Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T23:34:17.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jubatagrass (Cortaderia jubata) Control Using Chemical and Mechanical Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Joseph M. DiTomaso ,
Jennifer J. Drewitz  and
Guy B. Kyser
Joseph M. DiTomaso*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, Mail Stop 4, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Jennifer J. Drewitz
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, Mail Stop 4, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Guy B. Kyser
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, Mail Stop 4, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jmditomaso@ucdavis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Jubatagrass is one of the most invasive plants along the California and southern Oregon coast. It establishes dense populations that can severely impact native plant diversity and conifer seedling recruitment following forestry operations. This goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of both manual removal and several herbicide control options and application techniques. In addition, a cost analysis was also conducted for the most successful herbicide control methods. Results demonstrate that mechanical removal through digging is effective, although labor intensive. Among the herbicides tested, glyphosate applied as a high-volume (spray-to-wet) application (0.6% ae) in early summer, low-volume application (2.4% ae) in early summer or fall, and ropewick technique in early summer or fall (> 9.9% ae) all provided ≥ 88% jubatagrass control, but the low-volume treatments were the most cost effective. Although the graminicide sethoxydim at the highest rate (0.36% ai) did not give effective control, fluazifop applied in the fall in a low-volume treatment (0.98% ai) gave 87% control of jubatagrass. Imazapyr gave some level of control but does not appear to provide an economical option for jubatagrass management. Results of this study demonstrate that in addition to the more conventional methods of mechanical removal and spray-to-wet glyphosate (0.6% ae), control of jubatagrass can also be equally or more effective with low-volume and ropewick applications of glyphosate.

Keywords

Fluazifopglyphosateimazapyrsethoxydimjubatagrass, Cortaderia jubata (Lemoine) StapfHigh volumelow volumeperennial grassropewickwildland
Type
Research Articles
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 82 - 90
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

[Cal-IPC] California Invasive Plant Council California Invasive Plant Inventory. Cal-IPC Publication 2006-02 2006. Berkeley, CA California Invasive Plant Council http://www.cal-ipc.org. Accessed: October 29, 2007.Google Scholar
[CDFA] California Department of Food and Agriculture Eleven new species added to the state weed list. Noxious Times 2003. 5/3:1, 8–9.Google Scholar
Connor, H. E. and Edgar, E. 1974. Names and types in Cortaderia Stapf. (Gramineae). Taxon 23:595–605.Google Scholar
Costello, L. R. 1986. Control of ornamentals gone wild: pampas grass, bamboo, English and Algerian ivy. Calif. Weed Conf. 38:162–165.Google Scholar
Davenhill, N. A. 1988. Herbicides for pampas grass control. Proceedings, New Zealand Weed and Pest Control Conference 41:156–159.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Healy, E., Bell, D. E., Drewitz, J. J., and Tschohl, A. E. Pampasgrass and Jubatagrass Threaten California Coastal Habitats 1999. Davis, CA Weed Research and Information Center. University of California Coop Ext. Leaflet #99-1. http://wric.ucdavis.edu/information/pampasgrass.html. Accessed: October 29, 2007.Google Scholar
Drewitz, J. J. and DiTomaso, J. M. 2004. Seed biology of jubatagrass (Cortaderia jubata). Weed Sci. 52:525–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, K. W. and McDaniel, K. C. Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) management with imazapyr. Weed Technol. 12:37–344.Google Scholar
Fritzke, S. and Moore, P. 1998. Exotic plant management in national parks of California. Fremontia 26/4:49–53.Google Scholar
Fuller, T. C. 1976. Its history as a weed. Cowan, B.D., ed. The menace of pampas grass. Fremontia 4/2:14–16. in.Google Scholar
Gadcil, R. L., Knowles, A. L., and Zabkiewicz, J. A. 1984. Pampas—a new forest weed problem. Proc. N. Z. Weed Pest Control Conf. 37:187–190.Google Scholar
Harradine, A. R. 1991. The impact of pampas grass as weeds in southern Australia. Plant Prot. Quart. 6:111–115.Google Scholar
Lippmann, C. More on the weedy “pampas grass” in California. Fremontia 1977. 4:25–27.Google Scholar
Moore, K. 1994. Pulling pampas: controlling Cortaderia by hand with a volunteer program. Newsl. Calif. Exotic Pest Plant Counc. 2/2:7–9.Google Scholar
Odion, D. C., Hickson, D. E., and D'Antonio, C. M. 1992. Central Coast Maritime Chaparral on Vandenberg Air Force Base. An Inventory and Analysis of Management Needs for a Threatened Vegetation Type. Report for The Nature Conservancy and Department of Defense/Vandenberg Air Force Base. Pages 42.Google Scholar
Parsons, W. T. and Cuthbertson, E. G. 1992. Pampas grasses. Cortaderia spp. Pages 100–104 in. Noxious Weeds of Australia. Melbourne, Australia Inkata Press.Google Scholar
Pasquinelli, R. 1998. Exotic weeds in the North Coast state parks. Fremontia 26/4:54–57.Google Scholar
Saville, G. W., Watson, M. J., and Sharpe, C. J. 1986. Haloxyfop EE—selective control of pampas grass in New Zealand commercial forests. Proc. N. Z. Weed Pest Control Conf. 39:92–94.Google Scholar
Stanton, A. E. and DiTomaso, J. M. 2004. Growth response of Cortaderia selloana and Cortaderia jubata (Poaceae) seedlings to temperature, light, and water. Madroño 51:312–321.Google Scholar