Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T01:58:55.371Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selective Control of Plains Pricklypear in Rangeland with Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

G. A. Wicks ,
C. R. Fenster  and
O. C. Burnside
G. A. Wicks
Affiliation:
North Platte Station at North Platte, University of Nebraska
C. R. Fenster
Affiliation:
Scotts Bluff Station at Mitchell, University of Nebraska
O. C. Burnside
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy at Lincoln, University of Nebraska
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted at Crawford and Kimball, Nebraska, during 1962, 1963, 1964, and 1965 to determine the effect of 13 herbicides on plains pricklypear (Opuntia polyacantha Haw.). The best control was obtained with 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid (silvex), 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloropicolinic acid (picloram), 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid (dicamba), and (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy) acetic acid (2,4,5-T). Silvex and picloram were superior to dicamba and 2,4,5-T in controlling plains pricklypear, but picloram and dicamba injured the native grasses. Rotary hoeing plains pricklypear cladodes just prior to spraying improved herbicide performance. Simulated railing was not a consistent control measure. Evaluation of plains pricklypear control was made 1 and 2 years after herbicide application.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , October 1969 , pp. 408 - 411
Copyright
Copyright © 1969 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. Arnold, W. R. and Santelmann, P. W. 1966. The response of native grasses and forbs to picloram. Weeds 14:74–76.Google Scholar
2. Bement, R. E. 1968. Plains pricklypear: relation to grazing, intensity and blue grama yield on Central Great Plains. J. Range Manage. 21:83–86.Google Scholar
3. Costello, D. F. 1941. Pricklypear control on short-grass range in the Central Great Plains. U. S. Dep. Agr. Leaflet No. 210. 6 p.Google Scholar
4. Chow, P. N., Burnside, O. C., and Law, T. L. 1966. Physiological studies with pricklypear. Weeds 14:58–62.Google Scholar
5. Chow, P. N., Burnside, O. C., Law, T. L., and Knoche, H. W. 1966. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of silvex in pricklypear. Weeds 14:38–41.Google Scholar
6. Hoffman, G. O. and Darrow, R. A. 1958. Pricklypear—good or bad? Agr. Ext. Serv., Texas A & M College Bull. 806. 8 p.Google Scholar
7. Houston, W. R. 1963. Plains pricklypear, weather, and grazing in the northern Great Plains. Ecology 44:569–574.Google Scholar
8. Hyde, R. M., Hulett, A. D., and Alley, H. P. 1965. Chemical and mechanical control of plains pricklypear in northeastern Wyoming. Univ. of Wyoming Agr. Ext. Serv. Circ. 185. 10 p.Google Scholar
9. Hyder, D. N., Bement, R. E., Remmenga, E. E., and Terwilliger, C. Jr. 1966. Vegetation – soils and vegetation – grazing relations from frequency data. J. Range Manage. 19:11–17.Google Scholar
10. Meyer, R. E. and Morton, H. L. 1967. Several factors affecting the response of pricklypear to 2,4,5-T. Weeds 15:207–209.Google Scholar
11. McCarty, M. K. and Scifres, C. J. 1967. Time of herbicide and fertilizer applications in relation to herbicide-induced damage to smooth bromegrass. NCWCC Res. Report 24:83–84.Google Scholar
12. Thatcher, A. P., Davis, G. V., and Alley, H. P. 1964. Chemical control of plains pricklypear in southeastern Wyoming. J. Range Manage. 17:190–193.Google Scholar