Weed Identification, Management, and Control in the Home Lawn

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Weed Identification, Management, and Control in the Home Lawn WEED IDENTIFICATION, MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL IN THE HOME LAWN Michelle Le Strange* Introduction Though weeds are a natural component of the landscape, by definition we don't usually like where they end up growing. In the front lawn weeds are easily seen and are usually considered objectionable. The great majority of the 500 species of weeds in California are flowering plants, those higher forms of plant life that produce seed. Fifty species are considered as major weeds in turf. Why identify weeds in the first place? In the days when weed control and management was mechanical or pulled by hand, specific weed identification was not so important. Today the management tools are more sophisticated. Timing of fertilizer and water applications influences the growth of specific weeds. The herbicides are developed to be selective to major plant groups. Some are selective to plant families, others to species. Also rising labor, fossil fuel, water, and chemical costs put an emphasis on controlling weeds the first time. It is important for anyone conducting weed control programs to learn bow to tell the difference between weeds. Weed Classification Botanists recognize two natural divisions in the flowering plants. The monocotyledons and the dicotyledons. Two characteristics distinguish monocots from dicots. One is the number of leaves that the young seedling has when it emerges through the soil surface. The monocots have one seedling leaf, the dicots two. The second characteristic is the venation within the true leaves. In the monocots the veins run parallel to each other. In dicots the veins branch in several directions in a netted fashion. All of the grasses plus bamboo, irises, nutsedge, and palm trees are examples of monocots. Roses, hardwood trees, poison oak, and clovers are members of the dicot group. In weed control dicots are referred to as broadleaf weeds and the monocots as narrowleaf weeds, but it is their venation and number of seed leaves that determine their category. Depending on the number of years that they live, flowering plants are also classified as annuals, biennials, or perennials. Annuals grow from seed, flower, produce seed and die in one year or less. Where there are distinct seasons, annuals are found to occur either as winter or summer season plants. Winter annual weeds germinate in the fall, grow throughout winter, and mature in spring before the heat of summer. Summer annual weeds germinate in the spring, grow during summer, and mature before frost. Biennial plants have a 2 year lifecycle. Seeds germinate the first year and grow vegetatively in a rosette shape. During the second year a flower stalk arises, seed is produced, and the plant dies. Perennial weeds can live indefinitely, although the tops may die during the winter. They can start from germinating seeds, but many perennial plants spread naturally by *Farm Advisor, University of California Cooperative Extension, Tulare County 2 vegetative means such as root pieces, rhizomes, or tubers. Perennial plants continue to spread in turf until all of their parts are killed or weakened enough so they no longer compete with the turf. Seedling plants are the easiest to destroy whether they are annuals, biennials, or perennials. Once perennials become established, they are generally harder to control. Some examples of annual weeds in turf include: Narrow leaf Broad leaf Annual bluegrass California bur clover Large crabgrass Common chickweed Smooth crabgrass Common groundsel Goosegrass Birdseye speedwell Italian ryegrass Spotted spurge Some examples of perennial weeds in turf include: Narrow leaf Broadleaf Bermudagrass Dichondra German velvetgrass Dandelion Kikuyugrass White clover St. Augustinegrass Creeping woodsorrel Bentgrass Plantains Dallisgrass Mouseear chickweed Yellow nutsedge English daisy Cultural Management of Weeds There are several management tools or cultural practices that best enable the turf to compete with weeds. A healthy vigorous turf stands a much better chance against weed invasion than a weak stand of water-stressed, unfertil­ ized lawn. Mowing, watering, and fertilizing the lawn have a direct impact on weeds. The GOAL of MOWING is a smooth, uniform, dense turf. Large weeds that stick up over the turf are mowed away--that's why most problem weeds are prostrate. There are two KEYS in mowing--height and frequency. Each turf variety has its requirements. In general cool season grasses have a two inch optimum for stress tolerance and resistance against weeds. Warm season grasses are usually mowed 1/2 - 1 1/2" in height. At these heights the grasses are the most vigorous. With respect to frequency, the rule is to never remove more than 1/3 leaf area. In spring this is often more than one time/week for the cool season grasses as this is when they put on a tremen­ dous flush of growth. For the homeowner it's just a matter of getting out there and doing it, but under commercial or municipal situations it gets expensive. For this reason proper selection of turf varieties is important. The proper irrigation scheme for vigorous turf and weed control is to water INFREQUENTLY and water DEEPLY. Just how infrequent and how deep depends on the turf, temperature, and soil type. Using a long interval between irrigations in the spring serves two purposes. It encourages deep 3 root development before high demands of summer stress the system, and it reduces to a minimum the surviving infestation of annual summer weeds such as crabgrass. You can help control weeds by mowing a little high and with infrequent, deep waterings. The high mowing reduces the light penetration to the bare soil, and the infrequent watering lets the top 2" of the soil dry out causing weed seedlings to die. The greatest influence of fertilization on weeds is the indirect effect. Fertility increases grass vigor, thus reducing the competitiveness of the weeds. Nitrogen is the limiting element in most areas. Not only is the amount applied critical, but so is the timing of the application. If ferti­ lizers are applied at the optimum time for grass growth, weeds will be less likely to invade and compete. Fertilizer applications should be made to encourage turf before crabgrass germination in spring or before annual blue­ grass germination in the fall. A well fertilized, adapted turf will reduce invasion by dandelion, large and smooth crabgrass, and clovers. Controlling Broadleaf Weeds in Lawns There are herbicides available that are selective to controlling broad­ leaved annuals in lawns. Virtually three chemicals or their combination will control just about all of the common annual broadleaf weeds in lawns. They are 2,4-D, mecoprop, and dicamba. These herbicides are applied directly to the foliage of the weeds as they are growing in the lawn. The chemical then moves within the weeds to the growing points and kills them. These chemicals are readily available, and have many trade names. Nearly every company specializing in lawn products has them in some way, shape, or form. Oftentimes they are in the so called "weed and feeders", that is, the herbicide or herbicides are impregnated onto a granule and mixed in with a nitrogen fertilizer. The same selective herbicides that control the annual broadleaves will control the perennial broadleaves. Each herbicide has its list of weeds upon which it is most effective. In some cases it is necessary to use a combination of two or all three of them. For example, 2,4-D works well on dandelions and plantains, but it is weak on clovers. Dicamba, on the other hand, is good on clovers, but it is weak on dandelions and plantains. Controlling Narrowleaf Weeds in Lawns Crabgrass control includes managing irrigation so that water is applied deeper and less frequently. Several pre-emergent herbicides offer good control of crabgrass, if their application is properly timed. A single application of a selective, pre-emergent, soil applied herbicide such as benefin, bensulide, or DCPA will control crabgrass in turf for an entire growing season. The best time for crabgrass control is January-February for the most part of the state. With these chemicals it is important to sprinkle irrigate them into the soil, and to avoid using them on bentgrass because of its sensitivity to them. To control crabgrass that has emerged the methane arsonates, like CMA, DSMA, and MSMA, are used. Repeated applications of these selective foliage applied herbicides are often needed to get rid of the crabgrass. Several companies offer these products in their home lawn products line. Pendimethalin is primarily used by the col1Ullercial applicator, 4 but it is becoming more available to the homeowner. Oryzalin is registered for use on warm season turf, but care should be taken if you have the hybrid bermudas, because some phytotoxicity has been noticed in some of the varie­ ties. Controlling annual bluegrass in established turf is very similar to con­ trolling crabgrass, except the pre-emergent application date is August and September. Oxadiazon is another pre-emergent material that is registered for controlling annual bluegrass in established lawns. Available for commer­ cial applicators, but not the homeowner, is a post-emergent herbicide, pronamide. It works well in controlling established bluegrass in dormant bermudagrass. However, because of its specificity it is rather expensive to use. Dallisgrass is a perennial problem in lawns. The best management tool is to prevent it from getting into the lawn. If it is in the backyard, but not in the front, keep it out by hosing off the mower after use to remove any seed heads caught in the blades. There are no pre-emergent materials registered specifically for dallisgrass, but it is rarely a problem where crabgrass pre-emergents are used. For post-emergent control again rely on MSMA and DSMA. When these materials are used, care should be taken with respect to the kind of lawn and the temperature.
Recommended publications
  • EFFICACY of ORGANIC WEED CONTROL METHODS Scott Snell, Natural Resources Specialist
    FINAL STUDY REPORT (Cape May Plant Materials Center, Cape May Court House, NJ) EFFICACY OF ORGANIC WEED CONTROL METHODS Scott Snell, Natural Resources Specialist ABSTRACT Organic weed control methods have varying degrees of effectiveness and cover a broad range of costs financially and in time. Studies were conducted at the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Cape May Plant Materials Center, Cape May Court House, New Jersey to examine the efficacy and costs of a variety of organic weed control methods: tillage, organic herbicide (acetic acid), flame treatment, solarization, and use of a smother cover crop. The smother cover and organic herbicide treatment plots displayed the least efficacy to control weeds with the average percent weed coverage of each method being over 97%. The organic herbicide plots also had the greatest financial costs and required the second most treatment time following the flame treatment plots. Although the flame treatment method was time consuming, it was effective resulting in an average of 12.14% weed coverage. Solarization required below average treatment time and resulted in an average of 49.22% weed coverage. The tillage method was found to be the most effective means of control and also had well below average financial costs and required slightly above average treatment time. INTRODUCTION The final results of the third biennial national Organic Farming Research Foundation’s (OFRF) survey found that organic producers rank weed control as one of the top problems negatively affecting their farms’ profitability (1999). Weed control options available for organic producers are far more limited than those of conventional production due to organic certification standards.
    [Show full text]
  • PRINCIPLES of ORGANIC FARMING SIXTH SEMESTER Polytechnic In
    A LECTURE NOTE ON Agron. 6.10 (1 + 1 = 2) PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIC FARMING SIXTH SEMESTER Polytechnic in Agriculture College of Agriculture, NAU, Bharuch Agron. 6.10 (1 + 1 = 2) Principles of Organic Farming Theory: Chapter Chapter Page No. No. 1. ORGANIC FARMING-AN INTRODUCTION 2. PRINCIPLES, SCOPE AND COMPONENTS OF ORGANIC FARMING 3. COMPONENTS OF ORGANIC FARMING AND THEIR ROLE IN SUSTAINABLE CROP PRODUCTION 4. INITIATIVES FOR PROMOTING ORGANIC FARMING 5. NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT IN ORGANIC FARMING 6. DISEASE AND PEST MANAGEMENT IN ORGANIC FARMING 7. WEED MANAGEMENT IN ORGANIC FARMING 8. OPERATIONAL STRUCTURE OF NPOP AND NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR ORGANIC FARMING 9. CERTIFICATION AND ACCREDITATION PROCESS OF ORGANIC PRODUCT 10. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS, MARKETING AND EXPORT POTENTIAL OF ORGANIC FARMING Reference books 1. Organic farming-Theory and Practice by S.P. Palaniappan and K. Annadurai 2. Principles of organic farming by S. R. Reddy 3. Principles of Agronomy by S. R. Reddy 4. Organic crop production (Principles and practices Vol-I: Principles and General Aspects) by J. P. Sharma 5. Principles and practices of organic farming by R. Balasubramanian, K. Balakrishnan and K. Sivasubramanian CHAPTER -1 INTRODUCTION, DEFINITION, CONCEPT, IMPORTANCE, ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES, OBJECTIVES, ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ORGANIC FARMING 1.1 Introduction: Green revolution technologies such as greater use of synthetic agro chemicals like fertilizers and pesticides, adoption of nutrient responsive, high-yielding varieties of crops, greater exploitation of irrigation potentials etc… has boosted the production out put in most of cases. Without proper choice and continues use of these high energy inputs is leading to decline in production and productivity of various crops as well as deterioration of soil health and environments.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of Intercropping Pattern in Reducing Weeds Infestation in Okra, Maize and Pepper Intercrop
    International Journal of Weed Science and Technology ISSN 4825-3499 Vol. 2 (1), pp. 063-069, January, 2018. Available online at www.advancedscholarsjournals.org © Advanced Scholars Journals Full Length Research Paper Efficacy of intercropping pattern in reducing weeds infestation in okra, maize and pepper intercrop *Ubini C. Thomas, Jaymiwhie Obanna and Ikogho B. Patrick Department of Crop and Soil Science, University of Port Harcourt, P. M. B 5323 Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Accepted 15 January, 2018 Field study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of intercropping pattern in reducing weed infestation in okra, maize and pepper intercrop; at the teaching and research farm of Rivers State University of Science and Technology Port Harcourt, Nigeria during 2009 and 2010 cropping season. Three intercropping pattern namely; alternate row intercropping, strip row intercropping and mixed intercropping were compared to sole cropping in a randomized complete block design replicated three times. The result reveal that weed biomass were significantly lower in both years in all forms of intercropping pattern compared to sole cropping or mono-cropping. Weed smothering efficiency in both years showed that mixed pattern (45.7%) >alternate row pattern (33.4%) > strip row pattern (11.5%). Crop yield were better in an intercrop system for maize and pepper in both years compared to -1 sole crop. However, mean okra fruit yield was highest in sole cropping (3253 kg ha ) when compared -1 to intercropping pattern. Maize yield was highest in mixed pattern (8,987 kg ha ) and lowest in sole -1 -1 cropping (6,955 kg ha ) while pepper fruit yield was highest in strip row pattern (5,435 kg ha ) and -1 lowest in mixed pattern (1,562 kg ha ).
