Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:47:51.704Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of terbacil-based herbicide treatments for hair fescue (Festuca filiformis) management in lowbush blueberry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2020

Scott N. White Open the ORCID record for Scott N. White [Opens in a new window]  and
Linshan Zhang
Scott N. White*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Plant, Food, and Environmental Sciences, Dalhousie University Faculty of Agriculture, Truro, Nova Scotia, Canada
Linshan Zhang
Affiliation:
Graduate student, Department of Plant, Food, and Environmental Sciences, Dalhousie University Faculty of Agriculture, Truro, Nova Scotia, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Scott White, 50 Pictou Road, Truro, Nova Scotia, Canada B2N 2R8. Email: scott.white@dal.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hair fescue is a common tuft-forming perennial grass weed that reduces yields and hinders mechanical harvest in lowbush blueberry fields. PRE terbacil applications traditionally controlled hair fescue but currently only provide suppression in most fields. Terbacil use has not, however, been evaluated in conjunction with other currently registered herbicides in lowbush blueberry. The objective of this research was to evaluate a range of terbacil-based herbicide treatments for hair fescue management in lowbush blueberry. The experiment was conducted at three lowbush blueberry fields in Nova Scotia, Canada. Spring nonbearing-year terbacil applications (2,000 g ai ha–1) exhibited variable efficacy on hair fescue with reduced total tuft density at one site and reduced flowering-tuft density and flowering-tuft inflorescence number at two sites. Suppression was limited to the year of application only. Terbacil followed by (fb) foramsulfuron (35 g ai ha–1) did not improve suppression. A terbacil tank mixture with glufosinate (750 ai ha–1), however, reduced flowering-tuft density and flowering-tuft inflorescence number at each site and reduced total tuft density at one site, suggesting improved suppression with terbacil + glufosinate relative to terbacil alone. Terbacil + glufosinate fb foramsulfuron gave additional reductions in total tuft density at two sites and reduced bearing-year flowering-tuft density at two sites, indicating that hair fescue suppression with this herbicide combination extends into the bearing year. Although less effective than the industry standard pronamide applications, terbacil + glufosinate or terbacil + glufosinate fb foramsulfuron could be used as part of a weed management program for hair fescue in lowbush blueberry.

Keywords

fall bearing-year herbicidespring nonbearing-year herbicidefall nonbearing-year herbicideperennial grasstuftGlufosinateforamsulfuronpronamideterbacilhair fescueFestuca filiformis Pourr.FESTElowbush blueberryVaccinium angustifolium Ait.
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , June 2021 , pp. 485 - 491
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Peter J. Dittmar, University of Florida

