Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ...
Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ... Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ...
58 THE RESPONSE OF FIELD AND CONTAINER GROWN ORNAMENTALS TO SULFENTRAZONE AND FLUMIOXAZIN. M.W. Marshall and B.H. Zandstra, Michigan State University, East Lansing. ABSTRACT Field studies were conducted in 2006 to evaluate tolerance of container and field grown ornamentals to various rates of sulfentrazone and flumioxazin. Treatments included sulfentrazone at 0.14, 0.28, and 0.56 kg/ha and flumioxazin at 0.28, 0.56, and 1.02 kg/ha. An untreated control was included for comparison. Container grown ornamental species included periwinkle (Vinca minor L.), butterfly bush (Buddleia davidii 'Adonis Blue'), inkberry holly (Ilex glabra ‘Ivory Queen’), orange coneflower (Rudbeckia fulgida var. fulgida ‘Meadowbrite’), and boxwood (Buxus microphylla ‘Green Mountain’). Field grown ornamental species included burning bush (Euonymus alatus compactus), azalea (Azalea ‘Cannon’s Double’), boxwood, daylily (Hemerocallis ‘Evelyn Claar’), coral bells (Heuchera micrantha ‘Palace Purple’), hosta (Hosta fortunei 'Gold Standard'), and shasta daisy (Leucanthemum x superbum 'Snowcap'). In the container study, sulfentrazone was applied on July 15, 2006 and August 22, 2006. In the field study, sulfentrazone was applied on June 22, 2006 and July 24, 2006 and flumioxazin was applied on June 22, 2006. Experimental design was a randomized complete block design with 3 replications. Individual plot sizes were 0.6 by 0.9 m and 5.4 by 10.6 m in the container study and field study, respectively. Plant injury ratings were evaluated 7, 14, and 28 days after treatment (DAT) on a 0 to 9 scale with 0 indicating no injury and 9 equal to crop death. Herbicides were applied in water over-the-top of newly transplanted ornamentals at a carrier volume of 187 L/ha with a pressure of 207 KPa. Boxwood grown in container and the field showed very little injury to sulfentrazone and flumioxazin, regardless of the rate. Plants most sensitive to sulfentrazone included butterfly bush, orange coneflower, coral bell and daylily. In addition, daylily, Hosta, and Shasta daisy were sensitive to over-the-top applications of flumioxazin, especially at 1.02 kg/ha. Sulfentrazone injury, regardless of species, included browning of the leaves where the spray intercepted the leaf. New growth at the base of the plant did not exhibit these symptoms. Butterfly bush showed moderate injury at the 0.28 and 0.56 kg/ha sulfentrazone rate 7 DAT. By 28 DAT, injury was only apparent at the 0.56 kg/ha rate. In the field study, boxwood, Azalea, and burning bush exhibited very little response to flumioxazin and sulfentrazone, regardless of rate. At 14 and 28 DAT, daylily, Hosta, and Shasta daisy injury at 0.56 kg/ha ranged from 5.7 to 8.7, with the Hosta being the most sensitive. By the end of the trial; however, these plants had regrown and recovered to sizes not significantly different from the untreated control. In general, sulfentrazone and flumioxazin were generally safe on the container and field grown woody ornamental plants. Sulfentrazone at 0.28 and 0.56 kg/ha should be used with caution on container and field grown orange coneflower, butterfly bush, Hosta, and daylily. Since both formulations were liquids, a granular formulation maybe safer on these sensitive species. 40
59 THE EFFICACY AND CROP TOLERANCE OF PRE AND POSTEMERGENCE APPLICATIONS OF HALOSULFURON TO CHRISTMAS TREES. L.J. Kuhns and T.L. Harpster, The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park. ABSTRACT Over a two-year period, pre and postemergence applications of halosulfuron were made to three conifer species on five sites in Pennsylvania. At 0.33 lb ai/A, when combined with oryzalin for preemergence grass control, halosulfuron provided excellent broad-spectrum weed control. At 0.041 to 0.167 lb ai/A, when combined with oryzalin, it provided good to adequate control at three of the sites but was weak at two others. Applied prior to budbreak, there was little to no injury. Applied after budbreak, halosulfuron caused serious contact injury to the plants. However, no plants were killed and plants injured in 2005 grew well in 2006. 41
- Page 7 and 8: 7 CARFENTRAZONE AND QUINCLORAC FOR
- Page 9 and 10: 9 THE EFFICACY AND CROP TOLERANCE O
- Page 11 and 12: 11 EVALUATION OF HERBICIDES FOR CON
- Page 13 and 14: 13 BEING HEARD BY THE IR-4 PROJECT.
