Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:57:33.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Preherbicide Mowing and Herbicide Rate on Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum viarum) Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Paul Mislevy*
Affiliation:
Range Cattle Research Education Center, University of Florida, IFAS, 3401 Experiment Station, Ona, FL 33865
J. Jeffrey Mullahey
Affiliation:
Southwest Florida Research Education Center, University of Florida, IFAS, Immokalee, FL 34143
Frank G. Martin
Affiliation:
Statistics Department, University of Florida, IFAS, Gainesville, FL 32611
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: ona@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu.

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1993–1994 and 1994–1995 to evaluate the effects of preherbicide mowing and herbicide rate on tropical soda apple (TSA) control. Mature TSA plants were mowed one, two, or three times to a 7.5-cm stubble with a 60-d interval between mowings. Triclopyr was applied at 0, 0.6, and 1.1 kg ai/ha at 375 L/ha at 207 kPa 60 d after each mowing treatment. Mowing TSA plants twice before an application of 0.6 kg ai/ha triclopyr resulted in 100% control. Tropical soda apple control (2-yr average) for the triclopyr treatment increased between one (28% control) and two (82% control) preherbicide mowings, with no additional control benefits from three mowings (84% control). In a second study, TSA control increased from 10% 60 d after a single mowing to 92% after three consecutive mowings at 60-d intervals with no herbicide. Total nonstructural carbohydrates in TSA crowns decreased from 19.1% for unclipped plants to 4.3% 60 d after three preherbicide mowings.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 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

Bryson, C. T. and Byrd, J. D. Jr. 1996. Tropical soda apple in Mississippi. In Tropical Soda Apple Symp. Proc., University of Florida, Bartow, FL., January 9–10. pp. 5560.Google Scholar
Mislevy, P. and Everett, P. H. 1981. Subtropical grass species response to different irrigation and harvest regimes. Agron. J. 73:601604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mislevy, P., Mullahey, J. J., and Martin, F. G. 1997. Response of tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum) to triclopyr. Soil Crop Sci. Soc. Fla. Proc. 56:1113.Google Scholar
Mullahey, J. J. and Colvin, D. L. 1993. Tropical Soda Apple: A New Noxious Weed in Florida. Gainesville, FL: Florida Cooperative Extension Service IFAS, University of Florida, Fact Sheet WRS-7.Google Scholar
Mullahey, J. J., Nee, M., Wunderlin, R. P., and Delaney, K. R. 1993. Tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum): a new weed threat in subtropical regions. Weed Technol. 7:783786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullahey, J. J., Mislevy, P., Brown, W. F., and Kline, W. N. 1996. Tropical soda apple, an exotic weed threatening agriculture and natural systems. Down Earth 51:1017.Google Scholar
Nee, M. 1991. Synopsis of Solanum Section Acanthophora: a revision of interest for glyco-alkaloids. In Hawkes, J. G., Lester, R. N., Nee, M., and Estrada, N., eds. Solanaceae III: Taxonomy, Chemistry, Evolution. Kew, Richmond, Surrey, UK: Royal Botanic Gardens. pp. 258266.Google Scholar
Nelson, N. 1944. A photometric adaptation of the Somogyi method for the determination of glucose. J. Biol. Chem. 153:375380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1985. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 6, 4th ed., Volume 2. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Smith, D. 1981. Removing and Analyzing Total Non-Structural Carbohydrates from Plant Tissue. Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station Bull. Rep. 2107.Google Scholar
Somogyi, M. 1945. A new reagent for the determination of sugars. J. Biol. Chem. 160:6168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar