Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T01:08:45.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grape hyacinth [Muscari botryoides (L.) Mill] control in a wheat-soybean rotation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2019

Shawn C. Beam Open the ORCID record for Shawn C. Beam [Opens in a new window] ,
Mark J. VanGessel ,
Kurt M. Vollmer  and
Michael L. Flessner
Shawn C. Beam
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, School of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA
Mark J. VanGessel
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Delaware, Georgetown, DE, USA
Kurt M. Vollmer
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Delaware, Georgetown, DE, USA
Michael L. Flessner*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, School of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Michael L. Flessner, School of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061. Email: flessner@vt.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Grape hyacinth is a perennial bulbous species in the Liliaceae. It is commonly grown as an ornamental plant, but it can spread into agricultural fields and become weedy, potentially interfering with harvest and fall-planted crops. There has been limited research on controlling grape hyacinth in cropping systems. Fall and spring applied field-research studies were conducted to determine grape hyacinth control with herbicides labeled for use in wheat or winter fallow before planting soybean. Among fall-applied herbicides, paraquat resulted in the greatest initial grape hyacinth control (90% to 100%). Grape hyacinth control, 16 months after application (MAA), was variable, but the top-performing treatments were glyphosate and metsulfuron plus paraquat, resulting in 65% and 50% control, respectively. After spring applications, grape hyacinth control in November (7 MAA) was variable, but top-performing treatments were glyphosate and metsulfuron, which resulted in at least 26% control. Spring-applied paraquat, carfentrazone, metsulfuron, and sulfosulfuron resulted in 73%, 68%, 69%, and 60% reductions in grape hyacinth bulb counts, compared with the nontreated control 7 MAA, and were the top-performing treatments. Despite product-label prohibitions on rotation to soybeans, no soybean yield reductions were observed from any treatment in either study. Single applications of certain herbicides in the fall or spring can result in good control (>80%) of grape hyacinth initially, but long-term control is poor, and additional research is required.

Keywords

Daniel Stephenson, Louisana State University Agricultural CenterCarfentrazoneglyphosatemetsulfuronparaquatsulfosulfurongrape hyacinth, Muscari botryoides (L.) Mill. MUSBOsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merrwheat, Triticum aestivum L.Bulb countscarryovercoverdouble cropinjury
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , August 2019 , pp. 578 - 585
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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

Anderson, JM, McWhorter, CG (1976) The economics of common cocklebur control in soybean production. Weed Sci 24:397–400 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, B, Johnson, K, Franklin, S, Call, G, Webber, M (2002) Invasive exotic pest plants in Tennessee. J Tenn Acad Sci 77:45–48 Google Scholar
Brann, DE, Holshouser, DL, Mullins, GL, eds (2000) Agronomy Handbook. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Cooperative Extension. 134 pGoogle Scholar
Burnside, OC (1973) Influence of weeds on soybean harvesting losses with a combine. Weed Sci 21:520–523 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, OC, Wicks, GA, Warnes, DD, Somerhalder, BR, Weeks, SA (1969) Effect of weeds on harvesting efficiency in corn, sorghum, and soybeans. Weed Sci 17:438–441 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canfield, RH (1941) Application of the line interception method in sampling range vegetation. J Forestry 39:388–394 Google Scholar
Defelice, MS (2003) Wild garlic, Allium vineale L.–little to crow about. Weed Technol 17:890–895 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doussi, MA, Thanos, CA (2002) Ecophysiology of seed germination in Mediterranean geophytes. 1. Muscari spp. Seed Sci Res 12:193–201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, JM, Shaw, DR, Barrentine, WL (1998) Soybean (Glycine max) seed quality and harvesting efficiency as affected by low weed densities. Weed Technol 12:166–173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frans, R, Talbert, R, Marx, D, Crowley, H (1986) Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. Pages 29–46 in Camper, ND ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. 3rd ed. Champaign, IL:Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Grey, TL, Braxton, LB, Richburg, JS III (2012) Effect of wheat herbicide carryover on double-crop cotton and soybean. Weed Technol 26:207–212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanning, NR, Preece, JE, Young, BG (2012) The influence of chilling and chipping of star-of-Bethlehem (Ornithogalum umbellatum) bulbs on plant growth and reproduction. Invas Plant Sci Manag 5:402–407 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanning, NR, Young, JM, Young, BG (2016) Efficacy of preplant corn and soybean herbicides on star-of-Bethlehem (Ornithogalum umbellatum) in no-till crop production. Weed Technol 30:391–400 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khodayari, K, Frans, RE, Akkari, KH (1985) Evaluation of chlorsulfuron in wheat (Triticum aestivum) and a wheat-soybean (Glycine max) double-cropping system. Weed Sci 33:746–749 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leys, AR, Slife, FW (1988) Absorption and translocation of 14C-chlorsulfuron and 14C-metsulfuron in wild garlic (Allium vineale). Weed Sci 36:1–4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leys, A, Slife, FW (1986) The response of wild garlic (Allium vineale) to the timing of spray applications of chlorsulfuron. Weed Sci 34:718–723 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahr, S (2010) Grape hyacinth. https://hort.uwex.edu/articles/grape-hyacinth/. Accessed: September 28, 2018Google Scholar
McWhorter, CG, Anderson, JM (1976a) Bentazon applied postemergence for economical control common cocklebur in soybeans. Weed Sci 24:391–396 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, CG, Anderson, JM (1976b) Effectiveness of metribuzin applied preemergence for economical control of common cocklebur in soybeans. Weed sci 24:385–390 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nave, WR, Wax, LM (1971) Effect of weeds on soybean yield and harvesting efficiency. Weed Sci 19:533–535 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, EJ, Mckelvey, RA (1982) Herbicides and dates of application for control and eradication of wild garlic (Allium vineale). Weed Sci 30:557–560 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qi, Y, Lou, Q, Li, H, Yue, J, Liu, Y, Wang, Y (2013) Anatomical and biochemical studies of bicolored flower development in Muscari latifolium. Protoplasma 250:1273–1281 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritter, R, Haris, TC, Kaufman, LM (1988) Chlorsulfuron and metsulfuron residues on double-cropped soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol 2:49–52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rydrych, DJ (1974) Competition between winter wheat and downy brome. Weed Sci 22:211–214 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rydrych, DJ (1981) Corn cockle (Agrostemma githago) competition in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci 29:360–363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skroch, WA, Warren, SL, De Hertogh, AA (1988) Phytotoxicity of herbicides to spring flowering bulbs. J Environ Hort 6:109–113 Google Scholar
Steckel, LE, McClure, MA (2015) Oh, beautiful star-of-Bethlehem (Ornithogalum umbellatum). Weed Technol 29:874–877 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, DG (1971) Competition of blue mustard with winter wheat. Weed Sci 19:340–342 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, DG, Furtick, WR (1962) Competition of fiddleneck with wheat. Weeds 10:121–123 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troutman, BC, King, JW, Frans, RE (1981) Wild garlic (Allium vineale) control with glyphosate. Weed Sci 29:717–722 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2018) Natural Resources Conservation Service, Plants Database. https://plants.usda.gov/core/profile?symbol=MUBO. Accessed: March 3, 2018Google Scholar
VanGessel, MJ (2015) Grape hyacinth control in no-till fields: Weekly Crop Update. Volume 23, issue 5. Georgetown, DE: University of Delaware Cooperative Extension Service. 12 pGoogle Scholar