Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:24:38.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control of Silky Crazyweed (Oxytropis sericea) with Aminopyralid + 2,4-D and Picloram + 2,4-D on Native Rangeland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Laura E. Goodman ,
Andrés F. Cibils ,
Robert L. Steiner ,
John D. Graham  and
Kirk C. McDaniel
Laura E. Goodman*
Affiliation:
Natural Resource Ecology and Management Department, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078
Andrés F. Cibils
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003
Robert L. Steiner
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Applied Statistics and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003
John D. Graham
Affiliation:
Union County Extension, Clayton, NM 88415
Kirk C. McDaniel
Affiliation:
Extension Animal Science and Natural Resources, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: laura.goodman@okstate.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Techniques for preventing crazyweed toxicity in livestock have generally fallen into two categories: excluding livestock access to infested ranges during early spring and fall, and controlling crazyweed populations through herbicide application. Although picloram has been used to control crazyweed effectively in the past, aminopyralid has shown efficacy at lower application rates, exhibits less potential off-target movement, and has been classified as a reduced-risk product. Differences in the response of silky crazyweed and nontarget grasses and forbs to picloram + 2,4-D and aminopyralid + 2,4-D were investigated. Picloram + 2,4-D was applied at a rate of 0.3 kg ae ha−1 picloram + 1.1 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D, and aminopyralid + 2,4-D was applied at a rate of 0.1 kg ae ha−1 aminopyralid + 1.2 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D. Silky crazyweed canopy cover, number of flowering stalks, plant size, and biomass decreased 15 mo after herbicide treatments (MAT) with average percentage of relative reductions of 92, 95, 90, and 99%, respectively. Crazyweed density decreased by 1.5 ± 0.2 SE plants m−2 and 1.3 ± 0.2 plants m−2, a relative reduction of 95 and 80%, 15 MAT in aminopyralid + 2,4-D– and picloram + 2,4-D–treated plots, respectively. Plots treated with aminopyralid + 2,4-D had 4% lower nontarget forb canopy cover than did picloram + 2,4-D plots 15 MAT. Grass biomass remained similar within treatments over time for control, aminopyralid + 2,4-D and picloram +2,4-D plots, and was similar in all plots 15 MAT. Plots treated with herbicides had, on average, 11% greater grass cover than did control plots 15 MAT (aminopyralid + 2,4-D: 89%; picloram + 2,4-D: 85%; control: 76%).

Keywords

2,4-Daminopyralidpicloramcrazyweed, Oxytropis spp., silky crazyweed, Oxytropis sericea Nutt.Herbicidenontargetpoisonous plantreduced risksilky crazyweedwhite locoweed
Type
Research Article
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 401 - 408
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