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Sustainable Weed Able Weed
    PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE WEED MANAGEMENT FOR CROPLANDS AGRONOMY SYSTEMS SERIES Abstract: To some extent, weeds are a result of crop production, but to a larger extent they are a consequence of management decisions. Managing croplands according to nature’s principles will reduce weed problems. And while these principles apply to most crops, this publication focuses on agronomic crops such as corn, soybeans, milo, and small grains. The opportunities to address the root causes of weeds are not always readily apparent, and often require some imagination to recognize. Creativity is key to taking advantage of these opportunities and devising sustainable cropping systems that prevent weed problems, rather than using quick-fix approaches. Annual monoculture crop production generally involves tillage that creates conditions hospitable to many weeds. This publication discusses several alternatives to conventional tillage systems, including allelopathy, intercropping, crop rotations, and a weed- free cropping design. A Resources list provides sources of further information. By Preston Sullivan boundaries within which we operate and the NCAT Agriculture Specialist rules for success within those boundaries. September 2003 The “weed control” paradigm is reactive— it addresses weed First, Free Your Brain problems by using As Iowa farmer Tom Frantzen poetically states: various tools and tech- “Free your brain and your behind will follow.” nologies. “How am I What Tom is referring to is discovering new para- gonna get rid of this vel- digms. Joel Barker, author of Paradigms—The vet-leaf?” and “How do Business of Discovering the Future (1), defines a I control foxtail?” are re- paradigm as a set of standards that establish the active statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquaponicstheeasywaysample
    HOW TO DO AQUAPONICS THE EASY Way A Step-by-Step, Affordable DIY Guide to the Most Efficient Food Production System in the History of Mankind If You Have Light and Heat You Can Have Plants and Fish! SUSANNE FRIEND & TIM MANN HOW TO DO AQUAPONICS THE EASY WAY! First Edition, December 2013 ©Susanne Friend, Tim Mann, and Friendly Aquaponics, Inc, 2013. All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced in whole or in part, or transmitted in any form without express written permission from the publisher (Friendly Aquaponics, Inc.), except by a reviewer, who may quote brief passages in a review; nor may any part of this book be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or other, without express written permission from both the authors and publisher. Cover design, all document layout, design, and artwork ©Susanne Friend, 2013 This is designed to be an E-book, and is meant to be read on a mobile device or e-reader, and not printed at all, this saves TONS of paper! If you really need to print it, print it off your printer, but make sure to print only the pages you really need to print! Mahalo Nui Loa “Great thanks, Everlasting” To The People We Call “Farmily” First and foremost, thank you to Dr. James Rakocy, for his seminal work at the University of the Virgin Islands, and for hosting the 2007 Short Course that started us on this path. Along the way have been many excellent students who asked a critical question at just the right moment.
    [Show full text]
  • Flaming As a Method of Weed Control in Organic Farming Systems Dale R
    Michigan State University Extension Bulletin E-3038 • New • January 2008 Flaming as a Method of Weed Control in Organic Farming Systems Dale R. Mutch, Extension Specialist, Michigan State University Simon A. Thalmann, Research Assistant, W.K. Kellogg Biological Station Todd E. Martin, Research Assistant, W.K. Kellogg Biological Station Dean G. Baas, Graduate Assistant, W.K. Kellogg Biological Station Introduction Some farmers have found that flaming Using fire to control controls certain weeds weeds in organic farming (lambsquarters and systems shows promise for pigweed, for example) reducing weed populations better than others without herbicides. A (mustards or common carefully directed flame ragweed) (Mutch et al., fueled by natural gas or liquid propane (LP) 2005). Flaming is more effective in a crop such as increases the temperature within the weed, causing corn, where the growing point is below the soil cells to rupture and effectively killing weeds surface, than in crops such as soybeans, where the while doing little damage to the crop (Fig. 1). growing point is aboveground. The authors of this Flaming disrupts weed growth through heat, so bulletin do not recommend using flaming to control it is important to flame when the plants are dry weeds in soybeans. and wind speed and direction are favorable. Both moisture and wind can lower the heat from the Exposing a weed seedling to flame for 1/10 of flame, reducing the effectiveness of the flaming a second (Row Crop, 2007) is usually enough to application (Mutch et al., 2005). ensure control, although this may vary with weed type and size (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Permaculture Cairns Newsletter
    Permaculture Cairns Inc. Established July, 2007 Web site: www.permaculturecairns.org.au Permaculture Cairns News Empowering communities with sustainable solutions Care for the Earth, Care for people, Share the excess Care of the Earth, Care of People, Share the excess _________________________________________________________________________________ November Public Info & General Meeting Night th Tuesday 19 6:30pm for 7pm start. Flexible Learning Centre, 90 Clarke Street, Manunda Clarke Street comes off Hoare on the Salvos Corner. There is wheel chair access. If you can spare the time, come early (6.15) to help us set up tables and chairs. Members please bring a plate of food to share for dinner, or make a small donation towards the refreshment costs. OOH! and bring a friend, all welcome but ! Financial Members are free. Un- financial members and non members pay $5 for the info night and dinner SPEAKERS for the month: Steve Bailey from Terrain Natural Resource Management will be our November Guest Speaker. Steve has recently been involved on a broad range of catchment issues with a wide variety of stakeholder groups. Some examples of relevant projects: Prioritisation of cactchment repair programs Strategic targeting of weed control Trials of new erosion control measures in riparian areas Revegetation of degraded sites for habitat connectivity – working with local Landcare groups. Building constructed wetlands as nutrient and sediment sinks on farm lands. Water quality monitoring – in particular looking at pesticide/herbicide runoff. Working with primary producers to help transition a move away from some conventional farming methods and adopting alternative practices where possible. LAST MONTHS’ GUEST SPEAKER Jaide from King Brown Technologies, the makers of King Brown Compost was our guest speaker at the last meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Robotic Weed Control Using Automated Weed and Crop Classification Xiaolong Wu, Stéphanie Aravecchia, Philipp Lottes, Cyrill Stachniss, Cédric Pradalier
    Robotic weed control using automated weed and crop classification Xiaolong Wu, Stéphanie Aravecchia, Philipp Lottes, Cyrill Stachniss, Cédric Pradalier To cite this version: Xiaolong Wu, Stéphanie Aravecchia, Philipp Lottes, Cyrill Stachniss, Cédric Pradalier. Robotic weed control using automated weed and crop classification. 2020. hal-02484462 HAL Id: hal-02484462 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02484462 Preprint submitted on 19 Feb 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Robotic Weed Control Using Automated Weed and Crop Classification Xiaolong Wu Stephanie´ Aravecchia Georgia Institute of Technology UMI2958 GeorgiaTech-CNRS Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Metz 57070, France Atlanta, GA 30332, United States [email protected] [email protected] Philipp Lottes Cyrill Stachniss University of Bonn University of Bonn Department of Photogrammetry Department of Photogrammetry Bonn 53115, Germany Bonn 53115, Germany [email protected] [email protected] Cedric´ Pradalier UMI2958 GeorgiaTech-CNRS Metz 57070, France [email protected] Abstract Autonomous robotic weeding systems in precision farming have demonstrated their full potential to alleviate the current dependency on agrochemicals such as herbicides and pesticides, thus reducing environmental pollution and improving sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • To Consumers' Perceptions of Aquaponics Products In
    Article Commercial Aquaponics Approaching the European Market: To Consumers’ Perceptions of Aquaponics Products in Europe Vesna Miličić 1,*, Ragnheidur Thorarinsdottir 2, Maria Dos Santos 3 and Maja Turnšek Hančič 4 1 Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Jamnikarjeva 101, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia 2 University of Iceland, Hjardarhaga 2-6, IS-107 Reykjavik, Iceland; [email protected] 3 DINAMIA’CET—ISCTE–IUL, ESCS—IPL, Av. das Forcas Armadas, Edificio, ISCTE, Sala 2W4-d, 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal; [email protected] 4 Faculty of Tourism, University of Maribor, Cesta prvih borcev 36, SI-8250 Brežice, Slovenia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Academic Editor: M. Haïssam Jijakli Received: 1 October 2016; Accepted: 16 January 2017; Published: 31 January 2017 Abstract: The first commercial aquaponics companies are starting up in Europe. The main focus has been on solving technology issues and optimizing production. However, increasing attention is now being paid to certification and regulations linked to aquaponics, as well as the marketing of products and services. The paper presents the results of a study whose main aim was to estimate consumers’ knowledge about aquaponics and their acceptance of aquaponics products in different European regions. An on-line questionnaire was administered to the general public through the aquaponics network of Food and Agriculture COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Action FA1305 “The EU Aquaponics Hub—Realising Sustainable Integrated Fish and Vegetable Production for the EU” in 16 European countries. The methodology includes univariate and multivariate statistical techniques. The results show that, on average, attitudes towards aquaponics were positive, showing no significant differences between those who already knew about aquaponics and those who only heard about it through the survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Autonomous Robotic Weed Control Systems: a Review
