Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T20:44:32.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fosamine ammonium impacts on the targeted invasive shrub Rhamnus cathartica and non-target herbs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2020

Michael J. Schuster Open the ORCID record for Michael J. Schuster [Opens in a new window] ,
Paul Bockenstedt ,
Peter D. Wragg Open the ORCID record for Peter D. Wragg [Opens in a new window]  and
Peter B. Reich Open the ORCID record for Peter B. Reich [Opens in a new window]
Michael J. Schuster*
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Associate, Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
Paul Bockenstedt
Affiliation:
Project Manager, Stantec Consulting Services Inc, Minneapolis, MN, USA
Peter D. Wragg
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Associate, Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
Peter B. Reich
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA; and Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW2751, Australia
*
Author for correspondence: Michael J. Schuster, Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN55108. (Email: Schuster@umn.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Fosamine ammonium (Krenite®) is a foliar herbicide that primarily targets woody plant species; however, formal evaluations of its efficacy and potential for non-target impacts are scarce in the literature. The few tests of fosamine ammonium that exist focus primarily on its use in open environments, and the value of fosamine ammonium in controlling invasive understory shrubs is unclear. Here, we test the impact of fosamine ammonium on invasive common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica L.) and co-occurring herbaceous plants across six forest sites in Minnesota, USA. Rhamnus cathartica treated with fosamine ammonium had a 95% mortality rate, indicating high efficacy of fosamine ammonium for use against R. cathartica. Non-target impacts varied between forbs and graminoids such that forb cover was reduced by up to 85%, depending on site, whereas graminoid cover was sparse and impacts of fosamine ammonium on graminoids were unclear. These results indicate that while fosamine ammonium can provide effective control of R. cathartica and other understory shrubs, there is potential for significant non-target impacts following its use. We therefore suggest that land managers carefully consider the timing, rate, and application method of fosamine ammonium to achieve desired target and non-target impacts.

Keywords

Buckthornbud inhibitorefficacyKrenite®non-target effectsherbicideunderstory
Type
Note
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 2020 , pp. 210 - 215
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2020

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Rob J. Richardson, North Carolina State University

