Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:33:09.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

English Ivy (Hedera helix) Control with Postemergence-Applied Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Qian Yang ,
Glenn Wehtje ,
Charles H. Gilliam ,
J. Scott McElroy  and
Jeff L. Sibley
Qian Yang
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
Glenn Wehtje*
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
Charles H. Gilliam
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
J. Scott McElroy
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
Jeff L. Sibley
Affiliation:
Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wehtjgr@auburn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

English ivy (Hedera helix) is an evergreen, perennial vine that was introduced from Europe and Asia and is not endemic in much of the United States. English ivy can be invasive and difficult to control once established. Four similar, but not identical, experiments were conducted in sequence to evaluate selected, POST-applied herbicides for English ivy control. English ivy plants were propagated from cuttings and container-grown to obtain a large population of uniform plants. Aminopyralid and fluroxypyr applied at 1.34 and 0.71 kg ae ha−1, which is more twice the maximum registered rate for either herbicide, were ineffective. Glyphosate and 2,4-D amine were generally more effective, but neither herbicide provided a level of control that could be deemed consistently acceptable. Glyphosate applied at 8.51 kg ae ha−1 (the highest rate evaluated) provided 69, 98, and 89% control in the second, third, and fourth experiments as determined by foliage fresh-weight reduction relative to a nontreated control. Treatment with 2,4-D at 5.60 kg ae ha−1 (the highest rate evaluated) controlled English ivy 28, 98, and 89% in the second, third, and fourth experiments, respectively. Mixtures of 2,4-D and glyphosate were generally no more effective than were the components applied alone. Metsulfuron was the most effective herbicide. Metsulfuron applied at 0.168 kg ai ha−1 controlled English ivy ≥ 97% across the three experiments in which this treatment was included. This treatment also prevented regrowth.

Keywords

2,4-DaminopyralidfluroxypyrglyphosatemetsulfuronsulfometuronEnglish ivy, Hedera helix L.English ivyinvasive plant control
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 411 - 415
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

Beck, K. G., Zimmerman, K., Stone, J., Lukens, R. R., Reichard, S., Randall, J., Cangelosi, A. A., Cooper, D., and Thompson, J. P. 2008. Invasive species defined in a policy context: recommendations from the federal invasive species advisory committee. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 1:414–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggerstaff, M. S. and Christopher, W. B. 2007. Effect of method of English ivy removal and seed addition on regeneration of vegetation in Southeastern Piedmont Forest. Am. Midl. Nat. 158:206–220.Google Scholar
Derr, J. F. 1993. English ivy (Hedera helix) response to postemergence herbicides. J. Environ. Hortic. 11:45–48.Google Scholar
Gilman, E. F. 1999. Hedera helix—English Ivy: University of Florida Fact Sheet. http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu. Accessed: January 3, 2013Google Scholar
Ingham, C. S. and Borman, M. M. 2010. English ivy (Hedera spp., Araliaceae) response to goat browsing. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 3:178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalfe, D. J. 2005. Biological flora of the British Isles no. 268, Hedera helix L. J. Ecol. 93:632–648.Google Scholar
Miller, J. H., Chambliss, E. B., and Loewenstein, N. J. 2010. Nonnative Invasive Plants of Southern Forests: A Field Guide for Identification and Control. Asheville, NC USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-119. 126 p.Google Scholar
Morisawa, T. 1999. Weed Notes: Hedera helix L.—The Native Conservancy: Wildlands Weeds Management and Research. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu. Accessed: January 23, 2013Google Scholar
Randall, J. M. 1996. Weed control for the preservation of biological diversity. Weed Technol. 10:370–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichard, S. and White, P. 2001. Horticulture as a pathway of invasive plant introductions in the United States. Bioscience. 51:103–113.Google Scholar
Reichard, S. 2000. Hedera helix . Pages 212–215 in Bossard, C. C., Randall, J. M., and Hoshovsky, M. C., eds. Invasive Plants of California's Wetlands. Berkeley, CA University of California Press.Google Scholar
Soll, J. 2005. Controlling English ivy (Hedera helix) in the Pacific Northwest. http://www.invasive.org/gist/moredocs/hedhe102.pdf. Accessed: January 23, 2013.Google Scholar
[USDA, NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2012. The Plants Database. http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed: January 3, 2013.Google Scholar
Weaver, M. A. and Lyn, M. E. 2007. Compatibility of biological control agent with herbicides for control of invasive plant species. Nat. Areas J. 27:264–268.Google Scholar