|
COMPARISON OF
CALENDAR DAYS AND GROWING DEGREE DAYS FOR SCHEDULING HERBICIDE APPLICATIONS IN
SUGAR BEET
Corey V. Ransom and Joey K. Ishida
Malheur Experiment Station
Oregon State University
Ontario, OR
Introduction
Timely herbicide applications are
critical to achieve effective weed control in sugar beet. Often, the amount of time between sequential
herbicide applications is based on a given number of calendar days since the prior
herbicide application. Under most circumstances
this approach works well. When spring
weather is cooler than normal, applying herbicides on a calendar day schedule
may result in applications too close together.
This can result in greater injury to the beets or herbicides being
applied before they are needed. Since
weed and beet growth depend on temperature, it is logical that using
accumulated growing degree days (GDD) to schedule herbicide applications may be
superior to calendar days. GDD accounts
for variations in the weather and gives a more accurate idea of how fast plants
are growing. If the weather is ideal
for weed and beet growth, herbicide applications are made closer together; if
the weather is cool, then applications are spaced further apart. Evaluation of a GDD model for timing
herbicide applications may provide producers with a tool to improve the
efficacy of the herbicides they are using.
Materials and
Methods
This trial was established at the
Malheur Experiment Station under furrow irrigation on April 6, 2005. Sugar beets (Hilleshog 'PM-90') were planted
in 22-inch rows at a 2-inch seed spacing.
On April 7, the trial was corrugated and Counter 20 CR® was applied in a 7-inch band
over the row at 6 oz/1,000 ft of row.
Sugar beets were thinned to 8-inch spacing on May 12 and 13. Plots were sidedressed on June 8 with 150 lb
nitrogen (urea), 50 lb phosphate (P), 30 lb potash (K2O), 30 lb
sulfates (SO4), 5 lb manganese (Mn), 8 lb zinc (Zn), 1 lb copper
(Cu), and 2 lb/acre boron (B). All
plots were treated with Roundup®
(0.75 lb ai/acre) on April 11 prior to sugar beet emergence. On April 28, Temik 15G® (14 lb prod/acre) was applied
for sugar beet root maggot control. For
powdery mildew control, Headline®
(12 fl oz/acre) was applied on June 14, Dithane® (2 lb prod/acre) plus sulfur (6
lb/acre) were applied June 28, sulfur (6 lb/acre) was applied August 20, and
Gem® (7 fl
oz/acre) was applied August 25. All
fungicide treatments were applied by air.
Herbicide treatments were broadcast-applied with a CO2-pressurized
backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 20 gal/acre at 30 psi. Plots were 4 rows wide and 27 ft long and
treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with 4
replicates.
Standard rate, high rate, and micro-rate treatments were compared when applied on fixed calendar day schedules or when applied on different GDD accumulation schedules. The standard and high rate treatments were applied every 7 or 10 days and these timings were compared to applications at 150, 175, or 225 accumulated GDD since the previous application. The micro-rate treatments were applied on a 5- or 7-day schedule or at 150, 175, or 225 GDD since the previous application. Growing degree days were calculated on a base of 34°F using the equation GDD = [(daily high temperature – daily low temperature)/2] – 34. GDD were calculated beginning the day after each herbicide application. Herbicide application dates and GDD measured between applications are shown in Table 1.
Table
1. Application dates for herbicide treatments applied to sugar beet on calendar
day or growing degree day (GDD) schedules, Malheur Experiment Station, Ontario,
OR, 2005.
|
|
|
Application |
||||
|
Treatment* |
Timing† |
PRE |
1st |
2nd |
3rd |
4th |
|
|
|
Calendar date (GDD
since previous application) |
||||
|
Standard/High Rate |
7 Day |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/29 |
5/7 |
-- |
|
Standard/High Rate |
10 Day |
4/11 |
4/22 |
5/2 |
5/12 |
-- |
|
Standard/High Rate |
150 GDD |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/29 (144) |
5/7 (165) |
-- |
|
Standard/ High Rate |
175 GDD |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/30 (161) |
5/10 (213) |
-- |
|
Standard/High Rate |
225 GDD |
4/11 |
4/22 |
5/3 (223) |
5/14 (231) |
-- |
|
Micro-rate |
5 Day |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/27 |
5/2 |
5/7 |
|
Micro-rate |
7 Day |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/29 |
5/7 |
5/12 |
|
Micro-rate |
150 GDD |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/29 (144) |
5/7 (165) |
5/17 (207) |
|
Micro-rate |
175 GDD |
4/11 |
4/22 |
4/30 (161) |
5/10 (213) |
5/17 (153) |
|
Micro-rate |
225 GDD |
4/11 |
4/22 |
5/3 (223) |
5/14 (231) |
5/25 (238) |
*Standard
and high rate treatments were applied on the same dates.
†Application
timing based on GDD were determined by calculating the number of GDD beginning
the day after the previous application, using the equation GDD = [(daily high
temperature – daily low temperature)/2] – 34.
Sugar beet injury was evaluated on May
12 and 23, and weed control was evaluated on August 18. Sugar beet yields were determined by
harvesting the center two rows of each plot on October 6 and 7. Root yields were adjusted to account for a 5
percent tare. One sample of 16 beets was taken from each plot for
quality analysis. The samples were
coded and sent to Syngenta Seeds Research Station in Nyssa, Oregon to determine
beet pulp sucrose content and purity.
Sucrose content and recoverable sucrose were estimated using empirical
equations. Data were analyzed using analysis of
variance procedures and means were separated using protected LSD at the 95
percent confidence interval (P =
0.05). The untreated control was not
included in the analysis of variance for weed control or crop response.
Results and
Discussion
For the standard and high rate
herbicide treatments, the number of days between herbicide applications was the
same for the 7-day schedule and the 150-GDD schedule. Applications on the 10-day schedule were between the 175-GDD and
225 GDD timing schedules. The final
application of the standard and high rate herbicide treatments varied by as
much as 7 days between application schedules.
For micro-rate treatments, the 5- and 7-day application schedules were
shorter than all application schedules based on GDD. The final application date among the different application
schedules varied by as much as 18 days.
The 7-day application schedule would have been similar to the 150-GDD
schedule except weather delayed the last application of the micro-rate on the
150-GDD schedule.
Pigweed control was reduced when the
standard or high rate treatments were applied on 225-GDD intervals compared to
all other application timings (Table 2).
Increasing the herbicide rate of standard treatments did not compensate
for the long period between applications.
Pigweed control was least when the micro-rate treatment was applied at
225-GDD. Reduced pigweed control was
also observed when the micro-rate was applied at the 150-GDD timing as compared
to 175-GDD or 5- or 7-day intervals.
The micro-rate applied on 5-day intervals provided less kochia control
than all other treatments and timings, suggesting that some of the kochia may
have germinated after the spray program was completed.
On May 12, injury from the standard or
high rate treatments was among the greatest with the exception of the 225-GDD
application timing, which had not yet received the third application (Table
3). By May 23, there were no
differences in sugar beet injury between any of the herbicide treatments or
application timings. All herbicide treatments
increased sugar beet root yield and estimated recoverable sugar compared to the
untreated check (Table 3). There were
no differences in percent extraction or sugar content for any treatment. Root yields were reduced by the micro-rate
applied on 225-GDD intervals compared to all other treatments and timings
because of poor pigweed control.
Estimated recoverable sugar was also reduced with the micro-rate applied
on a 225-GDD interval compared to all other treatments except the micro-rate
applied on a 175-GDD interval.
This year applications spaced too far
apart resulted in poor pigweed control.
With the micro-rate, making applications too close together reduced
kochia control, suggesting that some kochia emerged late this year. The use of GDD to assist in timing herbicide
applications appears to provide an advantage over calendar days because the GDD
model is able to account for slow weed growth during cold weather and
application timings are adjusted to compensate for the less favorable growing
conditions. Weather conditions make
applying herbicides on a set schedule difficult. Growers have to be flexible in making herbicide applications when
they are needed and when the weather allows.
Table 2. Weed control in sugar beet
with standard rate, high rate, and micro-rate herbicide treatments applied on a
calendar day schedule or at different growing degree day (GDD) intervals,
Malheur Experiment Station, Ontario, OR, 2005.
|
|
|
|
Weed control‡ |
||||
|
Treatment* |
Rate |
Timing† |
Pigweed spp. |
Common lambsquarters |
Hairy nightshade |
Kochia |
Barnyard-grass |
|
|
oz ai/acre or % v/v |
-- |
--------------------------------%--------------------------------- |
||||
|
Standard Rate Progress +
UpBeet Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger |
4.0 + 0.25 5.4 + 0.25 + 1.5 5.4 + 0.25 + 1.5 |
7 Day |
100 |
100 |
100 |
98 |
99 |
|
Standard Rate |
Same as above |
10 Day |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
|
Standard Rate |
Same as above |
150 GDD |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
96 |
|
Standard Rate |
Same as above |
175 GDD |
100 |
100 |
98 |
98 |
97 |
|
Standard Rate |
Same as above |
225 GDD |
86 |
100 |
100 |
98 |
98 |
|
Micro-Rate Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger + MSO Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger + MSO Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger + MSO Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger + MSO |
1.3 + 0.08 + 0.5 + 1.5% v/v 1.3 + 0.08 + 0.5 + 1.5% v/v 2.0 + 0.08 + 0.5 + 1.5% v/v 2.0 + 0.08 + 0.5 + 1.5% v/v |
5 Day |
95 |
100 |
98 |
88 |
99 |
|
Micro-Rate |
Same as above |
7 Day |
92 |
100 |
100 |
96 |
97 |
|
Micro-Rate |
Same as above |
150 GDD |
76 |
100 |
100 |
96 |
98 |
|
Micro-Rate |
Same as above |
175 GDD |
86 |
99 |
100 |
95 |
100 |
|
Micro-Rate |
Same as above |
225 GDD |
51 |
100 |
100 |
94 |
97 |
|
High Rate Progress +
UpBeet Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger |
4.0 + 0.25 6.7 + 0.37 + 1.5 8.1 + 0.5 + 1.5 |
7 Day |
99 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
99 |
|
High Rate |
Same as above |
10 Day |
100 |
100 |
100 |
99 |
98 |
|
High Rate |
Same as above |
150 GDD |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
96 |
|
High Rate |
Same as above |
175 GDD |
100 |
100 |
100 |
99 |
98 |
|
High Rate |
Same as above |
225 GDD |
85 |
99 |
99 |
98 |
100 |
|
LSD (P =
0.05) |
-- |
|
9.0 |
NS |
NS |
5.7 |
NS |
*Standard and high-standard-rate treatments were applied on
the same dates.
†Application timing based on GDD were determined
by calculating the number of GDD beginning the day after the previous
application using the equation GDD = [(daily high temperature – daily low
temperature)/2] – 34.
‡Weed control was evaluated August
18. Pigweed species are a mixture of
redroot pigweed and Powell amaranth.
Table 3. Sugar
beet injury and yield with standard
rate, high-standard-rate, and micro-rate herbicide treatments applied on a
calendar day schedule or at different growing degree day (GDD) intervals,
Malheur Experiment Station, Ontario, OR, 2005.
|
|
|
|
Sugar beet‡ |
||||||
|
|
|
|
Injury |
|
Yield |
||||
|
Treatment* |
Rate |
Timing† |
5-12 |
5-23 |
|
Root yield |
Extraction |
Sucrose |
ERS¶ |
|
-- |
oz ai/acre or % v/v |
-- |
---- % ---- |
|
ton/acre |
------------ % ------------ |
lbs/acre |
||
|
Untreated
control |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
|
13.0 |
92.7 |
15.6 |
3,760 |
|
Standard Rate Progress +
UpBeet Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger Progress +
UpBeet + Stinger |
4.0 + 0.25 5.4 + 0.25 + 1.5 5.4 + 0.25 + 1.5 |
| |||||||