Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:32:20.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Citronmelon (Citrullus lanatus var. citroides) Control in Texas Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) Using Postemergence Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

W. James Grichar
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Yoakum, TX 77995
Brent A. Besler
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Yoakum, TX 77995
Kevin D. Brewer*
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Yoakum, TX 77995
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: taes@viptx.net.

Abstract

Field studies were conducted from 1995 through 1998 to evaluate citronmelon control with postemergence (POST) herbicides. Imazapic at any application timing and late postemergence (LPOST) applications of 2,4-DB were the only herbicides that provided >80% control of citronmelon late season. Other herbicides such as acifluorfen, imazethapyr, lactofen, and pyridate provided acceptable (>75%) early-season control of citronmelon, but control was inadequate at harvest.

Type
Research
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

Brecke, B. J. and Colvin, D. L. 1991. Weed management in peanuts. In Pimentel, D., ed. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture. 2nd ed., Volume 3. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 239251.Google Scholar
Buchanan, G. A., Murray, D. S., and Hauser, E. W. 1982. Weeds and their control in peanuts. In Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Yoakum, TX: American Peanut Research Education Society. pp. 209249.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. 1994. Spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus L.) control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Weed Technol. 8: 199202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J. 1997a. Control of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 11: 739743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J. 1997b. Influence of herbicides and timing of application on broadleaf weed control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 11: 708713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J. and Nester, P. R. 1997. Nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with AC 263,222 and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 11: 714719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., and Wehtje, G. R. 1994. Toxicity of AC 263,222 to purple (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow nutsedge (C. esculentus). Weed Sci. 42: 398402.Google Scholar
[SWSS] Southern Weed Science of America. 1990. Weed Identification Guide. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society. 498 p.Google Scholar
Walker, R. H., Wells, L. W., and McGuire, J. A. 1989. Bristly starbur (Acanthosperum hispidium) interference in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 37: 196200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. 1991. Imazethapyr and AC 263,222 systems for Georgia peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:138.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. and Richburg, J. S. III. 1992. Pursuit and Cadre tank mixtures for weed control in Georgia peanuts. Proc. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc. 24:46.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Wiley, G., Wall, F. R. Jr., Jones, S. R., and Iverson, M. J. 1994. Imidazolinone herbicide systems for peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Sci. 2: 2328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., Grichar, W. J., and Wehtje, G. R. 1995. The biology and management of weeds in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). In Pattee, H. E. and Stalker, H. T., eds. Advances in Peanut Science. Stillwater, OK: American Peanut Research Education Society. pp. 207244.Google Scholar
Young, J. H., Peterson, N. K., Donald, J. O., and Mayfield, W. H. 1982. Harvesting, curing, and energy utilization. In Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Yoakum, TX: American Peanut Research Education Society. pp. 458487.Google Scholar