DOCSLIB.ORG

Weed Control Recommendations for Christmas Tree Growers (Revised February 2018)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Weed Control Recommendations for Christmas Tree Growers (Revised February 2018) Weed Control Recommendations for Christmas Tree Growers (Revised February 2018) Contents Herbicide Chemical and Trade Name………................................Page 2 What is "lbs. AIA"? ..................................................................... Page 3 Why Control Weeds .................................................................... Page 4 Levels of Control ........................................................................ Page 4 The Herbicides ............................................................................ Page 5 Postemergence Herbicides ...................................................... Page 5 Preemergence Herbicides .................................................... ….Page 10 Weed Control Program ................................................................ Page 14 Recommendations - Field ............................................................ Page 15 Site Preparation ....................................................................... Page 15 Preventing Weed Growth ........................................................ Page 15 Table 1. Herbicide Combinations ............................................ Page 17 Eliminating Weeds From Existing Plantings ........................... Page 18 Recommendations - Seedbeds ..................................................... Page 19 Site Preparation ....................................................................... Page 19 Preventing Weed Growth ........................................................ Page 19 Eliminating Weeds From Existing Plantings ........................... Page 20 Herbicide Sprayer Calibration……………………………………Page 21 Summary ..................................................................................... Page 22 Chemical Name Trade Name Page Trade Name Chemical Name Page 2,4-D Barrage, HardBall, Aatrex, Atra 5 Atrazine 10 Lo-Vol 4 & 6, Accord Glyphosate 5 LV4, Salvo 10 Arrow Clethodim 8 Atrazine Aatrex, Atra 5 10 Barricade Prodiamine 13 Atrazine Barrage 2,4-D 10 + 2,4-D Shotgun 10 Basagran T/O Bentazon 10 Bentazon Basagran T/O 10 Biathlon Oxyfluorfen + prodiamine 13 Clethodim Arrow, Envoy, Cleo, Cavalcade Prodiamine 13 Intensity, Section, Devrinol Napropamide 11 Element 3 Triclopyr 9 Shadow, Trigger, Endurance Prodiamine 13 Tapout 8 Envoy Clethodim 8 Clopyralid Stinger 9 Fusilade DX & II Fluazifop-p-butyl 8 Dimethenamid-p Tower 14 Gallery Isoxaben 12 Flazasulfuron Mission 13 Galligon Oxyfluorfen 12 Fluazifop-p-butyl Fusilade DX & II 8 Garlon Triclopyr 9 Flumioxazin Broadstar, Sureguard13 Glyfos &Glypro Glyphosate 5 Glyphosate Roundup Pro/Ultra Goal & Goaltender Oxyfluorfen 12 Accord, Glyfos Guardrail Prodiamine 13 Many others 5 HardBall 2,4-D 10 Hexazinone Intensity Clethodim 8 + sulfometuron Westar 14 Kerb Pronamide 14 Indaziflam Marengo, Specticle 13 Lo-Vol 4&6, LV4 2,4-D 10 Isoxaben Gallery 12 Marengo Indaziflam 13 Metolachlor Pennant Magnum 13 Mission Flazasulfuron 13 Napropamide Devrinol 11 Octane 2 Pyraflufen 10 Oryzalin Surflan, Prozalin, OxyStar Oxyfluofen 12 Oryzalin 4 Pro 13 Pennant Magnum Metolachlor 13 Oxadiazon Ronstar, Starfighter 13 Pendulum Pendimethalin 13 Oxyfluorfen Galligan, Goal, Pendulum Aquacap Pendimethalin 13 PreM Pendimethalin 13 Goaltender, OxyStar 12 Princep Simazine 11 Oxyfluorfen ProClipse Prodiamine 13 + oxadiazon Regal 0-0 13 Prozalin Oryzalin 13 Oxyfluorfen + prodiamine Biathlon 13 Regal 0-0 Oxyfluorfen + oxadiazon 13 Pendimethalin AquaCap, Pendulum, Ronstar Oxadiazon 13 PreM 13 Roundup Pro/Ultra Glyphosate 6 Prodiamine Barricade, Cavalcade, Salvo 2,4-D 10 Endurance, Guardrail, Section Clethodim 8 ProClipse 13 Select Clethodim 8 Pronamide Kerb 14 Shotgun Atrazine + 2,4-D 10 Pyraflufen Octane 2 10 Simazat Simazine 10 Sethoxydim Segment 8 Simtrol Simazine 10 Simazine Princep, Simazat, Specticle Indaziflam 13 Simazine, Simtrol 10 Starfighter Oxadiazon 13 Triclopyr Element 3, Garlon 3, Stinger Clopyralid 9 Tahoe 3 9 Sureguard Flumioxazin 13 Surflan Oryzalin 13 Tahoe 3 Triclopyr 9 Tower Dimethenamid-p 14 Segment Sethoxydim 8 Westar Hexazinone + sulfometuron 14 What Is "lbs. AIA" ? Many of the rates of application in this publication are presented in pounds of active ingredient per treated acre (lbs. AIA). By treated acre, we mean only the area to which the herbicides are directly applied. For example, if there is six feet between rows of trees, and a band three feet wide is sprayed over each row, only one-half of each acre of trees is actually being sprayed. To treat six acres of trees, you would only need to mix enough spray solution to cover three acres of ground. The amount of active ingredient in dry formulations of herbicides is presented as a percent active ingredient. The amount of active ingredient in liquid formulations is presented as pounds of active ingredient per gallon. Dry formulations Examples granular -G Ronstar 2G - 2% active ingredient wettable powders -W or WP Devrinol 50WP – 50% active ingredient dry flowable or -DF or WDG Aatrex Caliber 90 (a WDG) - 90% active ingredient water dispersible granules Liquid formulations emulsifiable concentrate -E or EC Goal 2 XL - 2 lbs. active ingredient per gallon liquid -L Princep 4L - 4 lbs. active ingredient per gallon amine -A Garlon 3A - 3 lbs. active ingredient per gallon water soluble Roundup Pro- 4 lbs. active ingredient per gallon Sample Calculations How much Princep Caliber 90 and Roundup Pro are needed to treat a field measuring 800 ft. by 160 ft. at the rates of 2 lbs. AIA (active ingredient per acre) Princep and 1 lb. AIA Roundup Pro? 800 ft. x 160 ft. = 128,000 sq. ft. ÷ 43560 sq. ft./acre = 2.9 Acres 2 lbs. ÷ 0.9 = 2.2 lbs. (2.2 lbs. Princep Caliber 90 contains 2 lbs. active ingredient). 2.2 lbs. x 2.9 A = 6.4 lbs. Princep Caliber 90 is needed to treat 2.9 A at the rate of 2 lbs. AIA. 1 gal. of Roundup Pro contains 4 lbs. active ingredient. There are 4 qts. in a gal., so each qt. contains 1 lb. active ingredient. 1 qt./A x 2.9 A = 2.9 qts. of Roundup Pro needed to treat 2.9 acres at the rate of 1 lb AIA. ATTENTION PRIOR TO USING ANY HERBICIDE, READ THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE AS STATED ON THE LABEL. Why Control Weeds There are many reasons to control weeds in Christmas tree plantings. Weeds: compete for nutrients, water, and light adversely affect needle color cause lower limb loss through light competition lodge in the lower limbs of trees, soiling the trees reduce air drainage and movement increasing tree susceptibility to frost damage and foliar disease provide cover and food for rodents resulting in girdling in winter when food is scarce are a fire hazard when dry and fire sources are in the area interfere with standard Christmas tree maintenance practices (e.g., shearing, insecticide and fungicide applications, mowing) interferes with choose and cut tree sales and customer experience and satisfaction Levels of Control Some growers ignore weeds, while others mow, apply herbicides, plant cover crops, or use a combination of these methods. Some growers that ignore weeds plant their trees on rocky, infertile soil that is not suitable for growing much else other than Christmas trees - not even weeds grow well on these sites. Surprisingly, several Christmas tree species grow in rocky, infertile soils in their native range. This means they will survive and grow on these sites, but they will not produce optimum growth. Growers that rely on low fertility soils to provide their weed control are not producing uniform, high quality trees in a reasonable length of time. Other growers rely entirely on mowing for weed control. For best control with mowing, the planting should be mowed both with and across the rows. This means the plantation must be very carefully planted so that all rows are straight in both directions. Though relying only on mowing eliminates the risk of herbicide injury, there is the constant risk of hitting trees with the mower. Mowing is time consuming and therefore expensive. Also, mowing alone does not provide all the benefits of a weed control program that includes herbicides. Many weeds, especially grasses, stunt the growth of trees even when close-mowed. Combining the careful use of herbicides and mowing provides several advantages over mowing alone. The herbicides can be used in the rows to provide a weed free band 30-36" wide. Weeds growing between the rows can then be mowed quickly with little risk of hitting the trees with the mower. Maintaining the weed free area around the trees limits the competition between weeds and trees and keeps the weeds from interfering with maintenance of the trees. There are several problems associated with letting naturally occurring vegetation grow between the rows. One is varying growth rates of weeds. One part of a field may have quackgrass, which starts growing early in the spring, while another part may be dominated by foxtails, which start growing in early summer. To maintain uniform control in the field it must be frequently mowed. Another problem is the lateral spread into the clean rows by the rhizomes (underground stems) of perennial weeds and the foliage of large or creeping weeds. 4 The optimum level of control would include maintaining a weed free band in the rows and a controlled cover crop between the rows. A properly selected cover crop would crowd out fast growing, aggressive weeds and require little mowing. The Herbicides The development of safe and effective herbicides for use in Christmas tree plantings has revolutionized Christmas tree production. Growers, in the past, avoided high fertility sites and the application of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the WSSA
    Weed Science 2010 58:511–518 Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the Weed Science Society of America Below is the complete list of all common and chemical of herbicides as approved by the International Organization names of herbicides approved by the Weed Science Society of for Standardization (ISO). A sponsor may submit a proposal America (WSSA) and updated as of September 1, 2010. for a common name directly to the WSSA Terminology Beginning in 1996, it has been published yearly in the last Committee. issue of Weed Science with Directions for Contributors to A herbicide common name is not synonymous with Weed Science. This list is published in lieu of the selections a commercial formulation of the same herbicide, and in printed previously on the back cover of Weed Science. Only many instances, is not synonymous with the active ingredient common and chemical names included in this complete of a commercial formulation as identified on the product list should be used in WSSA publications. In the absence of label. If the herbicide is a salt or simple ester of a parent a WSSA-approved common name, the industry code number compound, the WSSA common name applies to the parent as compiled by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) with compound only. CAS systematic chemical name or the systematic chemical The chemical name used in this list is that preferred by the name alone may be used. The current approved list is also Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) according to their system of available at our web site (www.wssa.net).
    [Show full text]
  • INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES
    US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES Note: Pesticide tolerance information is updated in the Code of Federal Regulations on a weekly basis. EPA plans to update these indexes biannually. These indexes are current as of the date indicated in the pdf file. For the latest information on pesticide tolerances, please check the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/40cfrv23_07.html 1 40 CFR Type Family Common name CAS Number PC code 180.163 Acaricide bridged diphenyl Dicofol (1,1-Bis(chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichloroethanol) 115-32-2 10501 180.198 Acaricide phosphonate Trichlorfon 52-68-6 57901 180.259 Acaricide sulfite ester Propargite 2312-35-8 97601 180.446 Acaricide tetrazine Clofentezine 74115-24-5 125501 180.448 Acaricide thiazolidine Hexythiazox 78587-05-0 128849 180.517 Acaricide phenylpyrazole Fipronil 120068-37-3 129121 180.566 Acaricide pyrazole Fenpyroximate 134098-61-6 129131 180.572 Acaricide carbazate Bifenazate 149877-41-8 586 180.593 Acaricide unclassified Etoxazole 153233-91-1 107091 180.599 Acaricide unclassified Acequinocyl 57960-19-7 6329 180.341 Acaricide, fungicide dinitrophenol Dinocap (2, 4-Dinitro-6-octylphenyl crotonate and 2,6-dinitro-4- 39300-45-3 36001 octylphenyl crotonate} 180.111 Acaricide, insecticide organophosphorus Malathion 121-75-5 57701 180.182 Acaricide, insecticide cyclodiene Endosulfan 115-29-7 79401
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Herbicide-Resistant Weed Populations 100 Questions on Resistance
    Management of Herbicide-Resistant Weed Populations 100 questions on resistance Prepared by: Andreu Taberner Palou Servicio de Sanidad Vegetal, Unidad de Malherbologia DAR Generalitat de Cataluña Rovira Roure 191. 25198 Lleida Spain [email protected] Alicia Cirujeda Ranzenberger and Carlos Zaragoza Larios Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria Gobierno de Aragón Apdo. 727. 50080 Zaragoza Spain [email protected] FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ VII PREFACE ..................................................................................................................... IX 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 1.1 Interests and Objectives ............................................................................1 1.2 To whom is this publication useful?..........................................................4 1.3 Importance of herbicide resistance ...........................................................5 1.4 What is a resistant weed?..........................................................................6 1.5 Main species affected by problems of resistance.......................................7 1.6 Main herbicides causing problems of resistance ......................................9 1.7 Economic aspects of resistance...............................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Review of Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation With
