Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T16:36:03.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ear distortion in barley and other cereals caused by spraying with MCPA and 2, 4-D

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

E. C. Large  and
W. A. R. Dillon Weston
E. C. Large
Affiliation:
National Agricultural Advisory Service, Cambridge
W. A. R. Dillon Weston
Affiliation:
National Agricultural Advisory Service, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Trials made near Cambridge in 1949 and 1950, under ‘mild’ and ‘hard’ spring weather conditions respectively, have confirmed that the findings of Aberg & Denward in Sweden, and of Pedersen, Andersen & Hermansen in Denmark, concerning distortions in barley caused by MCPA and 2,4-D, are also valid under English conditions.

2. Damage to barley caused by the application of MCPA and 2,4-D up to the 2-leaf and early 3-leaf stages may be recognized by the occurrence of many tubular leaves and bowed or trapped ears. As little as 2 lb./acre of 2,4-D, as the amine salt, applied at this stage may also cause severe stunting of theplants with distortion of the roots.

3. Damage to barley by the application of MCPA and 2,4-D at the 3–4-leaf stages may be recognized by the occurrence of tweaked ears. The application of as little as 2 lb./acre of MCPA, as the sodium salt, at these stages may cause tweaking in over 50% of the ears. 2,4-D (as amine) at the same dosage causes more distortion. Although the reduction in yield due to such tweaking may be slight, the grain sample is irregular in size, with a number of naked grains, and malting quality may be reduced.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , October 1951 , pp. 338 - 349
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Åberg, E. & Denward, T. (1947). Ann. R. Agric. Coll. Sweden, 14, 366.Google Scholar
Andersen, S. & Hermansen, J. (1950). K. VetHøjsk. Aarskr. 141–203, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Dillon Weston, W. A. R., Large, E. C. & Earnshaw, F. (1947). J. Minist. Agric. 54, 417.Google Scholar
Gregory, F. G. & Purvis, O. N. (1947). Nature, Lond., 160, 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomis, W. E. (1949). N. Central Weed Control Conf. Rep. p. 210.Google Scholar
Osvald, H. & Åberg, E. (1948). Vaxtodling, (3), 74.Google Scholar
Pedersen, A., Andersen, S. & Hermansen, J. (1948). K. VetHøjsk. Aarskr. 101–147, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Slife, F. W., Fuelleman, R. F., Scott, W. O. & McKibben, G. E. (1950). Cire. Illinois Coll. Agric. no. 658.Google Scholar
Templeman, W. G. (1946). J. Minist. Agric. 53, 105.Google Scholar
Templeman, W. G. & Halliday, D. J. (1950). Emp. J. Exp. Agric. 18, 19, 172.Google Scholar