|
Native Wildflowers Grown For Seed
Production Show Tolerance to Conventional Postemergence Herbicides
Malheur Experiment
Station
Introduction
Native forb seed is needed to restore rangelands of the Intermountain West.
Commercial seed production is necessary to provide the quantity of seed needed
for restoration efforts. A major
limitation to economically viable commercial production of native forb seed is
weed competition. Weeds are adapted to
growing in disturbed soil, and native forbs are not competitive with these
weeds. There is a considerable body of
knowledge about the relative efficacy of different herbicides to control target
weeds, but few trials have tested the tolerance of native forbs to commercial
herbicides.
The trials reported here tested the tolerance of seven native forb species in
successive years to conventional postemergence herbicides in the field. This
work seeks to discover products that could eventually be registered for use for
native forb seed production. The
information in this report is for the purpose of informing cooperators and
colleagues in other agencies, universities, and industry of the research
results. Reference to products and
companies in this publication is for the specific information only and does not
endorse or recommend that product or company to the exclusion of others that
may be suitable. Nor should any information and interpretation thereof be
considered as recommendations for the application of any of these herbicides.
Pesticide labels should always be consulted before any pesticide
use. Considerable efforts may be
required to register these herbicides for use for native forb seed production.
Materials and
Methods
Plant
Establishment
Seed of seven
2006 Postemergence
Treatments
The field was staked out to
make 5-ft-wide plots perpendicular to the forb rows, crossing all seven species
using the lower 200 ft of the field.
Eight treatments including the untreated check were replicated four
times in a randomized complete block design (See tables 2-8). Treatments were applied May 24, 2006 at 30
psi, 2.63 mph, in 20 gal/acre using 8002 nozzles with three nozzles spaced 20
inches apart. Plant injury in 2006 was
rated visually on May 31, June 15, and June 30.
In 2006 the trial was
irrigated very little with the drip irrigation system because of ample
rainfall. Very few plants flowered and
seed was not harvested in 2006.
Spring of 2007
By
March 30, 2007, it was difficult if not impossible to distinguish any effects
of the 2006 postemergence herbicide applications on any of the seven forb
species. These observations suggest that
some degree of phytotoxic damage may be acceptable in establishing native forb
seed fields if effective weed control is achieved.
2007 Postemergence
Treatments
The same treatments as 2006
were applied again to the same plots on April 24, 2007. The same application specifications as in
2006 were used in 2007. Plant injury was
rated visually on May 1, May 11, May 25, and June 12.
Drip irrigations were
applied every two weeks starting on April 5 and ending on June 24. Each irrigation applied 2 inches of water.
Seed of Eriogonum umbellatum, Penstemon acuminatus, Penstemon deustus,
and Penstemon speciosus was harvested by
hand as the seed reached maturity. The
seed was cleaned and weighed. Lomatium dissectum, Lomatium triternatum, and Lomatium grayi did not flower in 2007.
General
Considerations
The focus of the evaluations
was forb tolerance to the herbicides, not weed control. Therefore, weeds were removed as needed.
The effects of herbicides for
each species on plant stand and injury were evaluated independently from the
effects on other species. Treatment
differences were compared using ANOVA and protected least significant
differences at the 95 percent confidence LSD (0.05) using NCSS Number Cruncher
software (NCSS, Kaysville, UT).
Table
1. Forb species planted at the Malheur
Experiment Station,
|
Species |
Common name |
Origin |
Year |
|
Eriogonum umbellatum |
Sulfur buckwheat |
Shoofly Road (ID) |
2004 |
|
Penstemon acuminatus |
Sand penstemon |
Bliss Dam (ID) |
2004 |
|
Penstemon deustus |
Hotrock penstemon |
Blacks |
2003 |
|
Penstemon speciosus |
Royal or sagebrush penstemon |
Leslie Gulch (OR) |
2003 |
|
Lomatium dissectum |
Fernleaf biscuitroot |
Mann Creek (ID) |
2003 |
|
Lomatium triternatum |
Nineleaf desert parsley |
Hwy 395 (OR) |
2004 |
|
Lomatium grayi |
Gray’s lomatium |
Weiser |
2004 |
Results and Discussion
All
observations made on the herbicides tested are strictly preliminary
observations. Herbicides that were observed
to be damaging to the forbs as reported here might be helpful if used at a
lower rate or in a different environment.
Herbicides that were relatively safe for the forbs in these trials might
be harmful if used at higher rates or in a different environment. Nothing in this report should be construed as
a recommendation.
Eriogonum umbellatum (Sulfur buckwheat)
Sulfur
buckwheat showed herbicide injury on the May 1 evaluation with Goal®
and Caparol® as postemergence treatments (Table 2). There were not significant differences in
injury between herbicide treatments on the other evaluation dates. Select® and Prowl® had
among the lowest injury symptoms on the May 11, May 25, and June 12
evaluations.
There
were no significant differences in seed yield between herbicide treatments
(Table 2). Prowl, the untreated check,
and Outlook® had among the highest seed yields with no statistical
differences between any of the treatments.
Table 2. Tolerance of Eriogonum umbellatum to postemergence herbicides applied on April
24, 2007. At time of herbicide applications, plants were 50% dormant. Malheur
Experiment Station,
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Visual estimates
of foliar injury, % |
|
Seed yield |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
lb/acre |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
91.7 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
12.5 |
22.5 |
20.0 |
15.0 |
|
38.1 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
45.0 |
27.5 |
17.5 |
13.8 |
|
42.6 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
11.7 |
6.7 |
3.3 |
1.7 |
|
57.6 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
10.0 |
6.3 |
3.8 |
3.8 |
|
115.0 |
|
|
0.8 |
28.8 |
41.3 |
33.8 |
26.3 |
|
27.3 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
2.5 |
18.8 |
15.0 |
15.0 |
|
75.1 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
15.0 |
27.5 |
27.5 |
26.3 |
|
35.6 |
|
LSD (0.05) |
|
19.4 |
NS |
NS |
NS |
|
NS |
Penstemon acuminatus (Sand penstemon)
No
injury symptoms were observed on the May 1 evaluation. On May 11, only Caparol resulted in
significantly higher injury symptoms than the check (Table 3). On May 25, Caparol and Buctril® resulted
in significantly higher injury symptoms than the check. On June 12, Caparol, Buctril, and Select resulted
in significantly higher injury symptoms than the check.
Seed
yields for Buctril, Select, Caparol, and Lorox® were significantly
lower than the untreated check (Table 3).
Plots treated with Prowl, Outlook, and the untreated check had among the
highest seed yields.
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Visual estimates
of foliar injury, % |
|
Seed yield |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
lb/acre |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
520.4 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
0.0 |
11.3 |
16.3 |
17.5 |
|
305.7 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
0.0 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
7.5 |
|
417.8 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
0.0 |
2.5 |
5.0 |
17.5 |
|
304.6 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
509.4 |
|
|
0.8 |
0.0 |
18.8 |
30.0 |
27.5 |
|
162.9 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
2.5 |
8.8 |
|
502.6 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
0.0 |
13.8 |
11.3 |
17.5 |
|
264.9 |
|
LSD (0.05) |
|
NS |
5.4 |
8.2 |
NS |
|
183.4 |
Penstemon deustus (Hotrock penstemon)
On
the first three evaluation dates, Buctril, Goal, Caparol, and Lorox resulted in
significantly higher injury symptoms than the check (Table 4). On the last evaluation (June 12), plants
treated with Caparol and Lorox still showed injury symptoms.
Seed
yields for the Buctril, Goal, Caparol, and Lorox treatments were significantly
lower than the untreated check (Table 4).
Plots treated with Select, Outlook, Prowl, and the untreated check had
among the highest seed yields.
Table 4. Tolerance of Penstemon deustus to postemergence herbicides applied on April 24,
2007. At time of herbicide applications, plants were growing vegetatively.
Malheur Experiment Station,
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Visual estimates
of foliar injury, % |
|
Seed yield |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
lb/acre |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
903.1 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
18.3 |
26.3 |
18.8 |
10.0 |
|
348.5 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
18.0 |
23.8 |
18.8 |
17.5 |
|
333.0 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
1.3 |
2.5 |
0.0 |
2.5 |
|
927.3 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
0.0 |
2.5 |
1.3 |
2.5 |
|
747.6 |
|
|
0.8 |
21.3 |
48.3 |
50.0 |
47.5 |
|
86.8 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
0.0 |
1.3 |
7.5 |
10.0 |
|
835.1 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
21.3 |
52.5 |
50.0 |
38.8 |
|
108.5 |
|
LSD (0.05) |
|
8.7 |
14.9 |
16.4 |
18.4 |
|
334.8 |
Penstemon speciosus (Royal or sagebrush
penstemon)
There
were no significant injury symptoms for any of the treatments on the first
evaluation (Table 5). Only Caparol and
Lorox treatments showed significant injury symptoms, with Caparol having the
most severe injury symptoms.
Seed
yields for Buctril, Goal, Caparol, and Lorox were significantly lower than the
check (Table 5). Plots treated with
Select, Outlook, Prowl, and the untreated check had among the highest seed
yields.
Table 5. Tolerance of Penstemon speciosus to postemergence herbicides applied on April 24, 2007. At time of herbicide
applications, plants were beginning to flower. Malheur Experiment Station,
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Visual estimates
of foliar injury, % |
|
Seed yield |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
lb/acre |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
55.3 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
1.3 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
1.3 |
|
24.6 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
2.5 |
|
20.9 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
51.2 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
52.9 |
|
|
0.8 |
0.0 |
26.3 |
37.5 |
42.5 |
|
15.7 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
56.6 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
0.0 |
10.0 |
6.3 |
11.3 |
|
20.0 |
|
LSD (0.10) |
|
NS |
4.2 |
4.1 |
6.2 |
|
29.7 |
Lomatium dissectum (Fernleaf biscuitroot)
Only
plants treated with Buctril showed significant injury symptoms on the first
evaluation (Table 6). There were no
significant differences in injury between treatments on the last three
evaluations.
Lomatium dissectum had a very short growing
period before going dormant and did not flower in 2007.
Table 6. Tolerance of Lomatium dissectum to postemergence herbicides applied on April 24,
2007. At time of herbicide applications, plants were growing vegetatively. Malheur
Experiment Station,
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Visual estimates
of foliar injury, % |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
5 |
2.5 |
3.75 |
5 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
1.25 |
1.25 |
1.25 |
0 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
|
0.8 |
1.25 |
1.25 |
3.75 |
7.5 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
1.25 |
1.25 |
1.25 |
2.5 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
0 |
0 |
1.25 |
0 |
|
LSD (0.05) |
|
2.2 |
NS |
NS |
NS |
Lomatium triternatum (Nineleaf desert parsley)
Only
plants treated with Buctril showed injury symptoms (Table 7).
No
seed was produced by Lomatium triternatum
in 2007.
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Visual estimates
of foliar injury, % |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2.5 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
20 |
63.75 |
88.75 |
92.5 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
0.8 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
LSD (0.05) |
|
2.1 |
2.5 |
1.3 |
2.9 |
Lomatium grayi (Gray’s lomatium)
On
the May 1, May 25, and June 12 evaluations only Buctril resulted in injury
symptoms significantly higher than the check (Table 8). On the May 11 evaluation, Buctril and Caparol
resulted in injury symptoms significantly higher than the check.
Table 8. Tolerance of Lomatium grayi to postemergence herbicides applied on April 24,
2007. At time of herbicide applications, plants were growing vegetatively. Malheur
Experiment Station,
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Injury % |
|||
|
|
lb ai/acre |
May 1 |
May 11 |
May 25 |
June 12 |
|
Untreated |
-- |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Buctril 2.0 EC |
0.125 |
15 |
37.5 |
41.25 |
28.75 |
|
Goal 2XC |
0.125 |
2.5 |
6.25 |
1.25 |
3.75 |
|
Select 2.0 EC + Herbimax |
0.094 + 1% v/v |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Prowl H2O 3.8 C |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
0.8 |
2.5 |
11.25 |
7.5 |
6.25 |
|
Outlook 6.0 EC |
0.656 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Lorox 50 DF |
0.5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
LSD (0.05) |
|
2.7 |
8.8 |
8.8 |
6.7 |
Acknowledgments
References
Shock,
C.C. 2006. Drip irrigation: an introduction. Sustainable Agriculture
Techniques,
Shock,
C.C., E.B.G. Feibert, L.D. Saunders, N. Shaw, and A. DeBolt. 2007. Seed
production of native forbs shows little response to irrigation in a wet year.
Malheur Agricultural Experiment
Station
| Malheur Experiment Station Web Site Purpose and Policy | OSU Home Page | OSU disclaimer |
Last updated Saturday April 19, 2008 .