Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-564cf476b6-mgm4h Total loading time: 0.185 Render date: 2021-06-21T02:26:17.649Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Factors Influencing Fenoxaprop Efficacy in Cool-Season Turfgrass

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Joseph C. Neal
Affiliation:
Dep. Flor. Orn. Hortic., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY 14853
Prasanta C. Bhowmik
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Univ. Mass., Amherst, MA 01003
Andrew F. Senesac
Affiliation:
Cornell Coop. Ext., Long Island Hortic. Res. Lab., Riverhead, NY 11901

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in Massachusetts and New York to evaluate the potential influence of plant growth stage, spray volume, nozzle type, additional surfactant, and herbicide formulation on smooth and large crabgrass control in turf with fenoxaprop. At a well-watered site, crabgrass control with fenoxaprop was equal to or greater than with MSMA. On an irrigated, fertilized site, crabgrass growth stage did not influence fenoxaprop efficacy. Excellent control of up to 5-tiller smooth crabgrass was obtained with 0.20 kg/ha of fenoxaprop. On nonirrigated turf, fenoxaprop was less effective on tillered crabgrass than on 2- to 5-leaf weeds. Under very dry conditions, fenoxaprop was ineffective regardless of growth stage. Control with MSMA was less affected by drought than was fenoxaprop. Spray volumes, between 140 and 1120 L/ha, did not affect fenoxaprop efficacy; however, high volume applications (1120 L/ha) with floodjet nozzles were less effective than flat fan nozzle treatments in two of three tests. Added surfactant did not improve efficacy except with floodjet nozzles on a droughty site. No differences were observed between the water-based and the emulsifiable concentrate formulations of fenoxaprop. Fenoxaprop caused temporary phytotoxicity (≤20% reduction in turf quality) to established Kentucky bluegrass and perennial ryegrass.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

1. Akey, W. C., and Morrison, I. N. 1983. Effect of moisture stress on wild oat (Avena fatua) response to diclofop. Weed Sci. 31:247253.Google Scholar
2. Baron, J. J., and Monaco, T. J. 1985. The influence of stage of growth of three annual grass species on phytotoxic effect of five postemergence grass herbicides. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 25:104.Google Scholar
3. Barrett, L. H., and Jagschitz, J. A. 1976. Control of crabgrass and fall panicum in turfgrass with postemergence herbicides. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:372376.Google Scholar
4. Bhowmik, P. C. 1986. Fenoxaprop-ethyl for postemergence crabgrass control in Kentucky bluegrass turf. HortScience 21:457458.Google Scholar
5. Chandrasena, J.P.N.R., and Sagar, G. R. 1986. Some factors affecting the performance of fluazifop-butyl against Elymus repens (L.)Gould [=Agropyron repens (L.)Beauv.] Weed Res. 26:139148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Coupland, D. 1987. Influence of environmental factors on the performance of sethoxydim against Elymus repens (L.). Weed Res. 27:329336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Dernoeden, P. H. 1987. Tolerance of perennial ryegrass and tall fescue seedlings to fenoxaprop. Agron. J. 79:10351037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Dernoeden, P. H. 1988. Fenoxaprop combined with preemergence herbicides for crabgrass and goosegrass control in turf. HortScience 23:154157.Google Scholar
9. Derr, J. F., Monaco, T. J., and Sheets, T. J. 1985. Response of three annual grasses to fluazifop. Weed Sci. 33:693697.Google Scholar
10. Dortenzio, W. A., and Norris, R. F. 1980. The influence of soil moisture on the foliar activity of diclofop. Weed Sci. 28:534539.Google Scholar
11. Kidder, D. W., and Behrens, R. 1988. Plant response to haloxyfop as influenced by water stress. Weed Sci. 36:305312.Google Scholar
12. Kocher, H., Kellner, H. M., Lotzsch, K., and Dorn, E. 1982. Mode of action and metabolic fate of the herbicide fenoxaprop-ethyl, HOE 33171. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.–Weeds 16:341347.Google Scholar
13. Pearson, S. L., and Bode, L. E. 1985. Effect of carrier rates and nozzle types on postemergence weed control. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 40:35.Google Scholar
14. SAS Institute Inc. 1985. SAS® User's Guide: statistics, version 5 edition. Cary, NC: SAS Inst. Inc.Google Scholar
15. Sawyer, C. D., Jagschitz, J. A., and Skogley, C. R. 1987. Tolerance of Kentucky bluegrass cultivars to fenoxaprop. Northeast. Branch Meetings, Abstr. Am. Soc. Agron. 10.Google Scholar
16. Snipes, D. E., and Street, J. E. 1987. Fenoxaprop for postemergence barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control in rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Sci. 35:224227.Google Scholar
17. Van Yahres, R. D., and Jagschitz, J. A. 1982. Pre- and postemergence herbicides for the control of crabgrass in lawn areas. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 36:292297.Google Scholar
18. West, L. D., Dawson, J. H., and Appleby, A. P. 1980. Factors influencing barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control with diclofop. Weed Sci. 28:366371.Google Scholar
19
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Factors Influencing Fenoxaprop Efficacy in Cool-Season Turfgrass
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Factors Influencing Fenoxaprop Efficacy in Cool-Season Turfgrass
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Factors Influencing Fenoxaprop Efficacy in Cool-Season Turfgrass
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *