Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
372.,· ~~;~li~~aW::ie:t:d ~=Q~r~~~=;::~~~~;O~e:l:1 made on June 29 and weed controls and crop injury rat1ngs were J made on July 5 and July 17 for., barley anci .at l respectively. Plots were harvested on July 10 and July-l?1 respectively, tor ~~n... ;.'. :~.·e:~~f.. ~¥~.a·..~e'~t..... se~..~i.iQ~....a~..~.~.. d,r.· ;:t~.~.' .. !i··r.:. t 1 .f.;omba.::.:n(:!R ..... :..." were .,~l~ctl!CL~t%'8.ndoml~.· ,itbreS1)8d~C~ldi,';~d, wej,Sheds ' an4.i ' the- 'data~ convEtrted to we1 ; ~el' thousa~" ,zonels., ,"'. ::1,,"' .! .:_ • '_ .' '.- '-~l j. : ..• ~~,- '. •. '. -..> " . • , . . Al1~datawere ~nalyZ!~[i~rSP11t piot.:~~ranQomizedbJ.o.~ designs •. ":::':Lc'. . ,·:n~Wheat was·riijt ttfected by aHt·t·ormtilat10n.' '.1'.neee data were in agreement w1t!l~~1er Ob~~~10ns in whioh barley exhibited greater abnol'!ll8.1t hre8p0n8~ from the new formulations than .f~~the OOIJ1lDe~o1a.;Lf.p.rm\.\..la~1.9.,~, A+,l!!ilv.ex.. ~.. The, '':l fomu](a.-t1o~ ()'?ll. ~1tU..ne; ..the... '~.,1ijW., .....brea~n..g' ~.'..... ~~.n..et ..f~otep,. ··.·"Ia::. grea~r abnormal SI"o\ft~~eson 'dog ~i1: ah4,.barleY than, the f0z!tl\ulat-,!;oh oonta1n1n~' '~: tast~br~~~j~II1U;I$1'on. ..:1. ~ ,.,. 't '; ." ..,~ . ":,' • :'~'.I'.J ..... ,.- : :,·',~ ..;... d'" :~, ' ... ,' , . .r:.- at1:Otl~dri' ·~1l'~.··~mat,1oh~ .,p¥t vat10ns are eV1~...ent. Whep c~.a:J;'e,d. t,o.....t.h~ c;1;~~ate...d. o.... ~eok .nQ ... _,:rate of anytormulat'1on effec~eg.''':ae;~t'ea~'e~..~,~~ ;n~:se-s inn1.\l!l1?e~ of barley t.LUera., "''llh$.'. nroi'tllU.,1.H. one. Y1ere'.:~, . p,.~.~~.mo.,t'e, 'e-.r.1t1.9~. ". Y.. (spUt plot--:Ul&1Y~18)1t·~.J~v:ldent,that.. '. 'I'1ere,%'~ater:~- ,o-reases·1'n' tiller tormat1GR tram tM t1t,O, 1'& ).Q,tiQnD.cont.:1~ng. the parafr1n1Gl·!'Z!8.ot1ons :'t~,; from the,:o. _, r~~al- rOrp1ulat~ow:. '... moreoverl····.the :~c.rease. wa8 l,sreater wi .. th....:.~h.r1"t).?:'mw.a.t~o..,n'..ce..Jjlt ..~~.-., ..r 1ng the fast-lWeak1ng emU.III.~..... n.'. ,.Th.ei.~h.~;~~b.n.."01'. tQrttl .. \lla.,.~~~. .x rate was 81gzU.t1cant • Genlftlly , d$cr.astti fb n~l:!ers, ot b~~ltti''' t-Uler.s~result.edas rate8f1ii.. Q~.ased. t.r 9m ..";lg tb... ·..'V.tt.pO.Und.' .•. ;.·'~.~.J.er' produot1on ..1ncl'eaaed With lntireas1ng ",te!,' i11Q.V~ 1/2 POUrid,~: i" Inoreaseswere, not as grat \ftth.thetormu ~~~t1 cOhtaln1nat~ fast-breaking emulsion. These data su~stan~~te obse~at10ns' made in the field. Alth0U$l\St:Uler1ng Wisalmost oompleted at time of hetb1c1clal·appl:tcaUon, tbehishHXoates of treatment retarded maj,n c~1m devel0P,mes)t-andt111erlng continued. This situation was not tl"ue .. ,tor'''lil'eat. Wb:eat was..'·8t.1l11n ..t*uUUe1'1n g .....at•.*.'. e.~) '1; ..·.·.he. ·t.,1me...1' ....:..... ·.'i~' . herbJ.cWlaJ.::iEl.pp11oat1on. 1f'ItoJI7 seen ,that 8;'11:.rates, 01' tl1e cQlieefomuIa"ilorilfl l·' generall~d.e';' -- creased tiller production. Furthermore I when tormulations were compared more olosely (split. plot analys1q) ;i.t was ev.14ent:t .... --tfte- the pl>e8~n~~tf~g~~.m,tta:s,t .~ ¥ ,
Heights of barley were significantly reduced by silvex containing the paraffinic carriers at rates of 1/2 and more. These formulations had no such effect on wheat. That the two experimentaitormulatiotls'bt silvex were more phytotoxic to barley than the-commercial fOZlDlulation is furthe~ evidenced by the yield data, Notwithstanding that commercial silvex reduced yields, the reduotions were not as great as those from the two experimental formulations. Rates above 1/4 pound of all preparations significantly reduced barley ~ ields. On the other hand, wheat yields were not reduce4 significantly be-, low the check by any rate or