Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:27:52.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) Control with Fall-Applied Glyphosate and Other Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. A. Ivany
J. A. Ivany*
Affiliation:
Res. Stn., Agric. Canada, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada C1A 7M8
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The herbicides glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine], hexazinone [3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione], and pronamide [3,5-dichloro(N-1,1-dimethyl-2-propynl)benzamide] were evaluated for effectiveness in quackgrass (Agropyron repens L. Beauv.) control when applied in the fall, a time that is desirable in a short-growing-season area such as Atlantic Canada. Glyphosate at 1.12 kg/ha applied to quackgrass in grain stubble gave good control. Glyphosate at 1.12 kg/ha in late October gave better control than the same rate applied in late September. At low rates of 0.56 and 1.12 kg/ha, glyphosate gave better quackgrass control when fall-applied than when spring-applied. No differences were noted between seasons at the 2.24-kg/ha rate of glyphosate. Pre-treatment with nitrogen at 35 kg/ha 30 or 15 days before application, or on the day of application, did not improve quackgrass control with glyphosate. Pronamide gave fair to good control. Hexazinone at 2.24, 4.48, or 6.72 kg/ha gave poor control when fall-applied, but excellent control when spring-applied.

Keywords

Hexazinonenitrogenpronamide
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , July 1981 , pp. 382 - 386
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 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

Literature Cited

1. Baird, D. D. and Begeman, G. F. 1972. Postemergence characterization of a new quackgrass herbicide. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 26:100–106.Google Scholar
2. Baird, D. D., Brown, R. H., and Phatak, S. C. 1974. Influence of preemergence herbicides, nitrogen, and density, and mowing on postemergence activity of glyphosate for quackgrass control. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 28:76–85.Google Scholar
3. Baird, D. D., Upchurch, R. P., Hamesley, W. B., and Franz, J. E. 1971. Introduction of a new broadspectrum postemergence herbicide class with utility for herbaceous perennial weed control. Res. Rep., North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 26:64–68.Google Scholar
4. Brockman, F. E., Duke, W. B., and Hunt, J. F. 1973. Agronomic factors influencing the effectiveness of glyphosate for quackgrass control. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 27:21–29.Google Scholar
5. Davis, H. E., Fawcett, R. S., and Harvey, R. G. 1978. Effect of fall frost on the activity of glyphosate on alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and quackgrass (Agropyron repens . Weed Sci. 26:41–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Duke, W. B. 1970. Effects of RH315 on quackgrass and established alfalfa. Proc. Northeast Weed Control. Conf. 24:220–226.Google Scholar
7. Duke, W. B. and Hunt, J. F. 1971. Effect of RH315 on quackgrass and alfalfa II. Soil residual activity in relation to quackgrass regrowth potential. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 25:301–308.Google Scholar
8. Evans, D. M. 1972. Field performance of glyphosate derivatives in the control of Agropyron repens and other perennial weeds. Proc. 11th Br. Weed Control Conf. 1:64–70.Google Scholar
9. Fawcett, R. S., Harvey, R. G., Schlough, D. A., and Block, I. R. 1978. Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) control in established alfalfa (Medicago sativa) with pronamide. Weed Sci. 26:193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Hernandez, T. J., Hudson, W. H., and Cowart, L. E. 1974. Velpar, a new weed killer. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 29: 138–140. In Weed Abstr. 25:2114.Google Scholar
11. Ivany, J. A. 1975. Effects of glyphosate application at different growth stages on quackgrass control. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:861–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Nass, H. G., Johnston, H. W., MacLeod, J. A., and Sterling, J. D. E. 1975. Effects of seeding date, seed treatment, and foliar sprays on yield and other agronomic characters of wheat, oats, and barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Rioux, R., Bandeen, J. D., and Anderson, G. W. 1974. Effects of growth stage on translocation of glyphosate in quackgrass. Can. J. Plant Sci. 54:397–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Ryan, J. B. 1972. Control of quackgrass (Agropyron repens) with (3,5-dichloro-N-(1,1-dimethyl-2-propynl)benzamide. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 26:86–92.Google Scholar
15. Sprankle, P. and Meggitt, W. F. 1972. Effective control of quackgrass with fall and spring applications of glyphosate. Res. Rep., North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 27:54. Weed Abstr. 23:2250.Google Scholar
16. Viste, K. L. and Sanborn, J. M. 1970. Control of quackgrass (Agropyron repens) in alfalfa by Kerb (RH315) Proc. Northeast Weed Control Conf. 24:227–231.Google Scholar
17. White, R. P. 1977. Effects of planting dates on forage corn yields and maturity on Prince Edward Island. Can. J. Plant Sci. 57: 563–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Yih, R. Y., Swithenbank, C., and McRae, D. H. 1970. Transformations of the herbicide N-(1,1-dimethylpropynyl)-3,5-dichlorobenzamide in soil. Weed Sci. 18:604–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar