Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:47:48.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preemergence Weed Control in Potato (Solanum tuberosum) with Ethalfluralin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Dennis J. Tonks ,
Charlotte V. Eberlein  and
Mary J. Guttieri
Dennis J. Tonks*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Aberdeen, ID 83210
Charlotte V. Eberlein
Affiliation:
Twin Falls Research and Extension Center, University of Idaho, Twin Falls, ID 83303
Mary J. Guttieri
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Aberdeen, ID 83210
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: dtonks@uidaho.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted to assess weed control and potato (Solanum tuberosum) tolerance to ethalfluralin. Ethalfluralin applied preemergence (PRE) alone at 1.05 kg ai/ha generally did not control weeds adequately. However, ethalfluralin at 1.05 kg/ha combined with either metribuzin at 0.28 kg ai/ha or rimsulfuron at 0.018 kg ai/ha controlled common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), and green foxtail (Setaria viridis) ≥ 98%, which was similar to control observed with several currently registered herbicide mixtures. Volunteer oat (Avena sativa) control with either ethalfluralin at 1.05 kg/ha plus EPTC at 3.4 kg ai/ha or ethalfluralin plus metribuzin was equal to registered two-way mixtures. Ethalfluralin plus metribuzin did not adequately control hairy nightshade (Solanum sarrachoides), but ethalfluralin mixtures with either rimsulfuron or EPTC controlled hairy nightshade equal to or better than the registered two-way mixtures evaluated. A sequential application of ethalfluralin PRE followed by rimsulfuron or rimsulfuron plus metribuzin postemergence (POST) did not improve hairy nightshade control compared to ethalfluralin plus rimsulfuron applied PRE. Potato tolerance to herbicide treatments applied PRE or POST to potato was evaluated in weed-free studies. Ethalfluralin alone or with metribuzin was compared to mixtures of metribuzin with either pendimethalin or EPTC. Initial visual injury with ethalfluralin PRE was ≤ 4% both years. In 1996, initial injury with ethalfluralin POST was ≤ 4% and U.S. No. 1 and total tuber yields were not affected by herbicide treatment or application timing. However in 1997, initial injury from POST ethalfluralin at 1.05 or 2.1 kg/ha was 2 or 8% and increased to 9 or 17%, respectively, at potato row closure. Averaged over all herbicide treatments, POST applications reduced U.S. No. 1 and total tuber yield 7% relative to PRE applications in 1997.

Keywords

EPTC, S-ethyl dipropyl carbamothioateethalfluralin, N-ethyl-N-(2-methyl-2-propenyl)-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenaminemetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onependimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenaminerimsulfuron, N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino] carbonyl]-3-(ethylsulfonyl)-2-pyridinesulfonamidecommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALgreen foxtail, Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. # SETVIhairy nightshade, Solanum sarrachoides Sendter # SOLSAredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREvolunteer oat, Avena sativa L. # AVESApotato, Solanum tuberosum L. ‘Russet Burbank.’InjurytoleranceAMAREAVESACHEALSETVISOLSAPNW, Pacific NorthwestPOST, postemergencePRE, preemergenceWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 287 - 292
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. 1992. Integrated Pest Management for Potatoes in the Western United States. Oakland, CA: Western Regional IPM Project, University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Publ. 3316. 146 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1999a. Treflan HFP and Sonalan HFP product labels. Indianapolis, IN: Dow AgroSciences.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1999b. Prowl 3.3 EC product label. Parsippany, NJ: American Cyanamid Company.Google Scholar
Aresenault, W. J. and Ivany, J. A. 1996. Response of three potato cultivars to metribuzin. J. Prod. Agric. 9: 86–88.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1974. Trifluralin dissipation in soil following repeated applications. Weed Sci. 22: 374–377.Google Scholar
Darwent, A. L., Lefkovitch, L. P., and Mills, P. F. 1997. Effects of soil temperature, seeding depth and cultivar on wheat tolerance to simulated ethalfluralin carryover. Can. J. Plant Sci. 77: 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Barkdoll, A. W., and Davis, J. R. 1991. Pathogenicity of Colletrotrichum coccodes isolates to potato (Solanum tuberosum) and two nightshade (Solanum spp.) species. Weed Technol. 5: 570–574.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Whitmore, J. C., Stanger, C. E., and Guttieri, M. J. 1994. Postemergence weed control in potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) with rimsulfuron. Weed Technol. 8: 428–435.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Patterson, P. E., Guttieri, M. J., and Stark, J. C. 1997. Efficacy and economics of cultivation for weed control in potato (Solanum tuberosum). Weed Technol. 11: 257–264.Google Scholar
Friesen, G. H. and Wall, D. A. 1984. Response of potato (Solanum tuberosum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 32: 442–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaynor, J. D. 1985. Dinitroaniline herbicide persistence in soil in southwestern Ontario. Can. J. Soil Sci. 65: 587–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, G. T. and Ogg, A. G. 1976. Differential response of potato cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24: 137–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Love, S. L., Baker, T. P., Ojala, J. C., Pavek, J. J., and Corsini, D. L. 1993. Characteristics of Potato Varieties in the Pacific Northwest. Moscow, ID: PNW Bull. 454. 24 p.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. C. and Thoreson, M. C. 1981. Competition between potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) and weeds. Weed Sci. 29: 672–677.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr. and Rogers, B. S. 1989. Taxonomy, distribution, biology, and control of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States and Canada. Rev. Weed Sci. 4: 25–58.Google Scholar
Ransom, C. V. and Ishida, J. 1998. Preemergence herbicides for weed control in potatoes. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 51: 79–80.Google Scholar
Tonks, D. J., Eberlein, C. V., Guttieri, M. J., and Fletcher, F. E. 1999. Effect of additives on postemergence weed control in potatoes. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 39:3.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. J. and Renner, K. A. 1990. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and barnyardgrass (Echinochola crus-galli) interference in potatoes (Solanum tuberosum). Weed Sci. 38: 539–542.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. and Friesen, G. H. 1990a. Effect and duration of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) competition on potato (Solanum tuberosum) yield. Weed Technol. 4: 539–542.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. and Friesen, G. H. 1990b. Green foxtail (Setaria viridis) competition in potato (Solanum tuberosum). Weed Sci. 38: 396–400.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G., Shea, P. J., and Tupy, D. R. 1995. Dinitroaniline herbicide carry over to sugar beet. J. Sugar Beet Res. 32: 201–213.Google Scholar