomatoes - 1961 Treatment Lbs. Active Per Acre Weeds Per Square Foot - August 9. Date of Applications Pigweed Lambsquarters other-s --~--~--------------------------------~---------------------------------------~--------~--- Solan . , .. 4.0 7/1. 8/1 0.0 0.0 0.0 two applications Solan 4.0 7/1 11.0 3.0 1.0 one application untreated Check --- --- 39.0 14.3 1.2 ------._---------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ . Tomatoes transplanted 6/16/61 Plots cultivated 7/11. 7/18/61 ~
~ Table 4 Total Yields in Number and Pounds of Fruit for Each of Fourteen Tomato Varieties ~eceiving Foliar Applications of Solan - 1961 Rbte Rate Rate Per No. Pounds Per No. Pounds Per No. Pour ~Acre ,of of Acre of of Acre of of Tomato Variety \Lbs.} Fruit Fruit (Lbs.) Fruit Fruit (Lbs.) Fruit Frt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Campbell 146 4.0 286 84 8.0 326 101 Untreated 156 L Glamour 205 65 242 86 177 ~ Long Red 364 105 351 103 139_ Marglobe 331 65 278 67 133 Roma 720 93 841 100 910 Homestead 61 310 97 349 99 346 E.,S. 24 492 101 518 110 212 H 1370 575 151 570 128 315 Homestead 24 342 93 293 81 170 Manalucie 345 94 289 85 185 Moreton HYbrid 447 120 497 140 280 Trellis 22 601 102 638 115 348 Valiant 520 149 491 . 134 322 Rutgers California 259 66 210 54 125 s c ~ ~ E ~ / E C r ~ Date-~f-T;~~t;e~t~-7/6~-7/28-----------------------------------------------~t;-pi;~t;d;--E ) )
- 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 and 134: DISCUSSIONOF RESULTS Transplant Tom
- Page 135 and 136: harvest was covered with weeds, and
- Page 137 and 138: An additional 2 years of tests on f
- Page 139: ~ Table 2 .--l Average Number and P
- 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
- Page 185 and 186: 185 S\:U!U!1fryand ConclWtlon No he
- Page 187 and 188: 187 Table 2. Potato YIelds Followin
- Page 189 and 190: Residue analysis of potatoes treate
~ Table 4 Total Yields in Number and Pounds of Fruit for Each of Fourteen Tomato<br />
Varieties ~eceiving Foliar Applications of Solan - 1961<br />
Rbte Rate Rate<br />
Per No. Pounds Per No. Pounds Per No. Pour<br />
~Acre ,of of Acre of of Acre of of<br />
Tomato Variety \Lbs.} Fruit Fruit (Lbs.) Fruit Fruit (Lbs.) Fruit Frt<br />
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
Campbell 146 4.0 286 84 8.0 326 101 Untreated 156 L<br />
Glamour 205 65 242 86 177 ~<br />
Long Red 364 105 351 103 139_<br />
Marglobe 331 65 278 67 133<br />
Roma 720 93 841 100 910<br />
Homestead 61 310 97 349 99 346<br />
E.,S. 24 492 101 518 110 212<br />
H 1370 575 151 570 128 315<br />
Homestead 24 342 93 293 81 170<br />
Manalucie 345 94 289 85 185<br />
Moreton HYbrid 447 120 497 140 280<br />
Trellis 22 601 102 638 115 348<br />
Valiant 520 149 491 . 134 322<br />
Rutgers California 259 66 210 54 125<br />
s<br />
c<br />
~<br />
~<br />
E<br />
~<br />
/<br />
E<br />
C<br />
r<br />
~<br />
Date-~f-T;~~t;e~t~-7/6~-7/28-----------------------------------------------~t;-pi;~t;d;--E<br />
) )
Change language