Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:57:16.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selective Control of Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) in California Sagebrush Scrub using Low Rates of Glyphosate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Guy B. Kyser ,
J. Earl Creech ,
Jimin Zhang  and
Joseph M. DiTomaso
Guy B. Kyser
Affiliation:
University of California, Department of Plant Sciences, Davis, CA 95616
J. Earl Creech
Affiliation:
Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322
Jimin Zhang
Affiliation:
University of California, Department of Plant Sciences, Davis, CA 95616
Joseph M. DiTomaso*
Affiliation:
University of California, Department of Plant Sciences, Davis, CA 95616
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jmditomaso@ucdavis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although glyphosate is typically used as a nonselective herbicide, low rates have the potential to provide selective control of seedling annuals in the understory of established perennial plants. In a repeated experiment on two adjacent sites at a single location near Alturas, CA (2009 and 2010), we evaluated the efficacy of glyphosate at several different rates on medusahead and nontarget species in northern California sagebrush scrub. We applied glyphosate at 10 rates ranging from 0 to 709 g ae ha−1 (0 to 18 oz product acre−1) at three separate timings in each trial: mid-March (medusahead in early seedling stage), late April to early May (tillering), and late May to early June (boot to early head). Plots measured 3 m by 9 m (10 ft by 30 ft) and were arranged in randomized complete blocks with four replications for each rate and timing. We visually estimated vegetative cover for all dominant species in July before medusahead seed drop using three 1-m2 quadrats per plot. Medusahead cover declined with increasing rates of glyphosate, and the middle application timing (at tillering) was the most effective. In rate series regression models, we achieved 95% control of medusahead with 160 g ae ha−1 glyphosate in midseason 2009, compared with 463 g ae ha−1 in early season and 203 g ae ha−1 in late season. In 2010, we achieved 95% control with 348 g ae ha−1 in midseason, compared with > 709 g ae ha−1 in early season. Medusahead seed production reflected changes in cover, though individual plants tended to produce more seed at low densities. We attribute reduced control early in the season and poorer overall control in 2010 to greater tolerance of medusahead to glyphosate at lower temperatures. Treatment effects on big sagebrush, as indicated by shoot tip vigor, were minor, although the midseason timing caused a slight reduction in vigor. These results show that low rates of glyphosate (158 to 315 g ae ha−1) at a treatment timing corresponding to medusahead tillering can give economical and effective control of medusahead without long-term damage to big sagebrush.

Keywords

Glyphosatemedusahead, Taeniatherum caput-medusae (L.) Nevskibig sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata NuttTaeniatherum caput-medusaeglyphosatechemical weed controlinvasive rangelandsagebrush
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 1 - 8
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., Sebastian, J. R., and Chapman, P. L. 1995. Jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) and downy brome (Bromus tectorum) control in perennial grasses. Weed Technol. 9:255–259.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L., D'Antonio, C. M., Richardson, D. M., Grace, J. B., Keeley, J. E., DiTomaso, J. M., Hobbs, R. J., Pellant, M., and Pyke, D. 2004. Effects of invasive alien plants on fire regimes. BioScience 54:677–688.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. and Pyke, D. A. 2001. Invasive plants and fire in the deserts of North America. Pages 1–14 in Galley, K.E.M. and Wilson, T. P., eds. Proceedings of the Invasive Species Workshop: The Role of Fire in the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire Conference 2000: The First National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention, and Management. Tallahassee, FL Tall Timbers Research Station. Miscellaneous Publication No. 11.Google Scholar
Butler, T. J., Muir, J. P., and Ducar, J. T. 2005. Weed control and response to herbicides during Tifton 85 bermudagrass establishment from rhizomes. Agron. J. 98:788–794.Google Scholar
Campbell, M. H. and Nicol, H. I. 1991. Tolerance of Phalaris aquatica to spraytopping rates of glyphosate or paraquat. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 31:229–231.Google Scholar
D'Antonio, C. M. and Vitousek, P. M. 1992. Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23:63–87.Google Scholar
Davies, K. W. and Johnson, D. D. 2008. Managing medusahead in the Intermountain West is at a critical threshold. Rangelands 30(4):13–15.Google Scholar
Davies, K. W. and Sheley, R. L. 2011. Promoting native vegetation and diversity in exotic annual grass infestations. Restor. Ecol. 19:159–165.Google Scholar