References

Anonymous (2017) Wild blueberry IPM weed management guide. Wild blueberry fact sheet C.4.2.0. New Brunswick Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture, and Fisheries. 32 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2019) Crop profile for lowbush blueberry in Canada, 2017. Catalogue No. A118-10/31-2017-PDF. AAFC No. 12972E. Pest Management Program. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 69 pGoogle Scholar
Barker, WG, Hall, IV, Aalders, LW, Wood, GW (1964) The lowbush blueberry industry in Eastern Canada. Economic Bot 18:357–365 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, NS, White, S (2009) Impact of wild blueberry harvesters on weed seed dispersal within and between fields. Weed Sci 57:541–546 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, NS, White, S, Rao, K (2014) Fertilizer and fluazifop-P inputs for winter bentgrass (Agrostis hyemalis)-infested lowbush blueberry fields. Weed Technol 28:527–534 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess, P (2002) Efficacy and crop phytotoxicity of several herbicides on commercial wild blueberries (Vaccinium angustifolium Ait.) and introduced living mulches. Dalhousie University, Truro, NS, Canada. MSc. thesis. 57 pGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, AS, York, AC (1999) Weed management in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 13:324–333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doohan, DJ, Monaco, TJ, Sheets, TJ (1992) Effect of field violet (Viola arvensis) growth stage on uptake, translocation, and metabolism of terbacil. Weed Sci 40:180–183 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, LJ, Glen, RW, Wyllie, JD (2004) Efficient mowing for pruning wild blueberry fields. Small Fruits Rev 3:123–131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, IV (1959) Plant populations in blueberry stands developed from abandoned hayfields and woodlots. Ecology 40:742–743 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, IV, Alders, LE (1961) Cytotaxonomy of lowbush blueberries in Eastern Canada. Amer J Bot 48:199–201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, IV, Alders, LE, Nickerson, NL, Vander Kloet, SP (1979) The biological flora of Canada. 1. Vaccinium angustifolium Ait., sweet lowbush blueberry. Can Field Natural 93:415–430 Google Scholar
Jensen, KIN (1985) Weed control in lowbush blueberry in Eastern Canada. Acta Hort 165:259–265 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, KIN, Yarborough, DE (2004) An overview of weed management in the wild lowbush blueberry–past and present. Small Fruits Rev 3:229–255 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, KIN, Specht, EG (2002) Response of lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) to hexazinone applied early in the fruiting year. Can J Plant Sci 82:781–783 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, KIN, Benjamin, SA, Hainstock, MH (2003) Grasses of lowbush blueberry fields. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Atlantic Food and Horticulture Research Center. 5 pGoogle Scholar
Jones, CA, Chandler, JM, Morrison, JE, Senseman, SA, Tingle, CH (2001) Glufosinate combinations and row spacing for weed control in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 15:141–147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marty, C, Levesque, J, Bradley, RL, Lafond, J, Pare, MC (2019) Contrasting impacts of two weed species on lowbush blueberry fertilizer nitrogen uptake in a commercial field. PLoS ONE 14: e0215253. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215253 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCully, KV, Sampson, MG, Watson, AK (1991) Weed survey of Nova Scotia lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) fields. Weed Sci 39:180–185 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritts, MP, Hancock, JF (1984) Independence of life history parameters in populations of Vaccinium angustifolium (Ericaceae). Bull Torr Botan Club 111:451–461 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, RL, Menbere, H (2001) Weed management systems utilizing glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 15:89–94 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, MG, McCully, KV, Sampson, DL (1990) Weeds of eastern Canadian blueberry fields. Truro, NS: Nova Scotia Agricultural College Bookstore. Pp 213–215 Google Scholar
Smagula, JM, Ismail, AA (1981) Effects of fertilizer application, preceded by terbacil, on growth, leaf nutrient concentration, and yield of the lowbush blueberry. Can J Plant Sci 61:961–964 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, SN (2018) Determination of Festuca filiformis seedbank characteristics, seedling emergence and herbicide susceptibility to aid management in lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium). Weed Res 58:112–120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, SN (2019) Evaluation of herbicides for hair fescue (Festuca filiformis) management and potential seedbank reduction in lowbush blueberry. Weed Technol 33:840–846 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, SN, Kumar, SK (2017) Potential role of sequential glufosinate and foramsulfuron applications for management of fescue (Festuca spp.) in wild blueberry. Weed Technol 31:100–110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, GW (2004) The wild blueberry industry––past. Small Fruits Rev 3:11–18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yarborough, DE, Cote, JD (2014) Pre- and post-emergence applications of herbicides for control of resistant fine-leaf sheep fescue in wild blueberry fields in Maine. Proc North American Blueberry Research and Extension Workers Conference, June 23–26, 2014, Atlantic City, NJ. https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/45990/ Google Scholar
Zhang, L (2017) Management of perennial grasses in wild blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) fields. Dalhousie University, Truro, NS, Canada. MSc. thesis. 173 pGoogle Scholar
Zhang, L, White, SN, Olson, AR, Pruski, K (2018) Evaluation of flazasulfuron for hair fescue (Festuca filiformis) suppression and wild blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium Ait.) tolerance. Can J Plant Sci 98:1293–1303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar