Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T19:38:58.013Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Range Forage Production and Consumption Following Aerial Spraying of Mixed Brush

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

C.J. Scifres
Affiliation:
Texas Agric. Exp. Sta. (Dep. Range Sci.), Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
G.P. Durham
Affiliation:
Texas Agric. Exp. Sta. (Dep. Range Sci.), Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843 King Ranch, Inc.
J.L. Mutz
Affiliation:
Texas Agric. Exp. Sta. (Dep. Range Sci.), Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843

Abstract

Production of native grasses following aerial application of 1.12 kg/ha of 2.4.5-T ((2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid), 2,4,5-T + dicamba (3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid), or 2,4,5-T + picloram (4-amino-3,5,6-trichloropicolinic acid) (1:) to a south Texas mixed-brush (Prosopis-Acacia) community was significantly increased by all herbicide treatments the year of application, by the herbicide combinations during the second year, but only by 2,4,5-T + picloram the third year after treatment. Moisture-use efficiency based on kg/ha native grass produced/cm precipitation was greastest where the herbicide combinations were applied. Defoliation of woody plants in years of above-average rainfall resulted in favorable grass production responses regardless of herbicide(s). However, range improvement over the 3-yr of study was dependent on maintenance of herbicide effectiveness, especially control of underbrush which resulted only where 2,4,5-T + picloram were applied. Consumption of native grass was a direct function of availability in response to brush control as augmented by rainfall. Forb production was reduced by all herbicides the year of treatment and by 2,4,5-T + picloram the year following application, but was not reduced by any treatment during the third growing season.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 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. Beasom, S.L. and Scifres, C.J. 1976. Population reactions of selected game species to aerial herbicide applications in South Texas. J. Range Manage. 29:(In press).Google Scholar
2. Bovey, R.W. 1971. Hormone-like herbicides in weed control. Econ. Bot. 25:385400.Google Scholar
3. Bovey, R.W., Davis, F.S., and Morton, H.L. 1968. Herbicide combinations for woody plant control. Weed Sci. 16:332335.Google Scholar
4. Bovey, R.W. and Scifres, C.J. 1971. Residual characteristics of picloram in grassland ecosystems. Tex. Agric. Exp. St. Bull. 1111.24 pp.Google Scholar
5. Cottam, G. and Curtis, J.T. 1956. The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37:451460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Fisher, C.E., Wiedemann, H.T., Meadors, C.H., and Brock, J.H. 1973. Mechanical control of mesquite. Pages 4652 in Scifres, , ed. Mesquite. Tex. Agric. Exp. St. Res. Monog. 1:84 pp.Google Scholar
7. Gould, F.W. 1969. Texas Plants. A checklist and ecological summary. Tex. Agric. Exp. St. Misc. Pub. 585. 121 pp.Google Scholar
8. Klingman, D.L., Miles, S.R., and Mott, G.O. 1943. The cage method for determining consumption and yield of pasture herbage. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 9: 739746.Google Scholar
9. Scifres, C.J. and Hoffman, G.O. 1972. Comparative susceptibility of honey mesquite to dicamba and 2,4,5-T. J. Range Manage. 24: 143146.Google Scholar
10. Scifres, C.J., Durham, G.P., and Mutz, J.L. 1976. Comparison of chaining techniques for South Texas mixed brush. J. Range Manage. 29: (In press).Google Scholar
11. Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J.H. 1960. Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc. New York. 481 pp.Google Scholar