Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:27:24.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in Rangeland Canopy Cover Seven Years After Tebuthiuron Application

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Thomas D. Whitson ,
Mark A. Ferrell  and
Harold P. Alley
Thomas D. Whitson
Affiliation:
Ext. Spec.-Pestic., Univ. Wyo., Laramie, WY 82071
Mark A. Ferrell
Affiliation:
Ext. Spec.-Pestic., Univ. Wyo., Laramie, WY 82071
Harold P. Alley
Affiliation:
Plant, Soil and Insect Sci. Dep., Univ. Wyo., Laramie, WY 82071
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tebuthiuron was evaluated at two Wyoming locations for its effects on big sagebrush control and associated vegetation, Big sagebrush was controlled with tebuthiuron at 0.6 to 1.1 kg ai/ha. Green needlegrass, prairie junegrass, blue grama, and Douglas rabbitbrush were unaffected by tebuthiuron treatments. Western wheatgrass and downy brome increased at different study locations and were dominant grass species at the end of 7 yr.

Keywords

Tebuthiuron, N-[5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl]-N-N′-dimethylureabig sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata Nutt. # ARTTRgreen needlegrass, Stipa viridula Trin.needle-and-thread, S. comata Trin. and Rupr. # STDCOwestern wheatgrass, Agropyron smithii Rydb.prairie junegrass, Koeleria cristata (L.)Pers.blue grama, Bouteloua gracilis (H.B.K.)plains pricklypear, Opuntia polyacantha Haw. # OPUPODouglas rabbitbrush, Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (Hook.)Nutt. # CYTVIdowny brome, Bromus tectorum L. # BROTEArtemisia tridentataBromus tectorumARTTRBROTE
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , October 1988 , pp. 486 - 489
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Alley, H. P. 1955. The chemical control of sagebrush and its effect upon production and utilization of associated native grass species. M.S. thesis. Univ. Wyo., Laramie, WY 82071.Google Scholar
2. Beetle, A. A. 1960. A study of sagebrush. Wyo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 368.Google Scholar
3. Bjerregaard, R. S., Kaeton, J. A., McNeill, K. E., and Warder, L. C. 1978. Rangeland brush and weed control with tebuthiuron. First Int. Rangeland Congr., Soc. Range Manage. 1:654–656.Google Scholar
4. Bowes, G. G. 1978. Tolerance of bromegrass to tebuthiuron. Res. Rep. West. Can. Expert Comm. Weeds, p. 21–22.Google Scholar
5. Carter, J. F. 1962. Urbage sampling for yield: tame pasture. p. 90–101 in Pasture and Range Research Techniques, Part IV Determination of herbage production and yield. Kennedy, W. K. and Reid, J. T., ed. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
6. Eaton, B. J., Wilson, D. G., and Kurtz, W. C. 1978. Tolerance of several forage grasses to tebuthiuron. Abstr. Soc. Range Manage. 31:56.Google Scholar
7. Hatzios, K. K., Penner, D., and Bell, D. 1980. Inhibition of photo-synthetic electron transport in isolated spinach chloroplasts by two 1,3,4-thiadiazolyl derivatives. Plant Physiol. 65:319–321.Google Scholar
8. Klauzer, J. C., and Arnold, W. E. 1975. Efficacy of tebuthiuron for control of (Artemisia tridentata) in native range. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 30:44.Google Scholar
9. Mayeux, H. S. Jr., and Chomrad, A. D. 1982. Response of false broomweed (Ericameria austrotexana) and associated vegetation to pelleted herbicides. Weed Sci. 30:668–671.Google Scholar
10. Mayeux, H. S. Jr., and Hamilton, W. T. 1983. Response of common goldenweed (Isocoma coronopifolia) and buffalograss (Cenchur ciliaris) to fire and soil-applied herbicides. Weed Sci. 31:355–360.Google Scholar
11. Meadors, C. H., and Fisher, C. E. 1977. Practices showing promise for two years but not fully recommended. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:167.Google Scholar
12. Meyer, R. E., and Bovey, R. W. 1980. Hexazinone and other herbicides on Texas woody plants. Weed Sci. 28:358–362.Google Scholar
13. Miller, R. F., Findley, R. R., and Alderfer-Findley, J. 1980. Changes in mountain big sagebrush habitat types following spray release. J. Range Manage. 33:278–281.Google Scholar
14. Pechanec, J. F., Plummer, A. P., Robertson, J. H., and Hull, A. C. Jr. 1965. Sagebrush control on rangelands. U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
15. Scifres, C. J., Stuth, J. W., Kirby, D. R., and Angell, R. F. 1981. Forage and livestock production following oak (Quercus spp.) control with tebuthiuron. Weed Sci. 29:535–539.Google Scholar
16. Stefferud, A., ed. 1948. Grass–The Yearbook of Agriculture. U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, DC. p. 571.Google Scholar
17. U.S. Bureau of Land Management. 1964. The Taylor Grazing Act. U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
18. Wattenbarger, D. W., Belles, W. S., and Lee, G. A. 1979. The control of big sagebrush on central Idaho rangeland. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci., p. 77.Google Scholar
19. Whitson, T. D., and Alley, H. P. 1982. Effects of tebuthiuron on range species complex and forage production. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci., p. 39–41.Google Scholar
20. Whitson, T. D., and Alley, H. P. 1984. Tebuthiuron effects on Artemisia spp. and associated grasses. Weed Sci. 32:180–184.Google Scholar
21. Whitson, T. D., and Ferrell, M. A. 1987. Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.) control and perennial grass production four years following herbicide treatments. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci., p. 67–68.Google Scholar