Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
·168 The yiel? of. U.S. #1 Katahdin potatoes from the untreated plots was 3~9 bushels per a,qre. StatisticaLan~J.yses of the yields indicated' that a .d1!ffElrence of 56 bushels was significant at the 5%level. Inspection of the results showscasoron was the ,only material which significantly reduced yields. 'It can also be seen that in 1960 with. adequate rainfall and fertility the heavier stand of weeds did not reduce the potato yields .....'Ibis is probablY duetQ,the fact that the annual weed"crop"'Iii'late potatoes usually does not becomeestablished until the vines mature, flatten out on the ground and lose manyof their leaves. Thep:-incipal objection' to late, 8,I:IIUl.el weeds is the difficulty they cause 'in the use of mechanical diggers, the increased tuber loss in the field and the amount of soil and debris that must be handled at the grading, shed. Procedure Pre-emergent'herbicide trials, 1961 The area of silt loam available for weed control during this season was not uniform with some low, moist spots and higher, drier ones. The large size of the plots, 15' x 48', helped to bridge some of these areas but some variability was inevitable. The land was in redtop sod the previous. 2 years. Redtop sod always exerts a favorable effect on the succeeding potato crop. Delus and Kennebec potatoes were planted 'on April 26 with 1600 lb/A of 10-10-10-2 (tc) fertilizer. The pre-emergent ,herbicides were applied on May16-17 using a calibrated low gallonage sprayer drawn by a tractor. The rate per acre was 40 gallons of spray. The granular materials were weighed for individual 'plots and spread by hand a,fter mixing with coarse sand. The area was not cultivated until June 26. The rainfall drought injury. Results .was scanty during July but the ,crop showed no evidence .of The amounts of herbicides per acre, weed estimates and yields of U.S. #1 tubers are shown in table 2. The principal weeds were ladysthtllllb and ragweed. Randomweed counts of several one, foot square areas for each treatment indicated that the triazine compounds, atrametryne, ipazine, prometryne and trietazine at the rate of 3 Ib/A of toxicant reduced weed stands considerably. The herbicides svph as dalapon, falone and zytron Whenused alone were not effective on the broadleaved weeds. The falone and zytron, however, slowed 'the initial growth of ladysthumb. DNBPused with these later materialS reduced the stands of ragweed aM ladysthumb. There were very few native annual grass seedlings at this time, and no conClusions were reached about their control. Foxtail and barnyard millet broadcasted over the area after hilling did not become established due to heavy vine cover and the dry July weather. Just prior to hill ing on June 26 the weeds weN pul Ied from random one foot square areas and their dry weights determined~ The weights were lal'gely of 1adysthumb with occasional ragweed and a few annual grass seedlings. !The . dal.apon plots had a .thick cover of 1adysthumb.Th& check, the dal apon and ,.falone trea'bnents still showed considerably ladysthumbat harvest time. Those combined with DNBPwere fairly clean at harvest •. Th~ .~~tatoes were dug on,
0' ~ Table 2. Pre-emergent weed control experiments with Kennebec and Delus potatoes (R.I. 1961). Average Av. # weeds per sq. ft. Gms. Ratin! Active Bu/A June 12. 1961 Dry weight Ladys- Toxicant U.S. #1 Ladys- Annual Weeds/sq. ft. th1,lll Material Ib/A Kennebec Qe1us thumb Ragweed grasses June 26 9126!t 1. D!'eP+Zytron 3+f) .. 646 491 3.0 1.,9 2.8 . 0.21 9.] 2. DNBP+Dalapon 3+3+{4 post-) 674 433 7.2 . 0.2 5.4 0.22 9.~ 3. DtI.'BP+Dal apon 3+3 573 464 0.6 0.2 3.1 0.43 9.~ 4. Zytron 8 508 407 13.4 6.2 1.9 2.93 7 .~ 5. Amiben (gran.) 5 525 388 9.7 4.2 1.5 2.06 7.t. 6. Zytron 5 509 414 12.8 5.8 2.2 3.18 7.e 7. Falone 4 534 388 14.2 5.3 0.3 9.04 4.] 8. Falone 4+{4 post-) 566 390 16.2 6.9 6.1 9.07 I.e 9. De.lapon 4 589 388 24.4 9.3 4.0 22.32 2.~ 10.· P'rometryne 3 654 459 0.6 0.3 1.6 0.48 8.1 ll. Atrametryne 3 539 436 0.3 1.1 1.4 0.33 8.~ 12. Ipazine 3 517 461 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.08 9.~ 13. Trietazine 3 661 441 0.0 0.8 2.5 0.05 9.~ 14. Trietazine 3+{2 post-) 612 406 0.4 0.7 1.2 0.04 9.e 15. No cultivation - 579 390 11.2 6.0 5.6 11.05 1.~ 16. CUltivated - 590 438 - - - - 7.e LSDat 0.05 NS NS *low numbers - high weed cover, 10 = no weeds ) )
