Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:18:25.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Herbicides on Pepper (Capsicum annuum) Stand Establishment and Yield from Transplants Produced Using Various Irrigation Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Bethany A. Galloway ,
David W. Monks  and
Jonathan R. Schultheis
Bethany A. Galloway
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 27695-7609
David W. Monks*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 27695-7609
Jonathan R. Schultheis
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 27695-7609
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: david_monks@ncsu.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies were conducted in 1996 and 1997 to determine the effect of irrigation systems used to produce transplants on subsequent tolerance of banana and bell pepper (Capsicum annuum) transplants to field-applied herbicides. The irrigation systems were overhead (OH), ebb and flood (EF), and float (F). At 2 and 4 wk, banana and bell pepper injury was greatest from clomazone (1.1 kg/ha) treatments. Banana and bell pepper yield were not influenced by herbicide treatment. Although crop injury was greater in 1997, there was no herbicide or irrigation system interaction with year. OH and EF irrigated banana pepper and OH irrigated bell pepper produced the greatest total yield over two harvests, whereas F irrigated pepper yielded the least. F irrigated bell pepper plants had reduced early total yield and fancy fruits relative to other irrigation treatments. F irrigated plants yielded 32 and 22% less than OH irrigated plants in banana and bell pepper, respectively. Stand counts at 3 wk after planting (WAP) show that, unlike OH and EF treatments, F treatments lost 240 to 330 plants/ha. Differences in stand among treatments were greater in 1997 than 1996. Based on our study, the OH irrigated system appears to be the best system for producing bell pepper transplants with the greatest total yield. With banana pepper, both OH and EF irrigated systems appear to produce banana pepper transplants with the greatest total yield. Also, pepper transplant tolerance to herbicides is not affected by the irrigation system used to produce transplants.

Keywords

Clomazone, 2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinonenapropamide, N,N-diethyl-2-(1-napthalenyloxy)propanamidetrifluralin, 2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenaminepepper, Capsicum annuum L.Overhead irrigationfloat irrigationebb and flow irrigationbell pepperbanana pepperherbicide toleranceDAP, days after plantingEC, emulsifiable concentrateEF, ebb and floodF, floatME, microencapsulatedOH, overheadPPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, premergenceWAP, weeks after planting
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 241 - 245
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

Anonymous. 1989. United States standards for grades of sweet peppers. (United States Department of Agriculture. http://www.ams.usda.gov/standards/peperswt.pdf).Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1997. Command. Philidelphia, PA: FMC Corporation. 20 p.Google Scholar
Frantz, J. M., Welbaum, G. E., Shen, Z., and Morse, R. 1998. Comparison of cabbage seedling growth in four transplant production systems. Hort-Science. 33 (6): 976–979.Google Scholar
Galloway, B. A. 1997. Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) growth and yield responses to irrigation, herbicides, mechanical stress, and DIF. . North Carolina State University, Raleigh. 79 p.Google Scholar
Gunatilaka, M. K., Frantz, J. M., and Welbaum, G. E. 1997. Growing sh 2 sweet corn from transplants. Proceedings of the 5th National Symposium on Stand Establishment. Columbus, OH. pp. 249–253.Google Scholar
Leskovar, D. I. and Boales, A. K. 1995. Plant establishment systems affect yield of jalapeno pepper. Acta Hortic. 412: 275–280.Google Scholar
McKee, J.M.T. 1981. Physiological aspects of transplanting vegetables and other crops. I. Factors which influence re-establishment. Hortic. Abstr. 51: 265–272.Google Scholar
Moliter, H.-D. 1990. The European perspective with emphasis on subirrigation and recirculation of water and nutrients. Acta Hortic. 272: 165–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salter, P. J. 1985. Crop establishment: recent research and trends in commercial practice. Scientia Hortic. 36: 32–47.Google Scholar
Sanders, D. C., Averre, C. W., Monks, D. W., and Sorenson, K. A. 1994. Producing Commercial Vegetable Transplants. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service AG-337. 20 p.Google Scholar
Smith, W. D. and Boyette, M. D. 1998. Flue-Cured Tobacco Information: Transplant Production. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin AG-187. 170 p.Google Scholar
Vavrina, C. S. 1994. An Introduction to the Production of Containerized Vegetable Transplants. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Bulletin #302. 15 p.Google Scholar