Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 16â1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
88 2,b!!D1C!1!. .;..' '.,;...._ !e£J.:.2.._!!e~!:. .!!D!~t'L!.:f!c.!.0!7.;.~ W~=,~,!.~.... ctuS1!e!:.~:.; Chemicals lacking crop '." Chem1clU.s~Xli ·weed control tolerance but 81v1n8 . and/or 'croJ,jt"oleranee ade~ateweed control .. ". " . '.. ' .. - - - -:.- ":"~ - -: - - -lbsZA-: ... ":" ...... - - ....- .. .,.,'.. - .. - - .. - rbi!A:~" - Amchem 61-l22 4, 8 . Amchem61-
weeding of Lima Bean. With Chemical Herbicides Char1el J. No1l 1 The weeding of lima beans is tBportant in reduoing the cost of production of this crop. DRBPhas been commoolyu.ed but the .earch continues for a > better and le .. expensive chemical. The expertBent :reported in thi. paper>18 a continuation of work started a-few years ago. PROCEDURE The seedbed was prepared and pre-planting treatmente made June 1. Tha.e treatments were t.corporated in the .oi1 with a roto~i11er .et .ha11ow. The following day the lima bean varlety rordhook 242 wal leeded. The pre-emel'lence treaenent. were applied from 1 to 6 days after planting. Post-emergence treatments were made 10 day. after planting. Individual plot. were 27 feet long and 3 feet wide. Treatments were randomized in each of 6 blocks. The chemicals were applied with a small sprayer over the row for a width of 12 inches. Cultivation controlled the weed. between the rows. An e&timate of weed control was made Auguat 24 on a baais of 1 to 10, 1 being moat>. desirable and 10 being leaat desirable. Bean harvest wes completed September 29. RESULTS The result. are pre.ented in table 1. All chemical •• ignificantly increaaed weed control a8 compared to .the untreated check. There were aignif~ caat differencea in wee' control between the treated plota but the higher > rate of treatment of most chemicals gave sufficient weed control. The 8t~nd of plants waa unaffected by the treatments. All treatment. except U-4513 at the 1.'8er rate re.ulted in significant increa.e in weight of beans. CONCLUSION Taking into consideration weed control, 8tand of plant8 and yield no chemical treatment was superior to DNBPapplied post-emergence. Many chemicals did a good job of weeding lima beans without injury to the stand aad with increase in yield _ compared to the UQtreat.ed·aback plot. Someof the mo.t promi8ing of the8e are Atramatryne, Trietazine, Herb. 326 and Hercules 7531. 89 1 A.eociate Profe,80r of 01erlcu1ture, Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture.and Experiment Station,Penn8y1vania State Univer8ity, Univer.ity Park, Penn8y1vania.
- Page 37 and 38: does Jo run a recreational facility
- Page 39 and 40: Another pote1U:ialuse for chemicals
- Page 41 and 42: Newapproaches in the use of herbici
- Page 43 and 44: 43 sentence would bear this out". T
- Page 45 and 46: More and more each year since the a
- Page 47 and 48: 11. Rice, E. J. The effects of cUlt
- Page 49 and 50: PFSI'ICIDESUSED - - - - - - - - - -
- Page 51 and 52: __..:I whether or not these apparen
- Page 53 and 54: Dosage. Ib./acre Dimethyl tetrachlo
- Page 55 and 56: ~ ~_~ __ L L Table 2. Weed Susceoti
- Page 57 and 58: - - - - - - - - ~, - - - - --- - -
- Page 59 and 60: Table 7.. Weed Control in :l:!c,Ql1
- Page 61 and 62: Table '1. Rat.1lISstI 'Of carrot an
- Page 63 and 64: H , 'ta~l!. g,._~e~_O!~ut~• .:.:.
- Page 65 and 66: 65 plant press and dried in a f~ced
- Page 67 and 68: 67 Tablet. 'lIi! EFFECT'or AN'INO'l
- Page 69 and 70: 69 THE INFLUENCE JIt P.I!ll'ROLEUM
- Page 71 and 72: 71 1 CDEC(Ee) 2 " " 3 4 " 5 " " 6 7
- Page 73 and 74: !a~l~ 1._ ~!:.c!: :!!1~hJl!:e.::m~d
- Page 75 and 76: 75 EFFECT;OFCOMPOSITIONANDVOLUMEOF
- Page 77 and 78: A LOGARITHMICSPRAlERFORSMALLPLCflSY
- Page 79 and 80: 79 Do~ Calculations The actual init
- Page 81 and 82: Selective Herbicides for Several Cr
- 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: Table 5. Bai
- 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
88<br />
2,b!!D1C!1!.<br />
.;..' '.,;...._<br />
!e£J.:.2.._!!e~!:.<br />
.!!D!~t'L!.:f!c.!.0!7.;.~ W~=,~,!.~.... ctuS1!e!:.~:.;<br />
Chemicals lacking crop '." Chem1clU.s~Xli ·weed control<br />
tolerance but 81v1n8 . and/or 'croJ,jt"oleranee<br />
ade~ateweed control .. ". " . '.. ' ..<br />
- - - -:.- ":"~ - -: - - -lbsZA-: ... ":" ...... - - ....- .. .,.,'.. - .. - - .. - rbi!A:~" -<br />
Amchem 61-l22 4, 8 . Amchem61-
Change language