Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T12:23:09.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responses of Peach Trees to Herbicides, Mulch, Mowing, and Cultivation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

W. J. Lord  and
Edward Vlach
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A 6-year study was conducted to compare the influence of 1,1′-dimethyl-4,4′-bipyridinium ion (paraquat), a mixture of paraquat and 2-chloro-4,6-bis(ethylamino)-s-triazine (simazine), frequent mowing, hay mulch, and cultivation on growth, yield, and nutrition of peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch ‘Jerseyland’) trees. The growth and yield of trees which received two annual applications of paraquat or one application of paraquat plus simazine were comparable to those of trees maintained under cultivation or hay mulch. Hay mulched and cultivated trees responded comparably. Hay mulched trees had higher leaf potassium (K) and lower leaf magnesium (Mg) than the other trees. Where grass was controlled only by mowing, trees were generally lower in nitrogen (N), made less growth, and produced less fruit.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 1973 , pp. 227 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © 1973 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. Boynton, D. and Oberly, G. H. 1966. Apple nutrition. Pages 1–50 in Childers, N. F., ed., Nutrition of fruit crops, Rutgers–The State University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.Google Scholar
2. Goren, R. and Monselise, S. P. 1966. Some physiological effects of triazines on citrus trees. Weeds 14:141–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Lord, W. J., Damon, R. A. Jr., and Gersten, B. 1968. Effects of simazine alone and in combination with hay or plastic mulch on ‘McIntosh’ apple trees and accumulation of simazine residues. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 93:62–70.Google Scholar
4. Lord, W. J. and Robinson, D. E. 1970. Comparative responses of three apple rootstocks to soil-incorporated simazine. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 95:737–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Lord, W. J., Vlach, E. F., and Damon, R. A. Jr. 1967. Response of ‘Jerseyland’ peach trees to three consecutive yearly herbicide applications of simazine and dalapon alone and in combination. HortScience 2:146–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Lord, W. J. and Wilder, G. E. 1964. The effectiveness at various times of several herbicides compared with dalapon for grass control in apple orchards. Proc. Northeast. Weed Contr. Conf. 18:193–198.Google Scholar
7. Ries, S. K. and Gast, A. 1965. The effect of simazine on nitrogenous components of corn. Weeds 13:272–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Ries, S. K., Larson, R. P., and Kenworthy, A. L. 1963. The apparent influence of simazine on nitrogen of peach and apple trees. Weeds 11:270–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Stubblefield, F. M. and DeTurk, E. E. 1940. Effect of ferric sulfate in shortening Kjeldahl digestion. Ind. Eng. Chem., Anal. Ed. 12:396–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar