Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:28:48.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Increasing the Efficacy and Extending the Effective Application Period of a Granular Turf Bioherbicide by Covering with Jute Fabric

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Mohammed H. Abu-Dieyeh  and
Alan K. Watson
Mohammed H. Abu-Dieyeh
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, McGill University, 21,111 Lakeshore Road, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada, H9X 3V9
Alan K. Watson*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, McGill University, 21,111 Lakeshore Road, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada, H9X 3V9
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: alan.watson@mcgill.ca.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Progress in bioherbicide development has been hindered by the strict moisture and temperature requirements of the living active ingredient. Application of a jute fabric to areas treated with a Sclerotinia minor granular bioherbicide improved broadleaf weed control and broadened the effective application period to include the warm summer season. When turfgrass plots treated with the bioherbicide were covered with burlap fabric for 3 d, broadleaf weed (dandelion, white clover, broadleaf plantain, buckhorn plantain, ground ivy, and prostrate knotweed) control was greatly enhanced. The cover was made of natural jute fibers that retained water but had sufficient transparency to allow 33% light penetration for continued growth of the grass. Virulence of the bioherbicide was maintained under elevated temperatures that would otherwise reduce efficacy. The bioherbicide was ineffective in the summer unless covered, but dandelion density, broadleaf weed ground cover, and dandelion survival were all reduced by the bioherbicide when plots were covered, even if applications were made in July. The efficacy of the bioherbicide was also enhanced under favorable conditions, and covering permitted reduced application rates without loss of efficacy. When applied at a rate of 20 g/m2 and covered, S. minor granules exerted significantly greater biocontrol of dandelion than 40 g/m2 without covering. Covering for up to 5 d did not cause any adverse effects on the turfgrass. This approach may overcome one obstacle to the commercialization of the Sclerotinia minor bioherbicide, permitting its deployment under challenging environmental conditions.