Almquist, TL, Lym, RG (2010) Effect of aminopyralid on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and the native plant community in a restored tallgrass prairie. Invasive Plant Sci Manage 3:155–168 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2002) Grazon P+D®. Herbicide product label. Indianapolis, IN Dow AgroSciences. 5 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2014) Grazon Next®. Herbicide product label. Indianapolis, IN Dow AgroSciences. 5 pGoogle Scholar
Connell, JH (1983) On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. Am Nat 122:661–696 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enloe, SF, Kyser, GB, Dewey, SA, Peterson, V, DiTomaso, JM (2008) Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) control with low rates of aminopyralid on range and pasture. Invasive Plant Sci Manage 1:385–389 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enloe, SF, Lym, RG, Wilson, R, Westra, P, Nissen, S, Beck, G, Moechnig, M, Peterson, V, Masters, RA, Halstvedt, M (2007) Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) control with aminopyralid in range, pasture, and noncrop areas. Weed Technol 21:890–894 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fast, BJ, Ferrell, JA, MacDonald, GE, Krutz, LJ, Kline, WM (2010) Picloram and aminopyralid sorption to soil and clay minerals. Weed Sci 58:484–489 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamaker, JW, Johnston, H, Martin, RT, Redemann, CT (1963) A picolinic acid derivative: a plant growth regulator. Science 141:363 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hare, DD, McFadden, AG, McGregor, WR, Juras, LT, Satchivi, NM, Turnbull, GC (2005) Aminopyralid: a new herbicide for broadleaf weed control in rangeland and pastures in Canada and United States. Page 59 in Proceedings of the Western Society of Weed Science (WSWS). Vancouver, BC, Canada WSWS Google Scholar
Jachetta, JJ, Havens, PL, Dybowski, JA, Kranzfelder, JA, Tiu, C (2005) Aminopyralid a new reduced risk herbicide for invasive species control: toxicology, ecotoxicology, and environmental fate profile. Pages 60–61 in Proceedings of the Western Society of Weed Science (WSWS). Vancouver, BC, Canada WSWS Google Scholar
James, LF, Hartley, WJ, Van Kampen, KR (1991) Syndromes of Astragalus poisoning in livestock. J Am Vet Med Assoc 178:146–150 Google Scholar
James, LF, Nielsen, DB, Panter, KE (1992) Impact of poisonous plants on the livestock industry. J Range Manage 45:3–8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsbury, J (1964) Poisonous plants of the United States and Canada. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice-Hall CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Master, RA, Burch, PL, Breuninger, JM, Carrithers, VF, Jachetta, JJ, Kline, WN, Hare, DD, Chemello, AA, Troth, JL, Schultz, RD (2005) Aminopyralid: a new herbicide for pasture vegetation management [abstract]. Proceedings of the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America International Annual Meeting. Salt Lake City, UT American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and the Soil Science Society of America (ASA-CSSA-SSSA)Google Scholar
McDaniel, KC (1999) Controlling locoweed with herbicides. Pages 52–54 in Sterling, TM and Thompson, DC, eds. Locoweed Research Updates and Highlights. Las Cruces, NM New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 730 Google Scholar
McDaniel, KC, Sterling, TM, Ivey, S (2007) Herbicide control of locoweeds. Pages 353–358 in Panter, KE, Wierenga, TL, Pfister, JA, eds. Poisonous Plants: Global Research and Solutions. Wallingford, UK CABI CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molyneux, RJ (1999) Defining the chemistry and biochemistry of swainsonine. Pages 12–13 in Sterling, TM and Thompson, DC, eds. Locoweed Research Updates and Highlights. Las Cruces, NM New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 730 Google Scholar
Molyneux, RJ, James, LF (1982) Locoweed intoxication: indolized alkaloids of spotted locoweed (Astragalus lentiginosus). Science 216:190–191 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molyneux, RJ, James, LF, Panter, KE (1985) Chemistry of toxic constituents of locoweed (Astragalus and Oxytropis) species. Pages 266–278 in Seawright, AA, Hegarty, MP, James, LF, Keeler, RF, eds. Plant Toxicology. Proceedings of the Australia–U.S.A. Poisonous Plants Symposium. Brisbane, Australia Queensland Poisonous Plant Committee Google Scholar
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2010) Climate–Radar Data Inventories. http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwDI~StnSrch~StnID~20020927#ONLINE. Accessed October 26, 2010Google Scholar
Payne, KK, Sleugh, BB, Bradley, KW (2010) Impact of herbicide and application timing on weed control, yield, and nutritive value of tall fescue pastures and hayfields. Weed Technol 24:515–522 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ralphs, MH, Graham, JD, Duff, G, James, LF (1999) Managing cattle to prevent locoweed poisoning. Pages 67–68 in Sterling, TM, Thompson, DC, eds. Locoweed Research Updates and Highlights. Las Cruces, NM New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 730 Google Scholar
Ralphs, MH, Graham, JD, Molyneux, RJ, James, LF (1993) Seasonal grazing of locoweed by cattle in northeastern New Mexico. J Range Manage 46:416–420 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ralphs, MH, Manners, GD, Gardner, DR (1998) Toxic alkaloid response to herbicides used to control tall larkspur. Weed Sci 46:116–119 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ralphs, MH, Mickelsen, LV, Turner, DL, Nielsen, DB (1988) Control of white locoweed (Oxytropis sericea). Weed Sci 36:353–358 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ralphs, MH, Ueckert, DN (1988) Herbicide control of locoweed: a review. Weed Sci 2:460–465 Google Scholar
Retzinger, EJ, Mallory-Smith, C (1997) Classification of herbicides by site of action for weed resistance management strategies. Weed Technol 11:384–393 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuel, LW, Lym, RG (2008) Aminopyralid effects on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and native plant species. Invasive Plant Sci Manage 1:265–278 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senseman, SA, ed. 2007a Herbicide Handbook 9th edn. Champaign, IL Weed Science Society of America. Pp 353–356 Google Scholar
Senseman, SA, ed 2007b Herbicide Handbook 9th edn. Champaign, IL Weed Science Society of America. Pp 331–332 Google Scholar
Stegelmeier, BL, Panter, KE, Ralphs, MH, Pfister, JA, Lee, ST, James, LF, Gardner, DR, Stegelmeier, BL (2007) The comparative pathology of locoweed poisoning in livestock, wildlife, and rodents. Pages 359–365 in Panter, KE, Wierenga, TL, Pfister, JA, eds. Poisonous Plants: Global Research and Solutions. Wallingford, UK CABI CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torell, LA, Owen, LP, McDaniel, KC, Graham, JD (2000) Perceptions and economic losses from locoweed in northeastern New Mexico. J Range Manage 53:376–383 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (2007) Ecological Site Description System for Rangeland and Forestland. http://esis.sc.egov.usda.gov. Accessed October 20, 2010Google Scholar
[USDA, NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (2009) Plant Fact Sheet: Scarlett globemallow. http://ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/ID/programs/plant/globemallow_scarlet.pdf. Accessed March 26, 2013Google Scholar
[USOPPEPTS] U.S. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, Environmental Protection, and Toxic Substances (2005) Aminopyralid Pesticide Fact Sheet. http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_search/reg_actions/registration/fs_PC-005100_10-Aug-05.pdf. Accessed March 4, 2013Google Scholar
Welsh, SL, Ralphs, MH, Panter, KE, Pfister, JA, James, LF (2007) Locoweeds of North America: taxonomy and toxicity. Pages 20–30 in Panter, KE, Wierenga, TL, Pfister, JA, eds. Poisonous Plants: Global Research and Solutions. Wallingford, U.K.: CABI CrossRefGoogle Scholar