Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:50:25.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Influencing Metham Efficacy on Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Tubers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Corey V. Ransom ,
Charles A. Rice  and
Joey K. Ishida
Corey V. Ransom*
Affiliation:
Oregon State University, Malheur Experiment Station, 595 Onion Avenue, Ontario, OR 97914
Charles A. Rice
Affiliation:
Oregon State University, Malheur Experiment Station, 595 Onion Avenue, Ontario, OR 97914
Joey K. Ishida
Affiliation:
Oregon State University, Malheur Experiment Station, 595 Onion Avenue, Ontario, OR 97914
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: corey.ransom@usu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Yellow nutsedge infests a large number of hectares in the Treasure Valley of eastern Oregon and western Idaho. Much of its continued expansion appears to be related to onion production in the valley. Fall applications of metham often produce inconsistent results when used to control yellow nutsedge before planting an onion crop. Trials were conducted in the laboratory to determine the influence on yellow nutsedge control of metham dose, duration of exposure, temperature during exposure, and tuber conditioning by washing and chilling at 3 C. All factors influenced metham efficacy against yellow nutsedge tubers. The dose causing 50% reduction in sprouting tubers (I50) for metham ranged from 22 to 76 mg kg−1 of soil and was lower for conditioned tubers than nonconditioned tubers across all conditions, except when tubers were exposed at 25 C for 3 d. Nonconditioned tubers were unaffected by metham after 1 d exposure at 5 C. Increasing exposure temperature or increasing exposure duration decreased sprouting for nonconditioned tubers. As exposure duration and exposure temperature increased, differences among conditioned and nonconditioned tubers were less. Temperature and exposure duration affects metham efficacy against yellow nutsedge, and the condition of the tubers at the time of treatment also has a significant effect. Applications of metham at a time when yellow nutsedge tubers are not dormant may improve yellow nutsedge control.

Keywords

Methamyellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L.onion, Allium cepa L.Fumigationdormancydose–responsetemperatureexposure duration
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 56 , Issue 6 , December 2008 , pp. 856 - 859
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

Bendixen, L. E. and Nandihalli, U. B. 1987. Worldwide distribution of purple and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus and C. esculentus). Weed Technol. 1:61–65.Google Scholar
Ben-Yephet, Y. and Frank, Z. R. 1985. Effect of soil structure on penetration by metham-sodium and of temperature on concentration required to kill soilborne pathogens. Phytopathology. 75:403–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boydston, R. A. and Williams, M. M. II. 2003. Effect of soil fumigation on volunteer potato (Solanum tuberosum) tuber viability. Weed Technol. 17:352–357.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, C. M., McGiffen, M. E. Jr., Sims, J. J., and Becker, J. O. 2003. Fumigant combinations for Cyperus esculentus L. control. Pest Manag. Sci. 60:369–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeley, P. E. and Thullen, R. J. 1978. Light requirements of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) and light interception by crops. Weed Sci. 26:10–16.Google Scholar
Keeling, J. W., Bender, D. A., and Abernathy, J. R. 1990. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) management in transplanted onions (Allium cepa). Weed Technol. 4:68–70.Google Scholar
Leistra, M. and Smelt, J. H. 1974. Optimum soil conditions for fumigation with metam-sodium. Agro-Ecosystems. 1:169–176.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, J. N., Wharton, B., and Shackleton, M. A. 2004. Enhanced biodegradation reduces the capacity of metham to control soil pests. Aust. J. Entomol. 43:72–76.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Malik, M. S., Jha, P., and Oliveira, M. J. 2006. Effects of isothiocyanates on purple (Cyperus rotundus L.) and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.). Weed Biol. Manag. 6:131–138.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. and Meehan, J. T. IV. 2005. Use of isothiocyanates for suppression of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri), pitted morningglory (Ipomeas lacunosa), and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus). Weed Sci. 53:884–890.Google Scholar
Rice, C. A., Ransom, C. V., and Ishida, J. K. 2004. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) response to irrigation and nitrogen fertilization. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 57.42–43, 65.Google Scholar
Saeed, I. A. M., Rouse, D. I., and Harkin, J. M. 2000. Methyl isothiocyanate volatilization from fields treated with metam-sodium. Pest Manag. Sci. 56:813–817.Google Scholar
Seefelt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose-response relationships. Weed Technol. 9:218–225.Google Scholar
Smelt, J. H. and Leistra, M. 1974. Conversion of metham-sodium to methyl isothiocyanate and basic data on the behavior of methyl isothiocyanate in soil. Pestic. Sci. 5:401–407.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. and Wax, L. 1973. Yellow nutsedge shoot emergence and tuber longevity. (Cyperus esculentus). Weed Sci. 21:76–81.Google Scholar
Tumbleson, M. E. and Kommedahl, T. 1961. Reproductive potential of Cyperus esculentus by tubers. Weeds. 9:646–653.Google Scholar
Warton, B., Matthiessen, J. N., and Shackleton, M. A. 2003. Cross-enhancement: enhanced biodegradation of isothiocyanates in soils previously treated with metham. Soil Biol. Biochem. 35:1123–1127.Google Scholar