References

Archibold, OW, Brooks, D, Delanoy, L (1997) An investigation of the invasive shrub European Buckthorn, Rhamnus cathartica L., near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Can Field-Nat 111:617 Google Scholar
Beste, CE, chairman (1983) Herbicide Handbook. 5th edition. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of AmericaGoogle Scholar
Caplan, JS, Whitehead, RD, Gover, AE, Grabosky, JC (2018) Extended leaf phenology presents an opportunity for herbicidal control of invasive forest shrubs. Weed Res 58:244–249 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coupland, D, Peabody, DV (1981) Absorption, translocation, and exudation of glyphosate, fosamine, and amitrole in field horsetail (Equisetum arvense). Weed Sci 29:556–560 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delanoy, L, Archibold, OW (2007) Efficacy of control measures for European buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica L. in Saskatchewan. Environ Manag 40:709–718 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derr, JF (2008) Common reed (Phragmites australis) response to postemergence herbicides. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 1:153–157 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, Y, Li, X-Y, Huang, H, Wu, X-C, Yu, K-L, Wei, J-Q, Zhang, C-C, Wang, P, Hu, X, D’Odorico, P (2019) Does phenology play a role in the feedbacks underlying shrub encroachment? Sci Total Environ 657:1064–1073 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fridley, JD (2012) Extended leaf phenology and the autumn niche in deciduous forest invasions. Nature 485:359–362 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghassemi, M, Quinlivan, S, Dellarco, M (1982) Environmental effects of new herbicides for vegetation control in forestry. Environ Int 7:389–401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, R, Brown, B, Reich, P (1989) Ecophysiology of exotic and native shrubs in southern Wisconsin. 1. Relationship of leaf characteristics, resource availability, and phenology to seasonal patterns of carbon gain. Oecologia 80:356–367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heimpel, GE, Frelich, LE, Landis, DA, Hopper, KR, Hoelmer, KA, Sezen, Z, Asplen, MK, Wu, K (2010) European buckthorn and Asian soybean aphid as components of an extensive invasional meltdown in North America. Biol Invasions 12:2913–2931 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Osipitan, OA, Oliveira, MC, Scott, JE (2018) Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) control with herbicides: multiyear applications. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 11:143–154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, KS (2006) Factors that Influence Invasion Success of Two Woody Invaders of Forest Understories. Ph.D dissertation. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota. 356 pGoogle Scholar
Knight, KS, Kurylo, JS, Endress, AG, Stewart, JR, Reich, PB (2007) Ecology and ecosystem impacts of common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica): a review. Biol Invasions 9:925–937 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurylo, JS, Knight, KS, Stewart, JR, Endress, AG (2007) Rhamnus cathartica: native and naturalized distribution and habitat preferences. J Torrey Bot Soc 134:420–430 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufenberg, SM, Sheley, RL, Jacobs, JS, Borkowski, J (2005) Herbicide effects on density and biomass of Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) and associated plant species. Weed Technol 19:62–72 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luken, JO, Beiting, SW, Kareth, SK, Kumler, RL, Liu, JH, Seither, CA (1994) Target and nontarget discrimination of herbicides applied to vegetation in a power-line corridor. Environ Manag 18:251–255 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrs, RH (1984) Birch control on lowland heaths: mechanical control and the application of selective herbicides by foliar spray. J Appl Ecol 21:703–716 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrs, RH (1985) The use of Krenite to control birch on lowland heaths. Biol Conserv 32:149–164 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrs, RH, Frost, AJ, Plant, RA (1991) Effects of herbicide spray drift on selected species of nature conservation interest: the effects of plant age and surrounding vegetation structure. Environ Pollut 69:223–235 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milbauer, M, Leach, MK, Glass, S (2003) Comparing E-Z-Ject application of Roundup with foliar application of Krenite in the control of aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) in tallgrass prairie. Nat Areas J 23:284–287 Google Scholar
Morey, PR, Dahl, BE (1980) Inhibition of mesquite (Prosopis juliflora var. glandulosa) growth by fosamine. Weed Sci 28:251–255 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nature Conservancy, Tu, M, Hurd, C, Randall, J (2001) Weed Control Methods Handbook: Tools & Techniques for Use in Natural Areas. https://www.invasive.org/gist/products/handbook/methods-handbook.pdf. Accessed: May 28, 2020Google Scholar
Naylor, REL, British Crop Protection Council (2002) Weed Management Handbook. 9th ed. Oxford: Published for the British Crop Protection Council by Blackwell Science CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Power, EF, Kelly, DL, Stout, JC (2013) The impacts of traditional and novel herbicide application methods on target plants, non-target plants and production in intensive grasslands. Weed Res 53:131–139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pretorius, A (2015) Role of Leafing Phenology in the Invasion of Forest Ecosystems by Rhamnus cathartica. M.S. thesis. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota. 60 pGoogle Scholar
Roth, A (2015) Common Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), European Earthworms, and Ecosystem Management: Invasion and Restoration in Minnesota’s Deciduous Forests. Ph.D dissertation. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota. 137 pGoogle Scholar
Shaw, DR, Mack, RE (1991) Application timing of herbicides for the control of redvine (Brunnichia ovata). Weed Technol 5:125–129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, WI (1999) Six-year growth of Douglas-fir saplings after manual or herbicide release from coastal shrub competition. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station Research Paper PNW-RP-50055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinson, K, Kaufman, S, Durbin, L, Lowenstein, F (2007) Impacts of garlic mustard invasion on a forest understory community. Northeast Nat 14:73–88 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinson, KA, Campbell, SA, Powell, JR, Wolfe, BE, Callaway, RM, Thelen, GC, Hallett, SG, Prati, D, Klironomos, JN (2006) Invasive plant suppresses the growth of native tree seedlings by disrupting belowground mutualisms. PLoS Biol 4:e140 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, V, Nelson, CR (2014) Herbicides can negatively affect seed performance in native plants. Restor Ecol 22:288–291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zettlemoyer, MA, Schultheis, EH, Lau, JA (2019) Phenology in a warming world: differences between native and non-native plant species. Ecol Lett 22:1253–1263 Google Scholar