Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T08:46:45.128Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Clopyralid Use in Strawberries (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) Grown on Plastic Mulch

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

G. L. McMurray
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. Sci. and Toxicology, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695-7609
D.W. Monks
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. Sci. and Toxicology, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695-7609
R. B. Leidy
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. Sci. and Toxicology, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695-7609

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in North Carolina in winter/spring 1992, 1993, and 1994 to determine crop tolerance, weed response, and clopyralid residue levels in fruit of ‘Chandler’ strawberry plants treated with clopyralid. Clopyralid at 0.07, 0.14, 0.20, or 0.28 kg ai ha−1 applied POST over strawberry plants and vetch resulted in 100% control of vetch species, 49 to 83% control of black medic, and less than 6% crop injury. As a comparison, 2,4-D at 0.84 kg ai ha−1 applied POST at 5 to 10% strawberry bloom resulted in 50% control of black medic and 48 to 73% crop injury, while 2,4-D at 0.84 kg ai ha−1 applied POST to 7- to 9- and 9- to 10-leaf strawberries resulted in 5 to 22% crop injury and no adverse affect on strawberry yield. Single applications of clopyralid at 0.07, 0.14, or 0.28 kg ai ha−1 applied POST to weed-free strawberries at the 5- to 6-, 6- to 7-, 9- to 10-, or 12- to 14-leaf stage caused less than 6% injury and did not adversely affect strawberry yield. In 1993 with preharvest intervals (PHI) of 39, 66, and 101 d after treatment all clopyralid residue levels in strawberry fruit were below the detectable level of 0.3 parts per billion (ppb). In 1994, with PHI of 30, 59, and 87 d after treatment trace clopyralid residues were found in strawberry fruit with a range from 0.25 to 1.9 ppb, with a level of detection of 0.2 ppb.

Type
Weed Management
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by the Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

1. Aarssen, L. T., Hall, I. V., and Jensen, K.I.N. 1985. The biology of Canadian weeds. 76. Vicia angustifolia (L.), V. cracca (L)., V. sativa (L.), V. tetrasperma (L.) Schreb. and V. villosa (Roth.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 66: 711737.Google Scholar
2. Ahrens, J. F. 1989. Control of bird vetch in Christmas trees. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 43: 108.Google Scholar
3. Ahrens, J. F. 1991. Selectivity of clopyralid in woody ornamentals. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 45: 74.Google Scholar
4. Ashton, F. M., and Monaco, T. J. 1991. Weed Science: Principles and Practices. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. pp. 149, 262–266.Google Scholar
5. Civerolo, E. L., Narang, S. K., Ross, R., Vick, K. W., and Greczy, L., eds. 1993. Alternatives to methyl bromide: Assessment of research needs and priorities. Proc. USDA Workshop on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide pp. 1, 42–50.Google Scholar
6. Clay, D. V. 1984. The safety and efficacy of new herbicide treatments for fruit crops. Aspects of Appl. Biol. 8: 5968.Google Scholar
7. Clay, D.V. and Andrews, L. 1984. The tolerance of strawberries to clopyralid: effect of crop age, herbicide dose and application date. Aspects of Appl. Biol. 8: 151158.Google Scholar
8. Cowgill, W. P. Jr. and Majek, B. A. 1991. Effectiveness of clopyralid for the control of broadleaf weeds in vegetable crops. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 45: 2729.Google Scholar
9. Doohan, D. J., Estabrooks, E. N., and Jensen, K.I.N. 1986. Toadflax and tufted vetch—perennial weed problems in strawberries. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 40: 157.Google Scholar
10. Ferguson, W. and Padula, A. 1994. Economic effects of banning methyl bromide for soil fumigation. USDA. Agric. Econ. Rep. No. 677. pp. 1, 6.Google Scholar
11. Frans, R., Talbert, R., Marx, D., Crowley, H. 1986. Exp. design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant response to weed control practices. p. 37 in Camper, N. D., ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. SWSS, Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
12. Guy, C. B. and Talbert, R. E. 1985. Response of strawberries to postemergence herbicides. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 38: 129.Google Scholar
13. Hemphill, D. D. 1980. Weed Control in Strawberries, pp. 309317 in Childers, N. F., ed. The Strawberry: Cultivars to Marketing. Hort. Publications, Gainesville, FL.Google Scholar
14. Jensen, K.I.N. 1986. Response of ‘Kent’ and ‘Veestar’ strawberries to 2,4-D, dicamba and clopyralid. Annual report: Nova Scotia Research Station. pp. 1920.Google Scholar
15. Kloppenburg, D. J., and Hall, J. C. 1990. Effects of formulation and environment on absorption and translocation of clopyralid in Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. and Polygonum convolulus (L.). Weed Res. 30: 920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Monks, D. W. 1993. Weed control investigations in horticultural crops. Dept. of Hort. Sci. North Carolina State Univ. Res. Series 106, p. 17.Google Scholar
17. Poling, E. B. 1993. Strawberry plasticulture in North Carolina: II. Preplant, planting, and postplant considerations for growing ‘Chandler’ strawberry on black plastic mulch. Hort Technol. 3(4): 383393.Google Scholar
18. Rhone-Poulenc Ag. Co. 1992. Formula 40: Product Label Guide. Rhone-Poulenc Ag. Co., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. pp. 9599.Google Scholar
19. Skroch, W. A. 1994. Weed control suggestions for Christmas trees, woody ornamentals, and flowers. North Carolina Coop. Ext. Ser. AG-427.Google Scholar
20. Skroch, W. A. and Sheets, T. J., co-ed. 1977. Herbicide Injury Symptoms & Diagnosis. North Carolina Coop. Ext. Ser. AG-85, p. 21.Google Scholar
21. Sterling, T. M. and Lownds, N. K. 1992. Picloram absorption by broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) leaf tissue. Weed Sci. 40: 390394.Google Scholar
22. Wallace, R. W. and Bellinder, R. R. 1991. Clopyralid and pyridate for postemergence broadleaf weed control in crucifers. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 45: 87.Google Scholar