Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T07:52:10.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Timing of Paraquat Applications for Weed Control in Virginia-type Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John W. Wilcut  and
Charles W. Swann
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Tidewater Agric. Exp. Stn., Virginia Polytechnic Inst. & State Univ., P.O. Box 7219, 6321 Holland Road, Suffolk, VA 23437
Charles W. Swann
Affiliation:
Tidewater Agric. Exp. Stn., Virginia Polytechnic Inst. & State Univ., P.O. Box 7219, 6321 Holland Road, Suffolk, VA 23437
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Common ragweed was the most difficult to control of the species present and its control appeared to have the greatest effect on peanut yield. Preplant-incorporated (PPI) treatments provided no control of common ragweed but ethalfluralin plus vernolate PPI provided better than 90% control of yellow nutsedge and nearly 50% control of morningglory species. Single applications of paraquat at 0.14 kg ai ha−1 following PPI applications of ethalfluralin or ethalfluralin plus vernolate provided less than 75% common ragweed control. Sequential applications of paraquat applied 1 and 3 weeks after peanut emergence (1 + 3 WAE) provided at least 81% common ragweed control. Peanut yield with ethalfluralin plus vernolate PPI followed by paraquat 1 WAE (4400 kg ha−1) was equivalent to the handweeded yield (4470 kg ha−1). Yields were not significantly less with the same PPI application followed by paraquat 1 + 3 WAE (3730 kg ha−1) or by acifluorfen plus bentazon 3 WAE (3730 kg ha−1), and ethalfluralin PPI followed by paraquat 1 + 3 WAE (3740 kg ha−1). Ethalfluralin plus vernolate PPI and paraquat 1 WAE provided the highest net returns of $1370 ha−1.

Keywords

Acifluorfen, 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)-phenoxy-2-nitrobenzoic acidbentazon, 3-(1-methylethyl)-(1H)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-4(3H)-one 2,2-dioxideethalfluralin, N-ethyl-N-(2-methyl-2-propenyl)-2,6-dinitro-4-trifluoromethyl)benzenamineparaquat, 1,1′-dimethyl-4,4′bipyridinium ionvernolate, S-propyl dipropylcarbamothioatecommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALcommon ragweed, Ambrosia artemisifolia # AMBELivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq. # IPOHEentireleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea var. integruiscula Gray # IPOHGtall morningglory, Ipomoea purpurea (L.) Roth. # PHBPUpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAyellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L. # CYPESpeanut, Arachis hypogaea L.Economic analysisnet returnsCHEALAMBELIPOLAIPOHEIPOHGPHBPUCYPES
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 38 , Issue 6 , November 1990 , pp. 558 - 562
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. Boote, K. J. 1982. Growth stages of peanut. Peanut Sci. 9:35–40.Google Scholar
2. Buchanan, G. A., Murray, D. S., and Hauser, E. W. 1982. Weeds and their control in peanuts. Pages 206–249 in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc., Yoakum, TX 77995.Google Scholar
3. Buchanan, G. A., Hauser, E. W., and Patterson, R. M. 1981. Control of bur gherkins (Cucumis anguria) in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) with herbicides. Peanut Sci. 8:66–73.Google Scholar
4. Colvin, D. L. and Younce, H. D. 1989. Basagran-Gramoxone admix combinations for peanut weed control. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:23.Google Scholar
5. Davidson, J. I. Jr., Whitaker, T. B., and Dickens, J. W. 1982. Grading, cleaning, storage, shelling, marketing of peanuts in the United States. Pages 571–623 in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc., Yoakum, TX 77995.Google Scholar
6. Elmore, C. D. 1989. Weed Survey–Southern States. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:408–420.Google Scholar
7. Evans, J. R., Turner, J. C., Gourd, D. R., and McKemie, T. E. 1988. Interaction of bentazon and paraquat for peanut weed control. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:68.Google Scholar
8. Gallimore, G. G., Updike, G. H., and Sturt, S. G. III. 1988–189. Crop enterprise cost analysis for southeast Virginia. Virginia Coop. Ext. Serv. VPI & SU, Blacksburg, VA.Google Scholar
9. Henning, R. J., Allison, A. H., and Tripp, L. D. 1982. Cultural practices. Pages 123–138 in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc., Inc., Yoakum, TX 77995.Google Scholar
10. Porter, D. M., Smith, D. H., and Rodriquez-Kabana, R. 1982. Peanut plant diseases. Pages 326–410 in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc., Yoakum, TX 77995.Google Scholar
11. Smith, B. W. 1950. Arachis hypogaea. Aerial flower and subterranean fruit. Am. J. Bot. 37:802–815.Google Scholar
12. Swann, C. W. and Wilcut, J. W. 1989. Bentazon and paraquat tank mixtures for lambsquarters control in peanuts. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc. 19:58.Google Scholar
13. Wehtje, G. R., McGuire, J. A., Walker, R. H., and Patterson, M. G. 1986. Texas panicum (Panicum texanum) control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) with paraquat. Weed Sci. 308–311.Google Scholar
14. Wilcut, J. W., Wehtje, G. R., Cole, T. A., Hicks, T. V., and McGuire, J. A. 1989. Postemergence weed control systems without dinoseb for peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 37:385–391.Google Scholar
15. Wilkinson, R. E. and Hardcastle, W. S. 1969. EPTC effects on sicklepod petiolar fatty acids. Weed Sci. 17:335–338.Google Scholar
16. Wilkinson, R. E. and Hardcastle, W. S. 1970. EPTC effects on total leaflet fatty acids and hydrocarbons. Weed Sci. 18:125–128.Google Scholar