Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-25T10:46:29.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Wine Grape (Vitis vinifera) Response to Fall Exposure of Simulated Drift from Selected Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Muhammad A. Bhatti
Affiliation:
Food and Environmental Quality Laboratory, Washington State University Richland, WA 99352
Kassim Al-Khatib
Affiliation:
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Robert Parker
Affiliation:
Irrigated Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Washington State University, Prosser, WA 99350

Abstract

‘Lemberger’ wine grape response to fall application of selected herbicides applied at simulated drift rates was studied in 1992 and 1993. Chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and 2,4-D plus glyphosate were applied at 1/100, 1/33, 1/10, and 1/3 of a selected maximum rate for use in wheat or fallow. All herbicides, except bromoxynil and thifensufluron, caused symptoms on grapevines at the highest rate during the spring following fall application. The most severe symptoms were caused by 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate, whereas the least symptoms were caused by chlorsulfuron and glyphosate. The severity of symptoms increased and shoot growth, leaf area, internode length, and dry cane weight decreased as the rates of 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate increased. Chlorsulfuron and glyphosate reduced the growth of grapevines only when applied at the highest rate during the fall. The data show that exposure of wine grapes to 2,4-D or 2,4-D plus glyphosate during the fall can adversely affect the growth of grapevines the following spring.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, P. 1993. Foliar absorption and translocation of herbicides from aqueous solution and treated soil. Weed Sci. 40:281287.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, P. 1993. Wine grape (Vitis vinifera) response to simulated herbicide spray drift. Weed Technol. 7:97102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatti, M. A., Al-Khatib, K., and Parker, R. 1996. Wine grape (Vitis vinifera) response to repeated exposure of selected sulfonylurea herbicides and 2,4-D. Weed Technol. 10:951956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clore, W. J. 1972. 2,4-D on Concord grapes. Wash. State Grape Soc. Proc. 2:2932.Google Scholar
Felsot, A. S., Bhatti, M. A., Mink, G. I., and Reisenauer, G. 1994. Biomonitoring for detection of atmospheric deposition of trace herbicide residues. Abstr. 8th Int. Congr. Pestic. Chem., 27 p.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. M., Talbert, R. E., and Morris, J. R. 1979. Weed control in ‘Concord’ grapes in Arkansas. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 104:713716.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. Jr., Ahmedullah, A., and Wright, G. A. 1991. Influence of repeated applications of 2,4-D on yield and juice quality of Concord grapes (Vitis labruscana). Weed Sci. 39:284295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reisinger, L. M. and Robinson, E. 1976. Long distance transport of 2,4-D. J. Appl. Meteorol. 15:836845.Google Scholar
Robinson, E. and Fox, L. L. 1978. 2,4-D herbicides in central Washington. J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc. 28:10151020.Google Scholar
Rom, R. C., Brown, S. A., and Markham, J. D. 1974. Glyphosate toxicity to apple trees. HortScience 9:594595.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, G. W. 1980. Statistical Methods. 7th ed. Ames, IA: The Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Wallinder, C. J., Talbert, R. E., and Morris, J. R. 1983. Response of ‘Concord’ grapes to glyphosate exposure. HortScience 18(1): 5759.Google Scholar
Weaver, R. J., Leonard, O. A., and McCune, S. B. 1961. Response of Tokay grapes to spray applications of 2,4-D. Hilgardia 31:419433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar