Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-glrdx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T09:05:53.983Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Application of Sand for Inhibition of Swamp Dodder (Cuscuta gronovii) Seedling Emergence and Survival on Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon) Bogs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Hilary A. Sandler ,
Mary Jane Else  and
Michael Sutherland
Hilary A. Sandler
Affiliation:
Cranberry IPM, Cranberry Experiment Station, East Wareham, MA 02538
Mary Jane Else
Affiliation:
Weed IPM, Department of Plant and Soil Science
Michael Sutherland
Affiliation:
Statistical Consulting Center, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dodder is a serious parasitic weed of cranberry bogs. Investigations were undertaken to determine if applications of sand to cranberry bogs might be useful as a control strategy for dodder. Sand is regularly applied to bogs as a cultural practice. In greenhouse studies, applications of sand reduced the seedling emergence, but did not affect survival time of dodder seedlings. At least 2.5 cm of sand was needed to reduce the emergence of dodder seedlings. Sanding may be used as part of a program consisting of combinations of multiple management methods directed toward the control of dodder. In addition, potential exists for using sand as a nonchemical means for obtaining some control, should present herbicidal control methods become unavailable.

Keywords

Dichlobenil, 2,6-dichlorobenzonitrileswamp dodder, Cuscuta gronovii Willd. ex R. & S. # CVCGRcranberry, Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.Burial depthcultural practicesintegrated pest managementnon-chemical weed suppressionIPM, integrated pest managementDAP, days after plantingDAE, days after emergence

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , June 1997 , pp. 318 - 323
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Allred, K. R. and Tingey, D. C. 1964. Germination and spring emergence of dodder as influenced by temperature. Weeds 12:45–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bewick, T. A., Binning, L. K., and Dana, M. N. 1988. Post-attachment control of swamp dodder (Cuscuta grovonii) in cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon) and carrot (Daucus carota). Weed Technol. 2:166–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, N. C. 1984. Some important physical properties of mineral soils. In The Nature and Properties of Soils. 9th ed. New York: Macmillan. pp. 35–71.Google Scholar
Cudney, D. W., Orloff, S. B., and Reints, J. S. 1992. An integrated weed management procedure for the control of dodder (Cuscuta indecora) in alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Weed Technol. 6:603–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, J. H. 1965. Prolonged emergence of field dodder. Weeds 13:373–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, J. H., Musselman, L. J., Wolswinkel, P., and Dorr, I. 1994. Biology and control of Cuscuta . Rev. Weed Sci. 6:265–317.Google Scholar
DeMoranville, C. J., Sandler, H. A., and Bicki, T. 1996. Sanding-Best Management Practices Guide for Cranberry Production in Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Extension Publication. East Wareham, MA: University of Massachusetts. 58 p.Google Scholar
Demoranville, I. E. 1987. Resanding Cranberry Bogs. In Modern Cranberry Cultivation. University of Massachusetts Special Publication No. 126. Wareham, MA: University of Massachusetts. pp. 43–46.Google Scholar
Devlin, R. M. and Deubert, K. H. 1980. Control of swamp dodder on cranberry bogs with butralin. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 34:399–405.Google Scholar
Eck, P. 1990. The American Cranberry. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 420 p.Google Scholar
Else, M. J., Sandler, H. A., and Schluter, S. 1995. Weed mapping as a component of integrated pest management in cranberry production. Hort-Technol. 5:302–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, H. J. 1950. Cranberry insects in Massachusetts. Parts II–VII. East Wartham, MA: Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin No. 445. 188 p.Google Scholar
Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. New York: J. Wiley. 680 p.Google Scholar
Hutchison, J. M. and Ashton, F. M. 1980. Germination of field dodder (Cuscuta campestris). Weed Sci. 28:330–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, C. and Riches, C. R. 1993. Parasitic Weeds of the World—Biology and Control. Oxon, U.K.: CAB International. 332 p.Google Scholar
Sandler, H. A., Demoranville, I. E., and Devlin, R. M. 1996. Weed management. In Sylvia, M., ed. Cranberry Chart Book—Management Guide for Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Extension Publication. East Wareham, MA: University of Massachusetts. pp. 11–21.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1987. SAS User's Guide. Cary, NC: Statistic Analysis Systems Institute. 1028 p.Google Scholar
Tomlinson, B. 1937. Proper sanding of great importance in good bog management. Cranberries 1:4, 8–11.Google Scholar