Keywords

Broadleaf plantain, Plantago major L. PLAMAbuckhorn plantain, Plantago lanceolata L. PLALAdandelion, Taraxacum officinale G. H. Weber ex Wiggers TAROFground ivy, Glechoma hederacea L. GLEHEprostrate knotweed, Polygonum aviculare L. POLAVwhite clover, Trifolium repens L. TRFREApplication technologybiological controljuteSARRITORSclerotinia minorturfgrass
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , December 2009 , pp. 524 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Abawi, G. and Grogan, R. 1979. Epidemiology of diseases caused by Sclerotinia species. Phytopathology 69:889–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abu-Dieyeh, M. H. 2006. Population Dynamics of Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) in Turfgrass as Influenced by a Biological Control Agent, Sclerotinia minor. . Montreal, QC, Canada: McGill University. 298.Google Scholar
Abu-Dieyeh, M. H. and Watson, A. K. 2005. Impact of mowing and weed control on broadleaf weed population dynamics in turf. J. Plant Interact 1:239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abu-Dieyeh, M. H. and Watson, A. K. 2006. Effect of turfgrass mowing height on biocontrol of Taraxacum officinale with Sclerotinia minor . Biocontrol Sci. Technol 16:509–524.Google Scholar
Abu-Dieyeh, M. H. and Watson, A. K. 2007a. Grass over-seeding and a fungus combine to control Taraxacum officinale. J. App. Ecol 44:115–124.Google Scholar
Abu-Dieyeh, M. H. and Watson, A. K. 2007b. Efficacy of Sclerotinia minor for dandelion control: effect of dandelion accession, age and grass competition. Weed Res 4:63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abu-Dieyeh, M. H. and Watson, A. K. 2007c. Population dynamics of broadleaf weeds in turfgrass as influenced by chemical and biological control methods. Weed Sci 55:371–380.Google Scholar
Boyette, C. D. and Walker, H. L. 1985. Factors influencing biocontrol of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and prickly sida (Sida spinosa) with Fusarium lateritium . Weed Sci 33:209–211.Google Scholar
Chittick, A. T. and Auld, B. A. 2001. Polymers in bioherbicide formulation: Xanthium spinosum and Colletotrichum as a model system. Biocontrol Sci. Technol 11:691–702.Google Scholar
Connick, W. J. Jr., Boyette, C. D., and McAlpine, J. R. 1991. Formulation of mycoherbicides using a pasta-like process. Biol. Control 1:281–287.Google Scholar
Daigle, D. J., Connick, W. J. Jr., Quimby, P. C. Jr., Evans, J., Trask-Morrell, B., and Fulgham, F. E. 1990. Invert emulsion: carrier and water source for the mycoherbicide, Alternaria cassiae . Weed Technol 4:327–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derr, J. F. 1989. Weed control with landscape fabrics. J. Environ. Hortic 7:129–133.Google Scholar
Emmons, R. 1995. Turfgrass Science and Management. Albany, NY: Delmar. 512.Google Scholar
Feldman, R. S., Holmes, C. E., and Blomgren, T. A. 2000. Use of fabric and compost mulches for vegetable production in a low tillage, permanent bed system: effects on crop yield and labor. Am. J. Altern. Agric 15:146–153.Google Scholar
Forcella, F., Poppe, S. R., Hansen, N. C., Head, W. A., Hoover, E. Y., Propsom, F., and McKensie, J. 2003. Biological mulches for managing weeds in transplanted strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa). Weed Technol 17:782–788.Google Scholar
Fravel, D. R. 2005. Commercialization and implementation of biocontrol. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol 43:337–359.Google Scholar
Hallett, S. G. 2005. Where are the bioherbicides? Weed Sci 53:404–415.Google Scholar
Hollowell, J. E., Shew, B. B., Cubeta, M. A., and Wilcut, J. W. 2003. Weed species as hosts of Sclerotinia minor in peanut fields. Plant Dis 87:197–199.Google Scholar
Kennedy, A. C. and Kremer, R. J. 1996. Microorganisms in weed control strategies. J. Prod. Agric 9:480–485.Google Scholar
Larsen, S. U., Kristoffersen, P., and Fischer, J. 2004. Turfgrass management and weed control without pesticides on football pitches in Denmark. Pest Manag. Sci 50:579–587.Google Scholar
Leathers, T. D., Oupta, S. C., and Alexander, N. J. 1993. Mycopesticides: status, challenges and potential. J. Ind. Microbiol 12:69–75.Google Scholar
Martin, C. A., Ponder, H. G., and Gilliam, C. H. 1991. Evaluation of landscape fabrics in suppressing growth of weed species. J. Environ. Hortic 9:38–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarty, L. B., Everest, J. W., Hall, D. W., Murphy, T. R., and Yelverton, F. 2001. Color Atlas of Turfgrass Weeds. Chelsea, MI: Sleeping Bear Press. 269.Google Scholar
Melzer, M. and Boland, G. 1994. Epidemiology of lettuce drop caused by Sclerotinia minor . Can. J. Plant Pathol 16:170–101.Google Scholar
Melzer, M., Smith, E., and Boland, G. 1997. Index of plant hosts of Sclerotinia minor . Can. J. Plant Pathol 19:272–280.Google Scholar
Miltner, E. D., Stahnke, G. K., Rinehart, G. J., Backman, P. A., and Johnston, W. J. 2004. Establishment of Poa annua var. reptans from seed under golf course conditions in the Pacific Northwest. Crop Sci 44:2154–2159.Google Scholar
Monaco, T. J., Weller, S. C., and Ashton, F. M. 2002. Weed Science: Principles and Practices. New York: J. Wiley. 671.Google Scholar
Patton, A., Trappe, J., and Richardson, M. 2008. Seed covers and germination blankets influence the establishment of seeded warm-season grasses. Pages 42–46. in. Arkansas Turfgrass Report 2007. Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas Agriculture Experiment Station Rep. 557.Google Scholar
[PMRA] Pest Management Regulatory Agency 2007. Evaluation Report: Sclerotinia minor Strain IMI 344141 (ERC2007-02). Ottawa, Canada: Health Canada. 50.Google Scholar
Quimby, P. C. Jr., Fulgham, F. E., Boyette, C. D., and Connick, W. J. 1988. An invert emulsion replaces dew in biocontrol of sicklepod—a preliminary study. Pages 264–270. in Hovde, D. A. and Beestman, G. B. Pesticides, Formulations and Application Systems. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.Google Scholar
Quimby, P. C. Jr., Zidack, N. K., Boyette, C. D., and Grey, W. E. 1999. A simple method for stabilizing and granulating fungi. Biocontrol Sci. Technol 9:5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saha, T. and Sen, S. K. 1992. Somatic embryogenesis in protoplast derived calli of cultivated jute, Corchorus capsularis L. Plant Cell Rep 10:633–636.Google Scholar
Schisler, D. A., Jackson, M. A., and Bothast, R. J. 1991. Influence of nutrition during conidiation of Colletotrichum truncatum on conidial germination and efficacy in inciting disease in Sesbania exaltata . Phytopathology 81:587–590.Google Scholar
Shabana, Y. M., Charudattan, R., DeValerio, J. T., and Elwakil, M. A. 1997. An evaluation of hydrophilic polymers for formulating the bioherbicide agents Alternaria cassiae and A. eichhorniae . Weed Technol 11:212–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart-Wade, S. M., Green, S., Boland, G. J., et al. 2002. Taraxacum officinale (Weber), dandelion (Asteraceae). Pages 427–430. in Mason, P. G. and Huber, J. T. Biological Control Programmes in Canada 1981–2000. Wallingford, Oxon, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Walker, H. L. and Connick, W. J. 1983. Sodium alginate for production and formulation of mycoherbicides. Weed Sci 31:333–338.Google Scholar
Watson, A. K. 2007. Sclerotinia minor—biocontrol target or agent? 205–211. in Vurro, M. and Gressel, J. Novel Biotechnologies for Biocontrol Agent Enhancement and Management. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W. and Watson, A. K. 1997. Effect of dew period and temperature on the ability of Exserohilum monoceras to cause seedling mortality of Echinochloa species. Plant Dis 81:629–634.Google Scholar