Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:43:14.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Honeyvine Milkweed (Ampelamus albidus) Response to Foliar Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Loren J. Moshier ,
Oliver G. Russ ,
Joseph P. O'Connor  and
Mark M. Claassen
Loren J. Moshier
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506
Oliver G. Russ
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506
Joseph P. O'Connor
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506
Mark M. Claassen
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A 3-yr experiment and a 1-yr experiment in continuous winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ‘Newton’) and two 3-yr experiments in continuous grain sorghum [Sorghum bicolor L. (Moench.) ‘Co-op SG-10’ or ‘DeKalb DX-42Y’] were conducted to evaluate selected foliage-applied herbicides for control of honeyvine milkweed [Ampelamus albidus (Nutt.) Britt # AMPAL]. Glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)-glycine] applied at 3.4 kg ae/ha, glyphosate plus dicamba (3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid) applied at 1.7 plus 0.6 kg ae/ha, and glyphosate plus 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] applied at 1.7 plus 1.1 kg ae/ha in summer between harvesting and planting winter wheat and in spring prior to planting grain sorghum effectively reduced honeyvine milkweed regrowth 1 yr after initial application in both cropping systems. One or two additional annual applications did not provide complete control in either cropping system. Applications of 2,4-D at 2.2 kg ae/ha dicamba at 1.1 kg ae/ha and 2,4-D plus dicamba at 1.1 plus 0.6 kg ae/ha were effective if applied consecutively for 3 yr in continuous winter wheat but not in continuous grain sorghum.

Keywords

Glyphosatedicamba2,4-Dherbicide combinationsAMPAL
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 34 , Issue 5 , September 1986 , pp. 730 - 734
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 by the 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

Literatur Cited

1. Barkley, T. M. 1977. A manual of the flowering plants of Kansas. Annotated reprint. Kansas State Univ. Endowment Assoc, Manhattan. 402 pp.Google Scholar
2. Coble, H. D. and Slife, F. W. 1970. Development and control of honeyvine milkweed. Weed Sci. 18:352–356.Google Scholar
3. Dersheid, L. A., Stritzke, J. F., and Wright, W. C. 1970. Field bindweed control with cultivation, cropping, and chemicals. Weed Sci. 18:590–596.Google Scholar
4. Moshier, L. J. 1980. Response of honeyvine milkweed (Ampelamus albidus) to herbicide applications. Weed Sci. 28:722–724.Google Scholar
5. Robinson, E. L. 1969. Reproductive characteristics of honeyvine milkweed. Weed Sci. 16:436–438.Google Scholar
6. Russ, O. G. and Anderson, L. E. 1960. Field bindweed control by combinations of cropping, cultivation, and 2,4-D. Weeds 8: 397–401.Google Scholar
7. Soteres, J. K. and Murray, D. S. 1982. Root distribution and reproductive biology of honeyvine milkweed (Cynanchum laeve). Weed Sci. 30:158–163.Google Scholar
8. Swan, D. G. 1982. Long-term field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) control in two cropping systems. Weed Sci. 30:476–480.Google Scholar
9. Wax, L. M. 1981. Weeds of the North Central States. Bull. 772. Univ. Illinois Agric. Exp. Stn., Urbana. 303 pp.Google Scholar