formulation. From the data on kernel weights it can be seen that this" quantitative response was somewhat related to tiller formation. Greater decreases in kernel weight resulted from the formulat1Pns containing the paraffinic fractions than from the commercial formulation. This decrease was greatest with the formulation containing the fast-breaking emulsion. The same was true for tiller formation. The interaction of formulation x rate was also statistically significant for kernel weights. As with tiller production, increas£s in rate of all formulations effected corresponding increases in kernel weight. The reverse, relationship of tillers to kernel weight might be suspected. The explanation is easily made. Since the high rates of herbi~ cides tended to check the development of the main culms and often prevented the formation of heads, the ones that did form were larger in size and weight. It is known that checking the development of main culms results in the format~on of more tillers. No such response or relationship was noted on wheat. 373 From the data and discussion it can be seen that herbicidal" activity and general phytotoxicity of silvex was greatly enhanced by using paraffLnic fractions, in aqueous dispersions, as carriers for this herbicide. Of the two experimental formulations, the one containing the slow-breaking emulsion was slightly more effective on dog fennel than the one containing the fast-breaking emulsion. The same generally was true with regard to their effects on certain yield components of small grains. There were instances when the reverse was noted. Additional work is needed to determine whether the latter is mo'reapparent than real. Summary (1) Two formulations of silvex using high boiling paraff~c fractions as carriers were compared tQ"a commercially available formulation of silvex for dog fennel control in barley and Wheat. (2) In addition to weed contrOl, the effects of all herbicidal treatments on tiller production, plant heights, yield, and kernel weights were made. (3) The two experimental formulations were more phytotOXic to dog fennel and on certain Yiel~ c?~ponents of the small grains
- Page 321 and 322: THERESPONSEOF NUTGRASS TO HERBIC~I)
- Page 323 and 324: '\.......- TABLE2. Ratings of Nutgr
- Page 325 and 326: All treatments produced si~1f~c~tly
- Page 327 and 328: A 327 WEBDe
- Page 329 and 330: . Eli'FECTSali' WEEDSON YIELD AND"G
- Page 331 and 332: Pollen Maturity: ",l. ,. Broadleaf
- Page 333 and 334: '--' The applicators were tested un
- Page 335 and 336: 335 Figure 1. The effeetof partic1e
- Page 337 and 338: 337 SRFeader 1 On this spreader onl
- Page 339 and 340: Table 4. The effect of speed, p~~cl
- Page 341 and 342: Table 1: Herbicidal treatments used
- Page 343 and 344: ·000 .000, I II ! WEEDCONTROLRATIN
- Page 345 and 346: 2.5000 CORNINJURY EXPRESSEDAS SQUAR
- Page 347 and 348: 347 1. 2. Danielson. l , ;4. L. Ef~
- Page 349 and 350: ',-- 34~ 3-(3 ..4-Dichlorophenyl)-1
- Page 351 and 352: weed control with adequate safety t
- Page 353 and 354: Untreated Table 2. Directed Post-E"
- Page 355 and 356: .s .... __ Table 7. Pre-Emel'ae~eWe
- Page 357 and 358: experiment is reported herE!. Trifl
- Page 359 and 360: Results are given. in Table 4~J'Rot
- Page 361 and 362: In Princeton fine sand, tritlupalin
- Page 363 and 364: Included in the lima. bean test wer
- Page 365 and 366: Table 1. The Effects ofS8veral form
- Page 367 and 368: Table 3. The effects of several for
- Page 369 and 370: 369 Table 5. The effects of sev~ral
- Page 371: • ~ : .• \ • ' -' ..,,:- ',-"
- Page 375 and 376: Table 2. The effe,cts of s~\I'~ral
- Page 377 and 378: Table 4. 377 The effects of aevel8.
- Page 379 and 380: ,:' A PROGRESSREPORTONCOMIo!ERCIAL
- Page 381 and 382: 4. Undesirable dead stem.,lio not r
- Page 383 and 384: areas under service conditionsa~ va
- Page 385 and 386: We ,prpbablyhave no speeie of g~owt
- Page 387 and 388: control. At the end of the third ye
- Page 389 and 390: initial defoliation was evident lat
- Page 391 and 392: OBJECTIVE In 1958 an experiment was
- Page 393 and 394: Replicates DlO 810 I 2.0 0.5 II 1.5
- Page 395 and 396: DISCUSSION One Year After Applicati
- Page 397 and 398: 1. Button, E.F. Bndwrfg'h~';J .L. ,
- Page 399 and 400: 399 The treatment consisted of appl
- Page 401 and 402: 401 FIELD PROCEDURES Although. the
- Page 403 and 404: 403 In the light of these data it a
- Page 405 and 406: 405 ...·1!MLE I SAMPLECHARACTERIST
- Page 407 and 408: 407 , '.". '.·',',~'l~rL,i;'. "\"
- Page 409 and 410: dltterent l"atespacaoreand"~"at thr
- Page 411 and 412: 411 RESULTS ireatmentettect was det
- Page 413 and 414: , 413 ;. ' "1 ' "':j " • made wit
- Page 415 and 416: ( ( . Table 3. Effectiveness on Spe
- Page 417 and 418: 417 FENURQlt,A PROMISINGNEWTOOL FOR
- Page 419 and 420: There are a number of reaso~ for un
- Page 421 and 422: .n_ots, "'hhin a few months after:
372.,·<br />
~~;~li~~aW::ie:t:d ~=Q~r~~~=;::~~~~;O~e:l:1<br />
made on June 29 and weed controls and crop injury rat1ngs were J<br />
made on July 5 and July 17 for., barley anci .at l respectively.<br />
Plots were harvested on July 10 and July-l?1 respectively, tor<br />
~~n...<br />
;.'.<br />
:~.·e:~~f.. ~¥~.a·..~e'~t..... se~..~i.iQ~....a~..~.~.. d,r.· ;:t~.~.' ..<br />
!i··r.:.<br />
t 1 .f.;omba.::.:n(:!R<br />
..... :..."<br />
were .,~l~ctl!CL~t%'8.ndoml~.· ,itbreS1)8d~C~ldi,';~d, wej,Sheds ' an4.i '<br />
the- 'data~ convEtrted to we1 ; ~el' thousa~" ,zonels., ,"'. ::1,,"'<br />
.! .:_ • '_ .' '.- '-~l j. : ..• ~~,- '. •. '. -..> " . • ,<br />
. . Al1~datawere ~nalyZ!~[i~rSP11t piot.:~~ranQomizedbJ.o.~<br />
designs •. ":::':Lc'. . ,·:n~Wheat was·riijt ttfected by aHt·t·ormtilat10n.' '.1'.neee<br />
data were in agreement w1t!l~~1er Ob~~~10ns in whioh barley<br />
exhibited greater abnol'!ll8.1t hre8p0n8~ from the new formulations<br />
than .f~~the OOIJ1lDe~o1a.;Lf.p.rm\.\..la~1.9.,~, A+,l!!ilv.ex.. ~.. The, '':l<br />
fomu](a.-t1o~ ()'?ll. ~1tU..ne; ..the... '~.,1ijW., .....brea~n..g' ~.'..... ~~.n..et ..f~otep,. ··.·"Ia::.<br />
grea~r abnormal SI"o\ft~~eson 'dog ~i1: ah4,.barleY than,<br />
the f0z!tl\ulat-,!;oh oonta1n1n~' '~: tast~br~~~j~II1U;I$1'on. ..:1. ~<br />
,.,. 't '; ." ..,~ . ":,' • :'~'.I'.J ..... ,.- : :,·',~ ..;... d'" :~, ' ... ,' , . .r:.-<br />
at1:Otl~dri' ·~1l'~.··~mat,1oh~ .,p¥t<br />
vat10ns are eV1~...ent. Whep c~.a:J;'e,d. t,o.....t.h~ c;1;~~ate...d. o.... ~eok .nQ ... _,:rate<br />
of anytormulat'1on effec~eg.''':ae;~t'ea~'e~..~,~~ ;n~:se-s inn1.\l!l1?e~ of<br />
barley t.LUera., "''llh$.'. nroi'tllU.,1.H. one. Y1ere'.:~, . p,.~.~~.mo.,t'e, 'e-.r.1t1.9~. ". Y..<br />
(spUt plot--:Ul&1Y~18)1t·~.J~v:ldent,that.. '.<br />
'I'1ere,%'~ater:~-<br />
,o-reases·1'n' tiller tormat1GR tram tM t1t,O, 1'& ).Q,tiQnD.cont.:1~ng.<br />
the parafr1n1Gl·!'Z!8.ot1ons :'t~,; from the,:o. _, r~~al- rOrp1ulat~ow:. '...<br />
moreoverl····.the :~c.rease. wa8 l,sreater wi .. th....:.~h.r1"t).?:'mw.a.t~o..,n'..ce..Jjlt ..~~.-., ..r<br />
1ng the fast-lWeak1ng emU.III.~..... n.'. ,.Th.ei.~h.~;~~b.n.."01'. tQrttl .. \lla.,.~~~. .x<br />
rate was 81gzU.t1cant • Genlftlly , d$cr.astti fb n~l:!ers, ot b~~ltti'''<br />
t-Uler.s~result.edas rate8f1ii.. Q~.ased. t.r 9m ..";lg tb... ·..'V.tt.pO.Und.' .•. ;.·'~.~.J.er'<br />
produot1on ..1ncl'eaaed With lntireas1ng ",te!,' i11Q.V~ 1/2 POUrid,~: i"<br />
Inoreaseswere, not as grat \ftth.thetormu ~~~t1 cOhtaln1nat~<br />
fast-breaking emulsion. These data su~stan~~te obse~at10ns'<br />
made in the field. Alth0U$l\St:Uler1ng Wisalmost oompleted at<br />
time of hetb1c1clal·appl:tcaUon, tbehishHXoates of treatment<br />
retarded maj,n c~1m devel0P,mes)t-andt111erlng continued. This<br />
situation was not tl"ue .. ,tor'''lil'eat.<br />
Wb:eat was..'·8t.1l11n ..t*uUUe1'1n<br />
g .....at•.*.'. e.~) '1; ..·.·.he. ·t.,1me...1' ....:..... ·.'i~'<br />
. herbJ.cWlaJ.::iEl.pp11oat1on. 1f'ItoJI7<br />
seen ,that 8;'11:.rates, 01' tl1e cQlieefomuIa"ilorilfl l·' generall~d.e';' --<br />
creased tiller production. Furthermore I when tormulations were<br />
compared more olosely (split. plot analys1q) ;i.t was ev.14ent:t .... --tfte-<br />
the pl>e8~n~~tf~g~~.m,tta:s,t .~ ¥ ,
Change language