    computers and electronics in agriculture 61 (2008) 63–78 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compag Autonomous robotic weed control systems: A review D.C. Slaughter ∗, D.K. Giles, D. Downey University of California, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Davis, CA 95616, United States article info abstract Article history: Autonomous robotic weed control systems hold promise toward the automation of one of Received in revised form agriculture’s few remaining unmechanized and drudging tasks, hand weed control. Robotic 22 March 2007 technology may also provide a means of reducing agriculture’s current dependency on her- Accepted 2 May 2007 bicides, improving its sustainability and reducing its environmental impact. This review describes the current status of the four core technologies (guidance, detection and identifica- Keywords: tion, precision in-row weed control, and mapping) required for the successful development Robot of a general-purpose robotic system for weed control. Of the four, detection and identifica- Weed recognition tion of weeds under the wide range of conditions common to agricultural fields remains the Machine vision greatest challenge. A few complete robotic weed control systems have demonstrated the Geospatial technology potential of the technology in the field. Additional research and development is needed to Pest management fully realize this potential. Precision agriculture © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction ranth (Amaranthus spinosus L.) in lettuce fields reduced head weight and quality. Hodgson (1968) found that two Canada 1.1. Importance of weed control in crop production thistle (Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.) shoots/m2 reduced wheat yields by 15%.
    [Show full text]
  • Brush and Weed Control in Pasture and Rangeland Doug Shoup, Southeast Area Crops and Soils Specialist Kansas State University Research and Extension
    Brush and Weed Control in Pasture and Rangeland Doug Shoup, Southeast Area Crops and Soils Specialist Kansas State University Research and Extension Rangeland, pasture, and hay meadows are often a diverse mix of both desirable and undesirable plant species. The definition of desirable is up to the owner or operator of the land. Whether a plant is considered a weed or not is often subjective and thus defined as a “plant out of place”. Although an integrated weed management approach (utilizing multiple methods of weed and brush control) should be taken to control or suppress any weed population, chemical weed control is often the most common method. All persons using pesticides must read and follow all label directions before use. The user of the pesticide is responsible for all instructions contained within the label. For additional information visit your local county Extension office. Livestock Utilization. The common notion of the perfect forage for livestock being strictly grass is often short-sided and misunderstood. The fact is many broadleaf species are nutritious and highly sought after by livestock commonly produced in Kansas. Cattle in a native range may consume greater than 20% of their diet as palatable forbs (a herbaceous flowering plant other than grass) if available for grazing. In fact, many of the forb species are higher in quality than common forage grasses, especially later in the season when grass quality begins to decline. Other livestock such as sheep and goats consume a diet of plants considerably different than cattle. Sheep may consume greater than 50% of their diet as forbs while goats may consume most of their diet as plants other than grass.
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Control Guide for Ohio, Indiana and Illinois
    Pub# WS16 / Bulletin 789 / IL15 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION Tables Table 1. Weed Response to “Burndown” Herbicides .............................................................................................19 Table 2. Application Intervals for Early Preplant Herbicides ............................................................................... 20 Table 3. Weed Response to Preplant/Preemergence Herbicides in Corn—Grasses ....................................30 WEED Table 4. Weed Response to Preplant/Preemergence Herbicides in Corn—Broadleaf Weeds ....................31 Table 5. Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides in Corn—Grasses ...................................................32 Table 6. Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides in Corn—Broadleaf Weeds ..................................33 2015 CONTROL Table 7. Grazing and Forage (Silage, Hay, etc.) Intervals for Herbicide-Treated Corn ................................. 66 OHIO, INDIANA Table 8. Rainfast Intervals, Spray Additives, and Maximum Crop Size for Postemergence Corn Herbicides .........................................................................................................................................................68 AND ILLINOIS Table 9. Herbicides Labeled for Use on Field Corn, Seed Corn, Popcorn, and Sweet Corn ..................... 69 GUIDE Table 10. Herbicide and Soil Insecticide Use Precautions ......................................................................................71 Table 11. Weed Response to Herbicides in Popcorn and Sweet Corn—Grasses
    [Show full text]