Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T20:40:29.448Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Postemergence-Directed Sprayers for Wild-Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum) Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Craig D Kleppe  and
Robert G. Harvey
Craig D Kleppe
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wis., Madison, WI 53706
Robert G. Harvey
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wis., Madison, WI 53706
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Several precision postemergence-directed sprayers with different nozzle designs and arrangements were evaluated for potential use in sweet corn for wild-proso millet (PANMI) control in field trials from 1987 to 1989. Ametryn at 2270 g ha-1 plus oil-emulsifier mixture (OEM) at 1.3% v/v and sethoxydim alone or plus OEM applied postemergence-directed selectively controlled PANMI in sweet corn. Sethoxydim at 220 g ha-1 plus OEM controlled PANMI best when averaged over the 3-yr period. Ametryn plus OEM did not injure corn and sethoxydim at 110 g ha-1 plus OEM caused little or no corn injury and no yield reductions when applied with any of the sprayers. Generally, only sethoxydim at 220 g ha-1 plus OEM injured corn. The amount of injury was different among sprayers, with the nozzle designs and arrangements responsible for corn injury. Injury was minimized when sethoxydim was applied with a sprayer equipped with 150 degree dual orifice nozzles spaced 38 cm apart and mounted on skids that contacted the soil to assure constant nozzle height. This sprayer, or sprayers of similar nozzle design, show the most potential for use by sweet corn growers.

Keywords

Ametryn, N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diaminesethoxydim, 2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-onewild-proso millet, Panicum miliaceum L. ssp. ruderale (Kitagawa) Tzevelev. ♯ PANMIcorn, Zea mays L.Corn tolerancecrop oil concentratecultivatordual orifice nozzlesroot uptakesandy soilshieldsskidssethoxydimametrynPANMI
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 185 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 by the 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

1. Chernicky, J. P., Gast, R., and Slife, F. W. 1989. The effect of sethoxydim on corn (Zea mays) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi). Weed Sci. 37:600–603.Google Scholar
2. Dill, G. M., and Martin, F. A. 1978. Postemergence directed application of paraquat in Louisiana sugarcane. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 31:70.Google Scholar
3. Fawcett, J. A., and Harvey, R. G. 1988. Proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) control in corn (Zea mays) with postemergence-directed herbicides. Weed Sci. 36:215–220.Google Scholar
4. Fawcett, J. A., Harvey, R. G., Arnold, W. E., Bauman, T. T., Eberlein, C. V., Kells, J. J., Moshier, L. J., Slife, F. W., and Wilson, R. G. 1987. Influence of environment on corn (Zea mays) tolerance to sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 35:568–575.Google Scholar
5. Hamilton, K. C., and Arle, F. A. 1970. Directed applications of herbicides in irrigated cotton. Weed Sci. 18:85–88.Google Scholar
6. Kleppe, C. D., and Harvey, R. G. 1989. Tolerance of corn (Zea mays) to sethoxydim applied with precision postemergence-directed sprayer equipment. Weed Technol. 3:663–667.Google Scholar
7. Wilson, R. G., and Burnside, O. C. 1973. Weed control in soybeans with postemergence-directed herbicides. Weed Sci. 21:81–85.Google Scholar