- Page 15 and 16: 15 ABSTRACTS FROM THE 7 TH CONFEREN
- Page 17: 17 HERBICIDE NAMES: COMMON, TRADE,
- Page 20 and 21: 20 INTEGRATING WEED CONTROL STRATEG
- Page 22 and 23: 22 GIANT HOGWEED ERADICATION IN PEN
- Page 24 and 25: 24 EFFECTS OF EMERGENCE PERIODICITY
- Page 26 and 27: 26 PRODUCER AND PRODUCTION IMPACTS
- Page 28 and 29: 28 A SIMPLE METHOD FOR CLEANING TUF
- Page 30 and 31: 30 EMERGENCE AND PERFORMANCE OF TWO
- Page 32 and 33: 32 CARFENTRAZONE AND QUINCLORAC FOR
- Page 34 and 35: 34 2006 NEWSS SUMMER WEED CONTEST R
- Page 36 and 37: 36 INVASIVE AQUATIC WEEDS IN NORTH
- Page 38 and 39: 38 AMMONIUM PELARGONATE AS A BIOHER
- Page 40 and 41: 40 TRINEXAPAC-ETHYL INFLUENCES EFFI
- Page 42 and 43: 42 Table 1. Insect feeding damage,
- Page 44 and 45: 44 WEED CONTROL WITH TOPRAMEZONE PR
- Page 46 and 47: 46 ROTARY HOE EFFICACY IN CORN: INF
- Page 48 and 49: 48 ALFALFA/GRASS FORAGE MIXTURES US
- Page 50 and 51: 50 CONTROL OF NEW WEED SPECIES IN T
- Page 52 and 53: 52 Table 1. Results of 2006 contain
- Page 54 and 55: 54 TOLERANCES OF ORNAMENTAL SHRUBS
- Page 56 and 57: 56 2006 WEED MANAGEMENT TRIALS IN C
- Page 60 and 61: 60 THE EFFICACY AND CROP TOLERANCE
- Page 62 and 63: 62 Table 2. Plant quality ratings o
- Page 64 and 65: 64 EVALUATION OF PROLINE-LINKED PEN
- Page 66 and 67: 66 ANNUAL BLUEGRASS AND DOLLAR SPOT
- Page 68 and 69: 68 Table 1. Autumn 2005 versus spri
- Page 70 and 71: 70 A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF THE NON-N
- Page 72 and 73: 72 native species, covering and smo
- Page 74 and 75: 74 EFFECTS OF BUCKWHEAT RESIDUE ON
- Page 76 and 77: 76 Japanese knotweed control 28 DAT
- Page 78 and 79: 78 ENHANCED TOLERANCE TO WEED COMPE
- Page 80 and 81: 80 EFFECTS OF PLANTING AND TERMINAT
- Page 82 and 83: 82 A UNIFYING FRAMEWORK FOR SPECIES
- Page 84 and 85: 84 BIOLOGY OF MULTIFLORA ROSE: AN I
- Page 86 and 87: 86 AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION. M.J. Van
- Page 88 and 89: 88 HERBICIDE COMPARISON IN WET BLAD
- Page 90 and 91: 90 Table 1. Morrow's honeysuckle (L
- Page 92 and 93: 92 EVALUATION OF HERBICIDES FOR CON
- Page 94 and 95: 94 EVALUATION OF HERBICIDES FOR CON
- Page 96 and 97: 96 HOT WATER SYSTEMS FOR VEGETATION
- Page 98 and 99: 98 SEEDHEAD SUPPRESSION OF ANNUAL B
- Page 100 and 101: 100 ROUGHSTALK BLUEGRASS CONTROL WI
- Page 102 and 103: 102 EFFECT OF DEW AND GRANULAR FORM
- Page 104 and 105: 104 USE OF TRICLOPYR TO REDUCE ANTI
- Page 106 and 107: 106 YELLOW NUTSEDGE CONTROL WITH SU
59<br />
THE EFFICACY AND CROP TOLERANCE OF PRE AND POSTEMERGENCE<br />
APPLICATIONS OF HALOSULFURON TO CHRISTMAS TREES. L.J. Kuhns and T.L.<br />
Harpster, The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park.<br />
ABSTRACT<br />
Over a two-year period, pre and postemergence applications <strong>of</strong> halosulfuron<br />
were made to three conifer species on five sites in Pennsylvania. At 0.33 lb ai/A, when<br />
combined with oryzalin for preemergence grass control, halosulfuron provided excellent<br />
broad-spectrum weed control. At 0.041 to 0.167 lb ai/A, when combined with oryzalin, it<br />
provided good to adequate control at three <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sites but was weak at two o<strong>the</strong>rs.<br />
Applied prior to budbreak, <strong>the</strong>re was little to no injury. Applied after budbreak,<br />
halosulfuron caused serious contact injury to <strong>the</strong> plants. However, no plants were killed<br />
and plants injured in 2005 grew well in 2006.<br />
41
Change language