Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-25T12:42:14.678Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chemical control of suckers in hazelnut orchards of western Oregon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 July 2020

Larissa Larocca de Souza
Graduate Research Assistant, Oregon State University, Department of Horticulture, Corvallis, OR, USA
Marcelo L. Moretti*
Assistant Professor, Oregon State University, Department of Horticulture, Corvallis, OR, USA
Author for correspondence: Marcelo L. Moretti, Oregon State University, 4017 Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2750 SW Campus Way, Corvallis, OR97331. Email:


Hazelnut naturally grows as a multi-stemmed tree. The basal sprouts, known as suckers, grow throughout the season. Suckers are removed to promote a single trunk that facilitates production mechanization and increased yield. In western Oregon, herbicides are the most common method of sucker control, and at least four applications per season are performed in the spring and summer seasons. This study evaluated the efficacy of foliar-applied herbicides currently registered for sucker control in hazelnuts. Season-long and short-term field studies were conducted to assess the efficacy of herbicides to control hazelnut suckers. In the season-long studies, four consecutive applications of treatments that contained 2,4-D, glufosinate, or paraquat provided 50% to 80% control, maintained sucker height at 50 cm or less as compared to 155 cm for the nontreated control, and reduced sucker biomass by 87% as compared to the nontreated control. The short-term study results confirmed the efficacy of 2,4-D, glufosinate, and paraquat for sucker control, and in this study, carfentrazone and saflufenacil reduced sucker biomass to a level comparable to 2,4-D or glufosinate treatment. These results confirm that 2,4-D, glufosinate, paraquat, carfentrazone, and saflufenacil can be used for sucker control in hazelnut and emphasize the necessity of multiple applications during the growing season to control suckers in hazelnut. Proper herbicide selection is important to control suckers with success.

Research Article
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)


Associate Editor: Darren Robinson, University of Guelph


Anonymous (1996) Saber® herbicide product label. Loveland Publications. No. 34704-803. Greeley, CO. Loveland Products Inc. 21 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2019) Global hazelnut market––growth, trends, and forecast (2020–2025). Accessed: April 5, 2020Google Scholar
Bolker, B (2017) Dealing with quasi-models in R. Compare 1:5.452305Google Scholar
Brooks, ME, Kristense, K, van Benthem, KJ, Magnusson, A, Berg, CW, Nielsen, A, Skaug, HJ, Machler, M, Bolker, BM (2017) glmmTMB balances speed and flexibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modeling. R J 9:378400 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolci, M, Galeotti, F, Curir, P, Schellino, L, Gay, G (2004) New 2-naphthyloxyacetates for trunk sucker growth control on grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Plant Growth Regul 44:4752 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolci, M, Schellino, L, Radicati, L (2000) Control of sucker growth in hazelnut with esters of 1-naphthylacetic acid. Pages 431–436 in Mehlenbacher SA, ed, Proceedings of the Vth International Congress on Hazelnut. Corvallis, OR: International Society of Horticultural SciencesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douma, JC, Weedon, JT (2019) Analysing continuous proportions in ecology and evolution: A practical introduction to beta and Dirichlet regression. Methods Ecol 10:14121430 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2019) FAOSTAT statistical database. Accessed: April 28, 2020Google Scholar
Franco, S, Pancino, B (2008) Economic result of organic hazelnut cultivation in the Monti Cimini area. Pages 783–788 in Varvaro L, Franco S, eds, Proceedings of the VIIth International Congress on Hazelnut. Viterbo, Italy. Lazio, Italy: International Society of Horticultural SciencesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hothorn, T, Bretz, F, Westfall, P, Heiberger, RM, Schuetzenmeister, A, Scheibe, S (2014) multcomp: Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. R package version:1.4-12. Accessed: November 20, 2019Google Scholar
Kang, F, Wang, H, Pierce, FJ, Zhang, Q, Wang, S (2012) Sucker detection of grapevines for targeted spray using optical sensors. Trans ASABE 55:20072014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaya-Altop, E, Haghnama, K, Sarıaslan, D, Phillippo, CJ, Mennan, H, Zandstra, BH (2016) Long-term perennial weed control strategies: economic analyses and yield effect in hazelnut (Corylus avellana). Crop Prot 80:714 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenth, R (2019) Emmeans package: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. R package version 1.3. 5.1. https://CRAN. R-project. org/package= emmeans. Accessed: August 1, 2020Google Scholar
Mehlenbacher, SA, Smith, DC (1992) Effect of spacing and sucker removal on precocity of hazelnut seedlings. J Am Soc Hort Sci 117:523526 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercanligil, S, Arslan, P, Alasalvar, C, Okut, E, Akgül, E, Pınar, A, Geyik, , Tokgözoğlu, L, Shahidi, F (2007) Effects of hazelnut-enriched diet on plasma cholesterol and lipoprotein profiles in hypercholesterolemic adult men. Eur J Clin Nutr 61:212 Google ScholarPubMed
Meyers, JM, Faucett, J, Tejeda, DG, Kabashima, J, Miles, JA, Janowitz, I, Duraj, V, Smith, R, Weber, E (2000) High risk tasks for musculoskeletal disorders in agricultural field work. Pages 616–619 in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Accessed: August 1, 2020Google Scholar
Miller, M, Seavert, CF, Olsen, JL (2013) Orchard Economics: The Costs and Returns of Establishing and Producing Hazelnuts in the Willamette Valley. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Extension Service, AEB 43. p 29 Google Scholar
Molnar, TJ, Goffreda, JC, Funk, CR (2010) Survey of Corylus resistance to Anisogramma anomala from different geographic locations. HortScience 45:832836 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, KJ, Dixon, PM (2015) Analysis of combined experiments revisited. Agron J 107:763771 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muro, J, Luri, E (1990) Initial control and subsequent regrowth inhibition of plum suckers in a peach orchard. Page 179–187 in Proceedings of la Reunión de la Sociedad Española de Malherbología. Madrid, Spain: Sociedad Española de MalherbologíaGoogle Scholar
Murray, K, Jepson, P (2018) An integrated pest management strategic plan for hazelnuts in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Extension Service, AEB EM 9223. Accessed: August 1, 2020Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llewellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci 60 (SP 1):3162 Google Scholar
Olsen, J, Peachey, E (2013) Growing hazelnuts in the Pacific Northwest: orchard floor management. Oregon State University Extension Service, AEB EM 9079. Accessed: August 3, 2020Google Scholar
Reich, JE (1970) The use of 2, 4-D, paraquat and dinoseb for control of filbert (Corylus avellana L.) suckers. M.S. thesis. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 66 pGoogle Scholar
R Studio Team (2020) RStudio: Integrated Development R. RStudio, Inc. Accessed: February 20, 2020Google Scholar
Serdar, U, Akyuz, B (2018) Sucker management methods in hazelnut cultivation. Pages 309–314 in Tuncer C, Erdoğan V, eds, Proceedings of the IX International Congress on Hazelnut. Atakum, Samsun, Turkey. Leuven, Belgium: International Society of Horticultural SciencesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, DC, Erdoğan, V (2001) Elimination of hazelnuts suckers by disbudding. Pages 263–268 in Mehlenbacher SA, ed, Proceedings of the Vth International Congress on Hazelnut, Corvallis, OR. Leuven, Belgium: International Society of Horticultural SciencesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroup, WW (2015) Rethinking the analysis of non-normal data in plant and soil science. Agron J 107:811827 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasone, R, Colorio, G, Cedrola, C, Pagano, M (2008) Mechanical and physical control of hazelnut suckers. Pages 407–412 in Varvaro L, Franco S, eds, Proceedings of the VIIth International Congress on Hazelnut, Viterbo, Italy: International Society of Horticultural SciencesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasone, R, Colorio, G, Cedrola, C, Pagano, M (2010) Thermal control of hazelnut suckers. Pages 13–17 in Savoie P, Villeneuve J, Morisette R, eds, Proceedings of the XVIIth World Congress of the International Commission of Agricultural Engineering (CIGR). Québec City, Canada: Canadian Society of BioengineeringGoogle Scholar
Tous, J, Girona, J, Tasias, J (1992) Cultural practices and costs in hazelnut production. Pages 395–418 in Me G, Radicati L, eds, Proceedings of the IIIth International Congress on Hazelnut, Alba, Italy. Piedmont, Italy: International Society of Horticultural SciencesGoogle Scholar
[USDA] United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (2017) Web soil survey. Accessed: August 3, 2020Google Scholar
[USDA NASS] United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (2019) Noncitrus Fruits and Nuts 2018 summary. Washington, DC. 101 pGoogle Scholar
Venables, W, Ripley, B (2002) Random and mixed effects. Pages 271300 in Chambers, J, Eddy, W, Hardle, W, Sheather, S, Tierney, L, eds, Modern Applied Statistics with S: Statistics and Computing. New York: Springer-Verlag CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, WW, Seltmann, H (1986) Effect of sucker control on the volatile compounds in flue-cured tobacco. J Agric Food Chem 34:899904 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiman, NG, Pscheidt, JW, Moretti, M (2019) 2019 Hazelnut pest management guide for the Willamette Valley. Oregon State University Extension Service, AEB EM 8328. Google Scholar