    Eurasian watermilfoil in Christmas Lake, 2011 Literature Review on Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation with Aquatic Herbicides Compared to Other Control Methods: Effectiveness, Impacts, and Costs Prepared for: Prepared by: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Steve McComas Blue Water Science St. Paul, MN 55116 September 2011 1 Literature Review on Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation with Aquatic Herbicides Compared to Other Control Methods: Effectiveness, Impacts, and Costs Steve McComas, Blue Water Science Table of Contents page number Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Use of Herbicides as an Aquatic Plant Control Technique ...................................................................................... 2 How Herbicides Work and Their Mode of Action ....................................................................................................... 3 Aquatic Herbicide Impacts on Humans and the Ecosystem ....................................................................................... 8 Where to Find Sources of Specific Information on herbicide Products and Their Active Ingredients ....................... 16 Harvesting, Drawdown, and Biocontrol as Aquatic Plant Control Techniques ................................................... 17 Summary of Control Techniques for Non-Native Curlyleaf Pondweed and Eurasian Watermilfoil ................... 25 Control Techniques for Other
    [Show full text]
  • ILRP Pesticides Evaluation Protocol 1 Central Valley Water Board Irrigated Land Regulatory Program Prioritizing and Selecting Pe
    ILRP Pesticides Evaluation Protocol 1 Central Valley Water Board Irrigated Land Regulatory Program Prioritizing and Selecting Pesticides for Surface Water Monitoring The following protocol has been developed for evaluating pesticides that are used on irrigated agricultural lands and to identify those that warrant surface water monitoring under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP). The protocol includes step-by-step instructions and attachments (i.e., list of pesticides with reference values, list of degradates, and groups). Introduction and Background The Central Valley Water Board adopted a series of Waste Discharge Requirements for irrigated lands, which include Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) requirements for the third-party groups (i.e. Coalitions). Under the MRP Orders, pesticides to be monitored are to be identified by the third- party using the list of pesticides (Executive Officer (EO) List) and a set of evaluation factors and an evaluation process provided by the Central Valley Water Board Executive Officer. Furthermore, the MRP Orders state “The pesticides marked as to be determined […] shall be identified as part of a process that includes input from qualified scientists and coordination with the Department of Pesticide Regulation.” Central Valley Water Board staff convened a Pesticide Evaluation Advisory Workgroup (Workgroup) to provide input on the process for evaluating and identifying pesticides that may require monitoring. The Workgroup consisted of thirteen qualified scientists1 selected by the Executive Officer through a nomination and selection process. Six meetings of the Workgroup were held in 2014 and early 2015. All Workgroup agendas, meeting materials and summary notes are available online: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/irrigated_lands/regulatory_information/stakehold er_advisory_workgroup/index.shtml The pesticide evaluation protocol is based largely on the Workgroup discussions and materials developed by the Workgroup during and outside of the formal meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Weed Control
    2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual The 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual is published by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, N.C. State University, Raleigh, N.C. These recommendations apply only to North Carolina. They may not be appropriate for conditions in other states and may not comply with laws and regulations outside North Carolina. These recommendations are current as of November 2013. Individuals who use agricultural chemicals are responsible for ensuring that the intended use complies with current regulations and conforms to the product label. Be sure to obtain current information about usage regulations and examine a current product label before applying any chemical. For assistance, contact your county Cooperative Extension agent. The use of brand names and any mention or listing of commercial products or services in this document does not imply endorsement by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service nor discrimination against similar products or services not mentioned. VII — CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual VII — CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL Chemical Weed Control in Field Corn ...................................................................................................... 224 Weed Response to Preemergence Herbicides — Corn ........................................................................... 231 Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides — Corn ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 Theinternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) Was Established in 1980
    The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 cation Hazard of Pesticides by and Guidelines to Classi The WHO Recommended Classi The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 TheInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) was established in 1980. The overall objectives of the IPCS are to establish the scientific basis for assessment of the risk to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals, through international peer review processes, as a prerequisite for the promotion of chemical safety, and to provide technical assistance in strengthening national capacities for the sound management of chemicals. This publication was developed in the IOMC context. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or stated policies of individual IOMC Participating Organizations. The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) was established in 1995 following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase international coordination in the field of chemical safety. The Participating Organizations are: FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNITAR, WHO, World Bank and OECD. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment. WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification, 2019 edition ISBN 978-92-4-000566-2 (electronic version) ISBN 978-92-4-000567-9 (print version) ISSN 1684-1042 © World Health Organization 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Control Efficacy and Citrus Response to Flazasulfuron Applied Alone Or in Combination with Other Herbicides
    American Journal of Plant Sciences, 2012, 3, 520-527 doi:10.4236/ajps.2012.34062 Published Online April 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ajps) Weed Control Efficacy and Citrus Response to Flazasulfuron Applied Alone or in Combination with Other Herbicides Megh Singh1, Analiza H. M. Ramirez1*, Amit J. Jhala1, Mayank Malik2 1Citrus Research and Education Center, Horticultural Sciences Department, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), Uni- versity of Florida, Lake Alfred, USA; 2Monsanto Corp., Lincoln, USA. Email: *[email protected] Received December 20th, 2011; revised January 19th, 2012; accepted February 10th, 2012 ABSTRACT Field experiments were conducted to evaluate the phytotoxicity of flazasulfuron on citrus species and efficacy on weeds when applied alone or in combination with other herbicides. Grapefruit was the most sensitive and tangerine was the least sensitive to flazasulfuron. Injury to grapefruit was 70% with the application of flazasulfuron at 0.20 kg a.i. ha–1 at 60 DAT and was reduced (5%) when flazasulfuron at 0.05 kg a.i. ha–1 was tank mixed with glyphosate at 0.84 kg·a.i.· ha–1. Flazasulfuron alone at all rates did not control grass weeds and common ragweed. Florida/Brazil pusley was mod- erately controlled with high rates of flazasulfuron from 30 to 45 DAT; however, control did not exceed 75%. There was good control of Spanishneedles (78% - 85%) and horseweed (73% - 81%) with flazasulfuron at all rates at 30 DAT but control declined later in the season. Tank mix of flazasulfuron with glyphosate improved flazasulfuron efficacy on grass and broadleaf weeds. Flazasulfuron at 0.07 kg a.i.
    [Show full text]
  • Registration Division Conventional Pesticides -Branch and Product
    Registration Division Conventional Pesticides - Branch and Product Manager (PM) Assignments For a list of Branch contacts, please click the following link: http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-contacts/contacts-office-pesticide-programs-registration-division Branch FB=Fungicide Branch. FHB=Fungicide Herbicide Branch. HB=Herbicide Branch. Abbreviations: IVB*= Invertebrate-Vertebrate Branch 1, 2 or 3. MUERB=Minor Use and Emergency Response Branch. Chemical Branch PM 1-Decanol FHB RM 20 1-Naphthaleneacetamide FHB RM 20 2, 4-D, Choline salt HB RM 23 2,4-D HB RM 23 2,4-D, 2-ethylhexyl ester HB RM 23 2,4-D, butoxyethyl ester HB RM 23 2,4-D, diethanolamine salt HB RM 23 2,4-D, dimethylamine salt HB RM 23 2,4-D, isopropyl ester HB RM 23 2,4-D, isopropylamine salt HB RM 23 2,4-D, sodium salt HB RM 23 2,4-D, triisopropanolamine salt HB RM 23 2,4-DB HB RM 23 2,4-DP HB RM 23 2,4-DP, diethanolamine salt HB RM 23 2,4-DP-p HB RM 23 2,4-DP-p, 2-ethylhexyl ester FB RM 21 2,4-DP-p, DMA salt HB RM 23 2-EEEBC FB RM 21 2-Phenylethyl propionate FHB RM 20 4-Aminopyridine IVB3 RM 07 4-Chlorophenoxyacetic acid FB RM 22 4-vinylcyclohexene diepoxide IVB3 RM 07 Abamectin IVB3 RM 07 Acephate IVB2 RM 10 Acequinocyl IVB3 RM 01 Acetaminophen IVB3 RM 07 Acetamiprid IVB3 RM 01 Acetic acid, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-, compd. with methanamine (1:1) HB RM 23 Acetic acid, trifluoro- FHB RM 20 Acetochlor HB RM 25 Acibenzolar-s-methyl FHB RM 24 Acid Blue 9 HB RM 23 Acid Yellow 23 HB RM 23 Sunday, June 06, 2021 Page 1 of 17 Chemical Branch PM Acifluorfen HB RM 23 Acrinathrin IVB1 RM 03
    [Show full text]
  • Weed and Vegetation Management Strategies in Christmas Trees
    A PACIFIC NORTHWEST EXTENSION PUBLICATION Weed and Vegetation Management Strategies in Christmas Trees Ed Peachey, Chal Landgren, and Tim Miller Contents good weed management plan is essential to Management philosophy . 1 produce high quality, marketable Christmas Thirteen common weeds of Christmas tree Atrees. Complete control of weeds, however, plantations: identification, biology, and control . 2 may not be cost effective and is seldom needed. It’s Annual broadleaves. .2 important to strike a balance between reducing weed Perennial broadleaves. .3 competition with trees and protecting soil and water. Biennials ...........................................6 Annual grasses .....................................6 Management philosophy Perennial grasses ...................................7 An effective weed management program Management Strategies . 8 incorporates diverse strategies and practices to Prevention . 8 keep weed populations off balance. Using the same Mechanical controls . 8 practice over and over will, predictably, select for Cover crops and vegetated strips . .. 9 weed species with certain traits. For example, using Cover crops . .9 the same herbicide selects for weeds that are not Vegetated strips .................................. 10 affected by that herbicide. Flame weeding . 10 Multiple strategies are essential to prevent weed Biological controls . 10 shifts and herbicide resistance from developing. Chemical controls . 11 These strategies include proper identification Herbicide application timing and efficacy ......... 12
    [Show full text]
  • NEWS 02 2020 ENG.Qxp Layout 1
    Polymers and fluorescence Balance of power 360° drinking water analysis trilogy Fluorescence spectroscopy LCMS-8060NX: performance of industrial base polymers and robustness without Automatic, simultaneous and compromising sensitivity rapid analysis of pesticides and speed CONTENT APPLICATION »Plug und Play« disease screening solution? – The MALDI-8020 in screening for Sickle Cell Disease 4 Customized software solutions for any measurement – Macro programming for Shimadzu UV-Vis and FTIR 8 Ensuring steroid-free food supplements – Identification of steroids in pharmaceuticals and food supplements with LCMS-8045 11 MSn analysis of nonderivatized and Mtpp-derivatized peptides – Two recent studies applying LCMS-IT-TOF instruments 18 Polymers and fluorescence – Part 2: How much fluorescence does a polymer show during quality control? 26 PRODUCTS The balance of power – LCMS-8060NX balances enhanced performance and robustness 7 360° drinking water analysis: Episode 2 – Automatic, simul- taneous and rapid analysis of pesticides in drinking water by online SPE and UHPLC-MS/MS 14 Versatile testing tool for the automotive industry – Enrico Davoli with the PESI-MS system (research-use only [RUO] instrument) New HMV-G3 Series 17 No more headaches! A guide to choosing the perfect C18 column 22 Validated method for monoclonal antibody drugs – Assessment of the nSMOL methodology in Global solution through the validation of bevacizumab in human serum 24 global collaboration LATEST NEWS Global solution through global collaboration – Shimadzu Cancer diagnosis:
    [Show full text]
  • Research Review No. CP 182 / 1807258 Weed Control Options And
    April 2019 Research Review No. CP 182 / 1807258 Weed control options and future opportunities for UK crops Authors: Sarah K. Cook, Laura R. Davies, Frances Pickering, Lynn V. Tatnell, Angela Huckle, Sonia Newman, Chloe Whiteside, Charlotte White, David Talbot, Helen Holmes (ADAS), Patricia E. Turnbull (Independent agronomist), Denis C. Buckley (Independent agronomist), Jim Scrimshaw (PGRO) and Pamela Chambers (UPL) Editors: James H Clarke, Steve Ellis and Sarah Clarke (ADAS Boxworth, Boxworth, Cambs CB23 4NN) This review was produced as the final report of a four month project (CP 182 / 1807258) that started in September 2018. The work was funded under a contract of £26,000 from AHDB and £10,000 from BBRO, with additional funding from BASF, Bayer CropScience, Belchim, Corteva Agriscience, FMC Agro Ltd, Syngenta and UPL Europe Ltd. Additional in-kind funders and contributors: Frontier, Garford Farm Machinery, Hutchinsons, Maize Growers Association, PGRO, Procam and Rootwave. While the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board seeks to ensure that the information contained within this document is accurate at the time of printing, no warranty is given in respect thereof and, to the maximum extent permitted by law, the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board accepts no liability for loss, damage or injury howsoever caused (including that caused by negligence) or suffered directly or indirectly in relation to information and opinions contained in or omitted from this document. Reference herein to trade names and proprietary products without stating that they are protected does not imply that they may be regarded as unprotected and thus free for general use. No endorsement of named products is intended, nor is any criticism implied of other alternative, but unnamed, products.
    [Show full text]