Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
224 _lUtTS The data on number of -.dlllalt lta~.d.iI tOtalt1me of weeding, presented in Table 1, luggest that the t~ee herbicidel gave comparable weed control,att.ir lowest, ~d41e and highel&:;~.. relpect1~ly. An exception ii noted in the p4!rell.ftid,. that tbe tille required to we.cl th.lowe',trate of ca'Oron wae ile.. erthat of thet;heck than the low rate, at tha ot~r. cl.'-icals., .' .Tbeshorter t~e~~«ded far annuab allcomparedw1.th perennials wullue to the slD81~ei,plot ,iz.s and probal>ly better sol1 preparation before ,t~' herbicidel, wer,.8PP1f.ed., TABLE1. NUMBEROF WIlDINGSAND. TIMBREQUIUD,l!'JU)MMAY31 TO AUG•. 3, 1961. PLOTSWIRE 96 SQUAREPDT PoR PERENNIALSAND48' SQUAREFIET FORANNUALS. PJB!rwi HERBICIDES.~lW:I. ,NO. or", TOTALWElDING ~. OF None CIPC CIPC CIPC S~ SlMUtNB SIMA~:m, CASORON CASORON CA30RON ':t::-"'--::::-"'~~~:..::===:' ANNUALS TOTAL WDD'UG (l",./A) WEED~HGi', TDG!,(Minut.s>*' 'WBBDINGSTDG! (Mimat.s>* 7 1/2 15 30 1 24 2' 4 8 *Average of t~ee 3 ll; 181 '2 2 if 73 2 2 SS 1 1 30 1 ~, ~ ~ 1 34 F:; 1 2 141 2 1 46 1 1 24 1 replications. , The re.~on,e of eaen .,ecl •• to each rate ol,;tbe her~icide at t~, two dat.' of observation haa been prepared but hal motbeen included in, this peper in order to conserve space. Anyone lnt'erested in obtaining these details.".y request copies .from .the junior ~thor. Table 2 sU~r1.. stb re.ult,s by ebbWil1J',the highest tat.' ~,feach chemicalt~ wa. tolerated by the plante. ' , None of the chemicals tested was lafe for all plante. In fact, eight epee ie' ,could not tolerate even the loweat ute of any· of the tu .. herbicides., .More plants could tolerate CIPC thp I~z:l.ne and casoron.! The datapre.ented in Table 2wo~i4 allow one to choose certain plants' ofll,"r\tich o~~lIIQI'e of the ~J;'~f.cide. might be ~.dl!ucceuful1)' for controlling weeds~ It 1& belleved, however, thAt' wide acceptall,Ce of chemical weed control on these herbaceous ornamentals will depend upon develop~ntof materiale. f~,,~~~olls or appl~o.Uo. techniques that wUl be eafe for a wider variety of speciel.' This work was perUafly supported by a grant from the Columbia Southern Chemical COlIIPany. 53, 27 12 11 22 13 9 22 9 15
TABLE2. TIll HIGHESTlATEOFHERBICIDES 'ATWHICH THEREWASNOINJURYTOTHEPERENNIALS~ ANNUALS PERENNIALS SIMAZlNE CASORON CIl'C lJJI./A lJIa./.A 'lb1./A A1YIsumlaxatile 0 2 0 Aquilegia crimson Star 0 0 7 1/2 Arabil rosaa 0 0 0 Campanulacarpatica 0 C)c 7 1/2 ChrY8anth8lllUlll coccineum 0 0 15 Delphinium SummerSkiel 2 2 15 Dianthul deltoidei erecta 0 0 0 Digitalis gloxinoides 2 0 7 1/2 Dimorphathaca aurantiaca 1 0 15 Euphorbia splandens 1 2 15 'atlhedara l.. ai 1 0 15 Gaillardia srandiflora 1 ,0 15 Gyplophila pacifica 1 c 0 Redera Helix 1 .() 15 Hemaroca1lia bfbrida 2 4 30 Heuchara unguinaa 1 0 0 M1osotia sy1vatica 0 0 0 !'rilllUla hybrids 0 .~ 7 1/2 !'rilllU1averis 0 '..0. 7 1/2 Rudbeckia gloriosa 1 0 15 Veronica Ipicata 0 0 0 Viola cornuta 0 0 0 ~AY Aster BaU Mix. 0 0 30 Browallia graodiflora 0 0 o. Celosia cristata 0 0 7 1/2 Coieul Ball Mix. 1 0 7 1/2 Dianthus barbatva 0 0 0 Lobelia l11cifo1ia 0 :~ 7 1/2 M8;18~if Naught1 Marietta 2 0 30 Petunia Double Mix. 1 '2 0 Phlox twinkle 0 0 0 Verbena Dwarf 1 0 7 1/2 Zinnia Giant Cactus 0 0 15 225 LITERATURE CITED 1. Bini, Arthur. 1961. The uae of several herbicides on perenniala. !'roc. N. E. W. C. C. 15:154..159. 2. Haramaki. Chiko. 1961. ,lvaluation of levaril pre·plant herbicid •• for petunias. !'roc. N. E. W. C. c. ISl13G-134.
- 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
- Page 219 and 220: 219 Table 1. Effect of pre-p1anthel
- Page 221 and 222: Table 2. tilat' of pre-plantbftb.tc
- Page 223: l EVALUATIONOF THREEHERBICIDESONPnE
- Page 227 and 228: Because of the lush growth of quack
- Page 229 and 230: Table 2. Effects of Herbicides on Q
- Page 231 and 232: Table 3. Effects of Herbicides on A
- Page 233 and 234: 233 The inhibitory activity was ass
- Page 235 and 236: non-polar solvents. Table 5 shows t
- Page 237 and 238: 237 Figure I Bioassay of cbrOlll4to
- Page 239 and 240: 239 Weed Control and Residual Effec
- Page 241 and 242: Rototilling was done in June·' SO
- Page 243 and 244: 243 in the spring of 1961 preceedin
- Page 245 and 246: WEEDCONTROL.AR
- Page 247 and 248: Li£erature Cited 1. Chappell. W. E
- Page 249 and 250: Tl'eatments ghing un.811~!8facto%'y
- Page 251 and 252: Table 1. Designa t ion Am1l:)en .\
- Page 253 and 254: Table 3. Percent Broadleat Weed Con
- Page 255 and 256: ,255 CONTROLOF ANNUALWlmDSIN swDT C
- Page 257 and 258: of Casoron per acre was statistical
- Page 259 and 260: ~.-! _ 1.37 ~ Table 2. Sweet Corn Y
- Page 261 and 262: Table 4. Peroent Control ot Ann.ual
- Page 263 and 264: EVALUATIONOF FIVE _~p>I!:S FOR KILL
- Page 265 and 266: 265 STRAWBERRY HERBICIDEINVESTIGATI
- Page 267 and 268: 267 Table 2. Eftect Of'herbicidet~e
- Page 269 and 270: 'h ", 4. Tillam lOG at 5 lb/A a.i.
- Page 271 and 272: Asparagus The results of weed contr
- Page 273 and 274: 273 TABLEII. ~1EED CONTROLANDYIELD
TABLE2. TIll HIGHESTlATEOFHERBICIDES 'ATWHICH<br />
THEREWASNOINJURYTOTHEPERENNIALS~ ANNUALS<br />
PERENNIALS SIMAZlNE CASORON CIl'C<br />
lJJI./A lJIa./.A 'lb1./A<br />
A1YIsumlaxatile 0 2 0<br />
Aquilegia crimson Star 0 0 7 1/2<br />
Arabil rosaa 0 0 0<br />
Campanulacarpatica 0 C)c 7 1/2<br />
ChrY8anth8lllUlll coccineum 0 0 15<br />
Delphinium SummerSkiel 2 2 15<br />
Dianthul deltoidei erecta 0 0 0<br />
Digitalis gloxinoides 2 0 7 1/2<br />
Dimorphathaca aurantiaca 1 0 15<br />
Euphorbia splandens 1 2 15<br />
'atlhedara l.. ai 1 0 15<br />
Gaillardia srandiflora 1 ,0 15<br />
Gyplophila pacifica 1 c 0<br />
Redera Helix 1 .() 15<br />
Hemaroca1lia bfbrida 2 4 30<br />
Heuchara unguinaa 1 0 0<br />
M1osotia sy1vatica 0 0 0<br />
!'rilllUla hybrids 0 .~ 7 1/2<br />
!'rilllU1averis 0 '..0. 7 1/2<br />
Rudbeckia gloriosa 1 0 15<br />
Veronica Ipicata 0 0 0<br />
Viola cornuta 0 0 0<br />
~AY<br />
Aster BaU Mix. 0 0 30<br />
Browallia graodiflora 0 0 o.<br />
Celosia cristata 0 0 7 1/2<br />
Coieul Ball Mix. 1 0 7 1/2<br />
Dianthus barbatva 0 0 0<br />
Lobelia l11cifo1ia 0 :~ 7 1/2<br />
M8;18~if Naught1 Marietta 2 0 30<br />
Petunia Double Mix. 1 '2 0<br />
Phlox twinkle 0 0 0<br />
Verbena Dwarf 1 0 7 1/2<br />
Zinnia Giant Cactus 0 0 15<br />
225<br />
LITERATURE CITED<br />
1. Bini, Arthur. 1961. The uae of several herbicides on perenniala.<br />
!'roc. N. E. W. C. C. 15:154..159.<br />
2. Haramaki. Chiko. 1961. ,lvaluation of levaril pre·plant herbicid ••<br />
for petunias. !'roc. N. E. W. C. c. ISl13G-134.
Change language