Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T01:49:52.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Sulfonylurea and Other Herbicides on Selected Woody and Herbaceous Species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert E. Meyer  and
Rodney W. Bovey
Robert E. Meyer
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Dep. Range Sci., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
Rodney W. Bovey
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Dep. Range Sci., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chlorsulfuron and metsulfuron were effective on Texas whitebrush, killing 70 to 75% of the plants at 0.28 kg ai ha, marginally effective on Macartney rose, killing 15 to 43% of the plants at 1.12 kg ha, but ineffective on honey mesquite and huisache, killing no more than 10% of the plants at 1.12 kg ha. Sulfometuron was ineffective on all woody species at 1.12 kg ai ha. Clopyralid and picloram were effective, killing 70 to 92% of the huisache at 2.24 kg ae ha. Tebuthiuron killed 72% of the Texas whitebrush at 1.12 kg ai ha. Sulfometuron generally reduced herbaceous plant cover the year of application. Chlorsulfuron and metsulfuron often resulted in increased grass cover the year of application. Most herbicides reduced broadleaf weeds the year of application. Woolly croton often was the first prominent broadleaf species to return to areas treated with clopyralid and sulfometuron. Few differences occurred among herbicides in herbaceous weed cover the year following treatment.

Keywords

clopyralid, 3,6-dichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acidpicloram, 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acidhoney mesquite, Prosopis glandulosa Torr. ♯ PRCJGhuisache, Acacia farnesiana (L.) Willd. ♯ ACAFAwoolly croton, Croton capitatus Michx. ♯ CVNCPClopyralidchlorsulfurondicamba2,4-D, metsulfuronpicloramsulfometurontriclopyrProsopis glandulosaAcacia farnesianaRosa bracteataAloysia gratissimaCroton capitatusPRCJGACAFAROSBCALYLYCVNCP
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , May 1990 , pp. 249 - 255
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Blair, A. M. and Martin, T. D. 1988. A review of the activity, fate and mode of action of sulfonylureas. Pestic. Sci. 22:195–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bourdot, G. W. and Hurrell, G. A. 1984. A screening of herbicides for yarrow seedling control. Proc. N. Z. Weed and Pest Conf. 37:167–171.Google Scholar
3. Bovey, R. W. and Meyer, R. E. 1978. Control of huisache with soil applied herbicides. J. Range Manage. 31:179–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Brewster, B. D. and Appleby, A. P. 1983. Response of wheat (Triticum aestivum) and rotation crops to chlorsulfuron. Weed Sci. 31:861–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Cornwell, M J. and Christie, M. S. 1984. Preliminary results with DPX-T6376 for control of gorse and blackberry. Proc. N. Z. Weed and Pest Control Conf. 37:197–199.Google Scholar
6. Gonzales, F. E. 1986. Escort herbicide foliar directed spray for pine release. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:240–245.Google Scholar
7. Hageman, C. H. and Behrens, R. 1981. Response of small-grain cultivars to chlorsulfuron. Weed Sci. 29:414–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Jacoby, P. W. and Meadors, C. H. 1983. Triclopyr for control of honey mesquite (Prosopis juliflora var. glandulosa). Weed Sci. 31:681–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Jacoby, P. W., Meadors, C. H., and Foster, M. A. 1981. Control of honey mesquite (Prosopis juliflora var. glandulosa) with 3,6-dichloropicolinic acid. Weed Sci. 29:376–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Kitchen, L. M., Yoder, J. F., Peregoy, R. S., and Wyllie, E. 1987. Weed control on noncroplands and ditchbanks with sulfometuron and glyphosate. Louisiana Agric. 30(4):19–20. La. Agric. Exp. Stn., Baton Rouge.Google Scholar
11. Larocque, D. J. and Christians, N. E. 1985. Selective control of tall fescue in Kentucky bluegrass with chlorsulfuron. Agron. J. 77:86–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Levitt, G., Ploeg, H. L., Weigel, R. C., and Fitzgerald, D. J. 1981. 2-chloro-N-[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)aminocarbonyl]-benzene sulfonamide, a new herbicide. J. Agric. Food Chem. 29:416–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Maass, D. I. 1987. Use of metsulfuron methyl in Maine forestry–a follow-up. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:176–178.Google Scholar
14. Maass, D. and Prouty, R. 1986. Efficacy and timing of metsulfuron methyl in forestry in Maine. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 40:230–232.Google Scholar
15. McDaniel, K. C. and Duncan, K. W. 1987. Broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) control with picloram and metsulfuron. Weed Sci. 35:837–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Meyer, R. E. and Bovey, R. W. 1984. Response of Macartney rose (Rosa bracteata) and understory vegetation to herbicides. Weed Sci. 32:63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Meyer, R. E. and Bovey, R. W. 1979. Control of honey mesquite (Prosopis juliflora var. glandulosa) and Macartney rose (Rosa bracteata) with soil-applied herbicides. Weed Sci. 27:280–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Meyer, R. E. and Bovey, R. W. 1980. Control of whitebrush (Aloysia lycioides) and associated species with soil-applied herbicides. Weed Sci. 28:204–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. O'Sullivan, P. A. 1982. Response of various broad-leaved weeds, and tolerance of cereals, to soil and foliar applications of DPX-4189. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:715–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Smith, H. N. and Rechenthin, C. A. 1964. Grassland Restoration. Part I. The Texas brush problem. U.S. Dep. Agric. Soil Conserv. Serv. 4-19114. 49 pp.Google Scholar
21. Young, F. L. and Gealy, D. R. 1986. Control of Russian thistle (Salsola iberica) with chlorsulfuron in wheat (Triticum aestivum) summer-fallow rotation. Weed Sci. 34:318–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar