Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
146. Effects l of Granular Herbicides on Newly Planted Nursery Liners J;ohn F. Ahreni Abstract - In ~~sery plantings, the gre~test weed problems often occur during: the first year or two after ,plants are lined out in the field. Several pre-emergence herbicides have. appeared promising for use in plantings of this type_ Iriformation is lac!Q.ng, however, on the effects of repeated applications of these herbicides, both on the existing and future nursery plantings -. Information also is needed on factorsaffe6t;.ing the response of nursery liners to. granular applications of herbicides. To obtain such information, experiments, were conducted with liners 'of yew (Taxus !EE-) and hemlock (Tsug~ canadenai.s}, as test plants •. The herbicides included simazine, neburon,CIPC, EPTC, CDEC,NPA,2,4-:-DEP,DNBPand se sone, . Permanent plots were established for each herbicide and dosage level •. In one experiment annual plantings and herbicide applications were made' over a .3-year period. In another testa single herbicide application a week after 'planting was followed,bY,two applications during the second year,. Oat cover crops arid oat' bioa,ssays of soil samples taken' from plots were used to indicate puhe-pre sence of herbicide residues. . .' . , In a thirdexperim~nt, we investigated the effects of
147. Residual herbicide activity was most pronounced with simazine. Dosages above 3 lbs./A. provided seasonal control of weeds. Even with slmazine, however, there was considerable loss of activity in a sandy loam soil. One year after a second annual application of simazine at 3 lbs./A., less than 0.25 lbs./A. was detected in the upper 4 n of soil and none was detected at depths of 4-8 n • With EPl'G most of the phytotoxic residue was found at depths below 4". The residues were somewhat less than those required to injure most woody plants. This and other evidence suggests that normal dosages of these herbicides, applied as needed, will not result in the accumulation of residues toxic to future plantings of species with tolerances similar to those treated. --
- Page 95 and 96: 95. Results Survey Table I of Hando
- Page 97 and 98: 97. Weed counts were made 3 weeks a
- Page 99 and 100: 99. Third applications were made on
- Page 101 and 102: 1t1. ~ata - Onion stand counts, wee
- Page 103 and 104: The data in table 2 gives the signi
- Page 105 and 106: The following effects were noted. 1
- Page 107 and 108: PRE-fREATINGSOILS, APOSSIBLE.TECfiN
- Page 109 and 110: · 109. Table 2. The influence of d
- Page 111 and 112: ..... 11 ... - Progress Report on W
- Page 113 and 114: 113. fndothal as a pre-planting inc
- Page 115 and 116: 115~ Table 3. Mean markebab l.e 9£
- Page 117 and 118: 1170 Chemical Weed Control Charles
- Page 119 and 120: 119. Table I .. Weed contrOl! plant
- Page 121 and 122: 121. '- The stand of plants of bo
- Page 123 and 124: 123. Table II. Weed control stand a
- Page 125 and 126: EFFECTOF SEVERALHERBICIDESONEARLYYI
- Page 127 and 128: Table 2. Calcula.ted ecre yields of
- Page 129 and 130: 129. - Treatment Average weight per
- Page 131 and 132: -- The herbicides were applied on J
- Page 133 and 134: 133. Table 2. Effect of pre-plant h
- Page 135 and 136: - 135. Dim tro for Weed Control in
- Page 137 and 138: PJ,OORESSREPORT:ON.:WEEJhCGNTROL IN
- Page 139 and 140: - Simazine 2 and 2 1/2 lb./A and at
- Page 141 and 142: 141. Results - .l2.22 Table 2 shows
- Page 143 and 144: - !!!! Applications 143. The plots
- Page 145: 145. Conclusions ADexperiment carri
- Page 149 and 150: - Table 1. Herbicides and Rates Use
- Page 151 and 152: ~ __ ( ( ( Table 3. WeedControl on
- Page 153 and 154: 153. TreatiD§ Established Hemlock
- Page 155 and 156: 155. flowering and growth in the sp
- Page 157 and 158: 157. Table 2. Pansy Weed Control (P
- Page 159 and 160: 1590 Table 3. Herbicides Used on Tu
- Page 161 and 162: ------- -------------_._------ ..
- Page 163 and 164: '. 163. In .Table 3 Co.mpariS01'U$
- Page 165 and 166: 1.65. "'-" Ia.!!l.! ! __!ind_a!!,d_
- Page 167 and 168: 167. Maleic Hydrazide for Weed Cont
- Page 169 and 170: 169. 1. Dana, M. N. Sensitive Fern
- Page 171 and 172: 171. -' Table 1. Amino triazole res
- Page 173 and 174: 1730 Additiona! apple .,samples wer
- Page 175 and 176: more consistently effective than 5
- Page 177 and 178: 177. HUBICIDES roll YOUNGAPPLE TUES
- Page 179 and 180: --. Table I. Treatments No. Materia
- Page 181 and 182: Table 1 -Effect of Granular Formula
- Page 183 and 184: iss. BVAWATIONor rIVE HEIBICIDES 10
- Page 185 and 186: PROGRESSREPORT'ON WEEDCONTROL IN CA
- Page 187 and 188: "'- Table' 1. Herbicide,s Used inCa
- Page 189 and 190: 189. Tabl\7 5. Rating ot BroodIest
- Page 191 and 192: WEEDGONTROLIN SWBE:rCORNWITHDACTHAL
- Page 193 and 194: D. FlantinB A!Plication of Thiolcar
- Page 195 and 196: Table 2. Rainfall, Monmouth, Maine
147.<br />
Residual herbicide activity was most pronounced with simazine.<br />
Dosages above 3 lbs./A. provided seasonal control of weeds. Even<br />
with slmazine, however, there was considerable loss of activity in<br />
a sandy loam soil. One year after a second annual application of<br />
simazine at 3 lbs./A., less than 0.25 lbs./A. was detected in the<br />
upper 4 n of soil and none was detected at depths of 4-8 n • With EPl'G<br />
most of the phytotoxic residue was found at depths below 4". The<br />
residues were somewhat less than those required to injure most woody<br />
plants. This and other evidence suggests that normal dosages of these<br />
herbicides, applied as needed, will not result in the accumulation of<br />
residues toxic to future plantings of species with tolerances similar<br />
to those treated.<br />
--