Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T05:38:59.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed control in sugar beet with single and split applications of herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Maurice Eddowes
Maurice Eddowes
Affiliation:
Harper Adams CollegeNewport, Shropshire
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Recent developments in chemical weed control in sugar beet have been reviewed. Two main approaches to the problem of providing reliable season-long control of annual weeds in sugar beet are, (a) the use of mixtures of herbicides applied pre-planting and incorporated into the soil during seed bed preparation, and (b) the use of split applications with a residual herbicide applied pre-emergence followed by a contact herbicide applied post-emergence.

The second approach (b) was examined in a series of field experiments from 1967 to 1969, on light to medium sandy loam soils in the West Midlands. Comparisons were made between pre-emergence application of lenacil and pyrazon, pre-emergence application of lenacil and pyrazon followed by post-emergence application of phenmedipham, and post-emergence application of phenmedipham for weed control in sugar beet.

Under dry soil conditions in April 1967, lenacil and pyrazon controlled only about 40% of the annual weeds, but in 1968 and 1969, when moist soil conditions predominated in April and May, lenacil and pyrazon controlled 80–95% of the annual weeds.

Phenmedipham applied post-emergence gave about 90% control of annual broadleaved weeds initially, but it seemed unlikely that a single application of this herbicide would provide satisfactory weed control in sugar beet.

In each of the 3 years 1967–9, a split application of a soil-acting residual herbicide (pro-emergence) followed by phenmedipham (post-emergence) gave outstanding weed control and enabled sugar beet to be established and grown until mid-June at least, in a near weed-free environment. It was concluded that this technique was the most effective for weed control in sugar beet on light to medium sandy loam soils in the West Midlands.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 77 , Issue 2 , October 1971 , pp. 247 - 252
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

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

Baldwin, J. H. & Armsby, W. A. (1970). Experiments to improve the herbieidal efficiency of phenmedipham by the prior use of other herbicides 1968–70. Proc. 10th Br. Weed Control Conf. 2, 578–85.Google Scholar
Bond, K. A. (1968). Herbicide usage in relation to further mechanisation of the sugar beet crop in the United Kingdom. Proc. 9th Br. Weed Control Conf. 3, 1281–84.Google Scholar
Bray, W. E. (1970). A comparison of soil incorporation with surface application of pyrazon or lenacil for weed control in sugar beet. Second int. Meet, on Selective Weed Control in Beet Crops, Rotterdam, pp. 265–71.Google Scholar
Bray, W. E. & Hilton, J. (1970). Weed control in sugar beet using di-allate followed by pyrazon or lenacil. Proc. 10th Br. Weed Control Conf. 2, 586–92.Google Scholar
Eddowes, M. & Caldwell, W. M. (1968). Chemical herbicides in sugar beet production. Harper Adams College, Techn. Bull. 12.Google Scholar
Griffites, W. (1970). Mixtures of phenmedipham and barban for control of Avena fatua and other weeds in sugar beet. Second int. Meet, on Selective Weed Control in Beet Crops, Rotterdam, pp. 27–32.Google Scholar
Griffites, W. & Swalweli, J. (1970). A programme for the control of annual broad-leaved weeds in sugar beet. Proc. 10th Br. Weed Control Conf. 2, 571–77.Google Scholar
North, J. J. (1970). Herbicides in relation to the production of field crops for industrial processing. Proc. 10th Br. Weed Control Conf. 3, 1126–28.Google Scholar
Oien, S., Jensen, V. & Marcussem, C. (1967). Efficiency of herbicides with regard to time of application. First int. Meet, on Selective Weed Control in Beet Crops, Paris147–51.Google Scholar
Sullivan, E. F. (1970). Present state of selective weed control in North America with emphasis on irrigated regions of the West. Second int. Meet, on Selective Weed Control in Beet crops, Rotterdam, pp. 11–18.Google Scholar
Thomas, T. M. (1970). Control of Agropyron repens. L. in sugar beet with TCA. Proc. 10th Br. Weed Control Conf. 2, 564–70.Google Scholar
Weed Control Handbook (1971). Part II, Vol. 6. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wicks, G. A. & Anderson, F. N. (1970). Selective weed control in sugar beets with split applications of herbicides. Second int. Meet, on Selective Weed Control in Beet crops, Rotterdam, pp. 55–62.Google Scholar