Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:53:35.444Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Common Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) Control in Alfalfa (Medicago sativa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

C. C. Sheaffer
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
D. L. Wyse
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at four locations to evaluate the efficacy of metribuzin [4-amino-6-tert-butyl-3-(methylthio)-as-triazin-5(4H)-one], simazine [2-chloro-4,6-bis(ethylamino)-s-triazine], buthidazole {3[5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl]-4-hydroxy-1-methyl-2-imidazolidinone} and 2,4-DB [4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy) butryic acid] treatments for common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale Weber) control in established alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Most herbicides temporarily reduced common dandelion populations at all locations, but by the end of the first year only buthidazole reduced them on fine-textured soils, but buthidazole, metribuzin and fall-applied simazine reduced populations on coarse-textured soils. Only buthidazole controlled common dandelion in the year following application at all locations. Control of common dandelion did not consistently increase total forage yield or quality or increase alfalfa yield and stands compared to the untreated check. Buthidazole reduced alfalfa and total forage yield on coarse-textured soils.

Type
Research Article
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

1. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the AOAC. 12th ed. AOAC, Washington, DC. pp 1617.Google Scholar
2. Doll, J. D. 1981. Dandelions in alfolfa don't affect forage quality. Hoard's Dairyman. 125:671.Google Scholar
3. Donker, J. D. and Marten, G. C. 1972. Alfalfa hay: evaluating its quality by performance of dairy animals and laboratory procedures. Minn. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 287. 14 pp.Google Scholar
4. Dutt, T. E., Fawcett, R. S., Harvey, R. G., and Jorgensen, N. A. 1977. Effect of some perennial weeds on forage quality. Abstr., Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 57.Google Scholar
5. Evans, P. S. 1978. Plant root distribution and water use patterns of some pasture and crop species. N.Z. J. Agric. Res. 21: 261265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Heikes, P. E. 1974. Evaluation of several herbicides for weed control and phytotoxicity in established alfalfa. Res. Prog. Rep., West. Soc. Weed Sci. pp. 7677.Google Scholar
7. Marten, G. C. and Barnes, R. F. 1979. Prediction of energy digestibility of forages with in vitro rumen fermentation and fungal enzyme systems. Pages 6171 in Proc. Int. Workshop on Standardization of Analytical Methodology of Feeds. IDRC-134e. Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
8. Robinson, L. R., Williams, C. F., and Laws, W. D. 1978. Weed control in established alfalfa (Medicago sativa . Weed Sci. 26: 3740.Google Scholar
9. Swan, D. G. 1978. Effects of repeated herbicide applications on alfalfa (Medicago sativa . Weed Sci. 26:151153.Google Scholar
10. Triplett, G. B. Jr., Van Keuren, R. W., and Walker, J. D. 1977. Influence of 2,4-D, pronamide and simazine on dry matter production and botanical composition of an alfalfa-grass sward. Crop Sci. 17:6165.Google Scholar
11. Vengris, J., Drake, M., Colby, W. G., and Bart, J. 1953. Chemical composition of weeds and accompanying crop plants. Agron. J. 45:213218.Google Scholar
12. Waddington, J. 1980. Chemical control of dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) and perennial sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis) in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) grown for seed. Weed Sci. 28:164167.Google Scholar
13. Wilson, R. G. Jr. 1981. Weed control in established dryland alfalfa (Medicago sativa . Weed Sci. 29:615618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar