Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T23:11:13.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spotgun-Applied Hexazinone: Release of Red Pine (Pinus resinosa) from Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) Competition and Residue Persistence in Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Raj Prasad  and
Joseph C. Feng
Raj Prasad
Affiliation:
For. Pest Manage. Inst., For. Can., P.O. Box 490, Sanlt Ste. Marie, Ont., Canada P6A 5M7
Joseph C. Feng
Affiliation:
For. Pest Manage. Inst., For. Can., P.O. Box 490, Sanlt Ste. Marie, Ont., Canada P6A 5M7
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Weed control and red pine release by spotgun-applied hexazinone in a northern Ontario plantation were evaluated 3 yr after treatment, while hexazinone residues and lateral movement in the sandy loam soil were determined 1 yr after treatment. Hexazinone, grid pattern spot applied at 480 mg ai/spot, approximating 1.6 kg ai/ha, resulted in 88% quaking aspen stem dieback and variable suppression of white birch and pin cherry. The height and basal diam of treated red pine were 131 and 150% of control, respectively, after 3 yr. Hexazinone residues were reduced to 1% at the treated spot and did not move laterally beyond 0.5 m, 1 yr after treatment. Detection of small amounts of metabolites A and B (0.2 and 0.3%) indicated the non-cumulative degradation of hexazinone in soils.

Keywords

Hexazinone, 3-cyclohexyl-6-(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H3H)-dionemetabolite A, 3-(4-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6-(dimethylamino)-1-methyl-l,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dionemetabolite B, 3-cyclohexyl-6-(methylamino)-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(H,3H)-dionered pine, Pinus resinosa Ait.quaking aspen, Populus tremuloides Michx. ♯3 POPTMwhite birch, Betula papyrifera Marsh. ♯ BETPYpin cherry, Prunus pensylvanica L.f. ♯ PRNPEConifer releaseleachingweed competitionPOPTM
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 1990 , pp. 371 - 375
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Bremner, J. M., and Mulvaney, C. S. 1982. Nitrogen. p. 595–624 in Page, A. L., Miller, R.H., and Keeney, D. R., ed. Methods of soil analysis. Part II. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
2. Campbell, T. E. 1981. Evaluating Velpar gridball for pine release. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 35:159–164.Google Scholar
3. Dimock, E. J., Bebe, T. F., and Collard, E. B. 1983. Planting-site preparation with herbicides to aid conifer reforestation. Weed Sci. 31:215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Drouin, J. 1989. Herbicide efficacy trials in Alberta and Manitoba, 1980–85. For. Can., North. For. Cent., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Inf. Rep. NOR-X-306.Google Scholar
5. Eilert, A. G. 1979. Some trial results with the weedicide Velpar in Pinus radiata plantations. Aust. For. 42(3):172–175.Google Scholar
6. Feng, J. C. 1987. Persistence, mobility and degradation of hexazinone in forest silt loam soils. J. Environ. Sci. Health B22(2):221–233.Google Scholar
7. Feng, J. C., and Campbell, R. A. 1985. New method for soil sampling and residue reporting in a study on persistence of Velpar-L in boreal forest soils. Expert Comm. Weeds, East. Can. Sect. Res. Rep. p. 593.Google Scholar
8. Feng, J. C., and Feng, C. C. 1988. Determination of hexazinone residues and their fate in a New Brunswick forest. Can. For. Serv., For. Pest Manage. Inst., Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., Canada, Inf. Rep. FPM-X-81.Google Scholar
9. Feng, J. C., and Feng, C. C. 1988. Persistence of hexazinone in Alberta soils. Expert Comm. Weeds, West. Can. Sect. Res. Rep. 3:182.Google Scholar
10. Feng, J. C., and Klassen, H. D. 1986. Forestry field and laboratory manual for herbicide residue sampling, sample processing and reporting. Can. For. Serv., For. Pest Manage. Inst., Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., Canada, Inf. Rep. FPM-X-72.Google Scholar
11. Feng, J. C., Feng, C. C., and Sidhu, S. S. 1989. Determination of hexazinone residues and its release from a granular formulation under forest conditions. Can. J. For. Res. 19:378–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Gratkowski, H., and Lauterbach, P. 1974. Releasing Douglas-fir from varnish leaf ceanothus. J. For. 72:150–152.Google Scholar
13. Holt, R. F. 1981. Determination of hexazinone and metabolite residues using nitrogen-selective gas chromatography. J. Agric. Food Chem. 29:165–172.Google Scholar
14. Knudsen, D., Peterson, G. A., and Pratt, P. F. 1982. Lithium, sodium and potassium. p. 225–246 in Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., and Keeney, D. R., ed. Methods of soil analysis, Part II. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
15. MacLean, D. A., and Morgan, M. G. 1983. Long-term growth and yield response of young fir to manual and chemical release from shrub competition. For. Chron. 59:177–183.Google Scholar
16. Michael, J. F. 1980. Long-term impact of aerial application of 2,4,5-T to longleaf pine (Pinus palustris). Weed Sci. 28:255–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Olsen, S. R., and Sommers, L. E. 1982. Phosphorus. p. 403–430 in Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., and Keeney, D. R., ed. Methods of soil analysis, Part II. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
18. Prasad, R. 1984. Evaluation of some herbicides for weed control in red pine plantations. Expert Comm. Weeds, East. Can. Sect. Res. Rep. p. 583–584.Google Scholar
19. Prasad, R., and Travnick, D. 1983. Held screening of some herbicides for weed control in a red pine plantation. Expert Comm. Weeds, West. Can, Sect. Res. Rep. 3:217.Google Scholar
20. Preest, D. W. 1977. Long-term growth response of Douglas-fir to weed control. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 7:329–332.Google Scholar
21. Radosevich, S. R., Passof, P. C., and Leonard, O. A. 1976. Douglas-fir release from tanoak and Pacific madrone competition. Weed Sci. 24:144–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Rhodes, R. C. 1980. Soil studies with 14C-labelled hexazinone. J. Agric. Food Chem. 28:311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Rhodes, R. C., Krause, R. L., and Williams, M. H. 1980. Microbial activity in soils treated with hexazinone. Soil Sci. 129:311–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Rogers, N. F. 1961. Apply monuron in bands to kill unwanted weeds. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 9:29–31.Google Scholar
25. Rohrbough, R. K., and Gonzales, F. E. 1979. Grid application of hexazinone pellets for brush control in forestry. Proc. 7th Asian-Pac. Weed Sci. Soc. Conf., p. 51–53.Google Scholar
26. Sajdak, R. L. 1983. Chemical weed control in Lake States. p. 121–126 in Holt, H. A. and Fischer, B. C., ed. Weed control in forest management. Purdue Univ. Press, Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
27. Shipman, R. D. 1963. Chemical pellets and their use in controlling unwanted hardwoods in South Carolina. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 16:204–208.Google Scholar
28. Snedecor, G. W. 1957. Analysis of variance. p. 237–328 in Statistical Methods. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames.Google Scholar
29. Sung, S. S., South, D. B., and Gjerstad, D. H. 1985. Bioassay indicates a metabolite of hexazinone affects photosynthesis of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Weed Sci. 33:440–442.Google Scholar
30. Sutton, R. F. 1984. Plantation establishment in boreal forest: glyphosate, hexazinone and manual weed control. For. Chron. 60:283–287.Google Scholar
31. Sutton, R. F. 1986. Hexazinone gridballs applied with concurrent under-planting of white spruce in boreal mixedwoods: 7-year results. For. Chron. 62:226–232.Google Scholar
32. Weaver, E. S. 1984. Critical period of weed competition in three vegetable crops in relation to management practices. Weed Res. 24:317–325.Google Scholar