Davies, K. W. and Svejcar, T. J. 2008. Comparison of medusahead-invaded and noninvaded Wyoming big sagebrush steppe in southeastern Oregon. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 61:623–629.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Kyser, G. B., George, M. R., Doran, M. P., and Laca, E. A. 2008. Control of medusahead using timely sheep grazing. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 1:241–247.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N. and Dekker, J. 1988. Temperature effects on translocation patterns of several herbicides within quackgrass (Agropyron repens). Weed Sci. 36:545–552.Google Scholar
Heap, I. M., Glick, H. L., Glasgow, L., and Vencill, W. K. 2011. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/In.asp. Accessed: February 22, 2011.Google Scholar
Hironaka, M. 1961. The relative rate of root development of cheatgrass and medusahead. J. Range Manag. 14:263–267.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, P. J. S., Morishita, D. W., and Price, W. J. 2007. Season-long dose–response of potato to sulfometuron. Weed Sci. 55:521–527.Google Scholar
Hyder, D. N., Sneva, F. A., and Freed, V. H. 1962. Susceptibility of big sagebrush and green rabbitbrush to 2,4-D as related to certain environmental, phenological, and physiological conditions. Weeds 10:288–295.Google Scholar
Kyser, G. B., DiTomaso, J. M., Doran, M. P., Orloff, S. B., Wilson, R. G., Lancaster, D. L., Lile, D. F., and Porath, M. L. 2007. Control of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) and other annual grasses with imazapic. Weed Technol. 21:65–75.Google Scholar
Kyser, G. B., Doran, M. P., McDougald, N. K., Orloff, S. B., Vargas, R. N., Wilson, R. G., and DiTomaso, J. M. 2008. Site characteristics determine the success of prescribed burning for medusahead control. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 1:376–384.Google Scholar
Mangla, S., Sheley, R. L., and James, J. J. 2011. Field growth comparisons of invasive alien annual and native perennial grasses in monocultures. J. Arid Environ. 75:206–210.Google Scholar
Masiunas, J. B. and Weller, S. C. 1988. Glyphosate activity in potato (Solanum tuberosum) under different temperature regimes and light levels. Weed Sci. 36:137–140.Google Scholar
McDaniel, K. C., Anderson, D. L., and Balliette, J. F. 1991. Wyoming big sagebrush control with metsulfuron and 2,4-D in northern New Mexico. J. Range Manag. 44:623–627.Google Scholar
Monaco, T. A., Osmond, T. M., and Dewey, S. A. 2005. Medusahead control with fall- and spring-applied herbicides on northern Utah foothills. Weed Technol. 19:653–658.Google Scholar
Neal, J. C., Skroch, W. A., and Monaco, T. J. 1986. Effects of plant growth stage on glyphosate absorption and transport in ligustrum (Ligustrum japonicum) and blue pacific juniper (Juniperus conferta). Weed Sci. 34:115–121.Google Scholar
Peters, E. F. and Bunting, S. C. 1994. Fire conditions pre- and postoccurrence of annual grasses on the Snake River Plain. Pages 31–36 in Monsen, S. B. and Kitchen, S. G., eds. Proc. Ecology and Management of Annual Rangelands. Ogden, UT U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station General Technical Report INT-GTR-313.Google Scholar
Senseman, S. A. 2007. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 458. p.Google Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Carpinelli, M. F., and Reever Morghan, K. J. 2007. Effects of imazapic on target and nontarget vegetation during revegetation. Weed Technol. 21:1071–1081.Google Scholar
Sweet, S. B., Kyser, G. B., and DiTomaso, J. M. 2008. Susceptibility of exotic annual grass seeds to fire. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 1:158–167.Google Scholar
Tevis, L. 1958. Germination and growth of ephemerals induced by sprinkling a sandy desert. Ecology 39:681–688.Google Scholar
Torell, P. J., Erickson, L. C., and Haas, R. H. 1961. The medusahead problem in Idaho. Weeds 9:124–131.Google Scholar
Tozer, K. N., Marshall, A. J., and Edwards, G. R. 2008. Methods of reducing ripgut brome seed production and carcasses damage. Proc. New Zeal. Grassland Assoc. 70:59–63.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. 2011. Farm Practices and Management. http://www.ers.usda.gov. Accessed 2011.Google Scholar
Whitwell, T., Banks, P., Basler, E., and Santelmann, P. W. 1980. Glyphosate absorption and translocation in bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) and activity in horsenettle (Solanum carolinense). Weed Sci. 28:93–96.Google Scholar
Willis, R. G., Stephenson, G. R., Fletcher, R. A., and Prasad, R. 1989. Seasonal variations in jack pine (Pinus banksiana) and white spruce (Picea glauca) tolerance to glyphosate and triclopyr. Weed Technol. 3:33–38.Google Scholar
Young, J. A. 1992. Ecology and management of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae ssp. asperum [Simk.] Melderis). Great Basin Nat. 52:245–252.Google Scholar
Young, J. A., Evans, R. A., and Eckert, R. E. Jr. 1968. Germination of medusahead in response to temperature and afterripening. Weed Sci. 16:92–95.Google Scholar
Young, J. A., Evans, R. A., and Kay, B. L. 1970. Phenology of reproduction of medusahead. Weed Sci. 18:451–454.Google Scholar
Young, K. and Mangold, J. 2008. Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) outperforms squirreltail (Elymus elymoides) through interference and growth rate. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 1:73–81.Google Scholar