- 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 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: u.s. #1 potatoes and weed control e
- 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
- Page 191 and 192: soil temperatures at the time the m
- Page 193 and 194: ( ( ~able 2. Effect of Several Che~
- Page 195 and 196: 195 PROBLEMSIN THEAPPLICATIONOF HER
- Page 197 and 198: 197 scale tests on 2 cOlJllllercial
- Page 199 and 200: l!!!! Experiment A factorial experi
- Page 201 and 202: frOlll plot. at .horter i*nalt (~ t
- Page 203 and 204: 6.50 Table 1. Effe,ct of p"e- an
- Page 205 and 206: 205 EVALUATION0It' DACTHAL * HERBIC
- Page 207 and 208: The 1959 and 1960 replicated field
- Page 209 and 210: 209 TABLEII Average Weed Cont~l Exh
- Page 211 and 212: Where the weed eompleJl;conststs of
- Page 213 and 214: ...... 1.67, 213 Table 1. Effect of
- Page 215 and 216: 215 Table 2. Bffect of pre-plant he
- Page 217 and 218: .217 Pive pre-plant herbicide. were
·168<br />
The yiel? of. U.S. #1 Katahdin potatoes from the untreated plots was 3~9<br />
bushels per a,qre. StatisticaLan~J.yses of the yields indicated' that a .d1!ffElrence<br />
of 56 bushels was significant at the 5%level. Inspection of the results<br />
showscasoron was the ,only material which significantly reduced yields. 'It<br />
can also be seen that in 1960 with. adequate rainfall and fertility the heavier<br />
stand of weeds did not reduce the potato yields .....'Ibis is probablY duetQ,the<br />
fact that the annual weed"crop"'Iii'late potatoes usually does not becomeestablished<br />
until the vines mature, flatten out on the ground and lose manyof<br />
their leaves. Thep:-incipal objection' to late, 8,I:IIUl.el weeds is the difficulty<br />
they cause 'in the use of mechanical diggers, the increased tuber loss in the<br />
field and the amount of soil and debris that must be handled at the grading, shed.<br />
Procedure<br />
Pre-emergent'herbicide trials, 1961<br />
The area of silt loam available for weed control during this season was<br />
not uniform with some low, moist spots and higher, drier ones. The large size<br />
of the plots, 15' x 48', helped to bridge some of these areas but some variability<br />
was inevitable. The land was in redtop sod the previous. 2 years. Redtop<br />
sod always exerts a favorable effect on the succeeding potato crop. Delus<br />
and Kennebec potatoes were planted 'on April 26 with 1600 lb/A of 10-10-10-2<br />
(tc) fertilizer. The pre-emergent ,herbicides were applied on May16-17 using<br />
a calibrated low gallonage sprayer drawn by a tractor. The rate per acre was<br />
40 gallons of spray. The granular materials were weighed for individual 'plots<br />
and spread by hand a,fter mixing with coarse sand. The area was not cultivated<br />
until June 26.<br />
The rainfall<br />
drought injury.<br />
Results<br />
.was scanty during July but the ,crop showed no evidence .of<br />
The amounts of herbicides per acre, weed estimates and yields of U.S. #1<br />
tubers are shown in table 2. The principal weeds were ladysthtllllb and ragweed.<br />
Randomweed counts of several one, foot square areas for each treatment indicated<br />
that the triazine compounds, atrametryne, ipazine, prometryne and trietazine<br />
at the rate of 3 Ib/A of toxicant reduced weed stands considerably.<br />
The herbicides svph as dalapon, falone and zytron Whenused alone were not effective<br />
on the broadleaved weeds. The falone and zytron, however, slowed 'the<br />
initial growth of ladysthumb. DNBPused with these later materialS reduced the<br />
stands of ragweed aM ladysthumb. There were very few native annual grass<br />
seedlings at this time, and no conClusions were reached about their control.<br />
Foxtail and barnyard millet broadcasted over the area after hilling did not become<br />
established due to heavy vine cover and the dry July weather.<br />
Just prior to hill ing on June 26 the weeds weN pul Ied from random one<br />
foot square areas and their dry weights determined~ The weights were lal'gely<br />
of 1adysthumb with occasional ragweed and a few annual grass seedlings. !The<br />
. dal.apon plots had a .thick cover of 1adysthumb.Th& check, the dal apon and<br />
,.falone trea'bnents still showed considerably ladysthumbat harvest time. Those<br />
combined with DNBPwere fairly clean at harvest •. Th~ .~~tatoes were dug on,