Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-h8lrw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T00:15:32.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hybrid Bluegrass Tolerance to Postemergence Applications of Mesotrione and Quinclorac

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

J. Scott McElroy ,
Greg. K. Breeden  and
John C. Sorochan
J. Scott McElroy*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, University of Tennessee, 2431 Joe Johnson Dr., Knoxville, TN 37996
Greg. K. Breeden
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, University of Tennessee, 2431 Joe Johnson Dr., Knoxville, TN 37996
John C. Sorochan
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, University of Tennessee, 2431 Joe Johnson Dr., Knoxville, TN 37996
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: mcelroy@utk.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

New hybrid bluegrass cultivars have been bred for increased heat and drought tolerance compared with traditional Kentucky bluegrass cultivars. Research was conducted to evaluate hybrid bluegrass tolerance and smooth crabgrass and goosegrass control with mesotrione and quinclorac during seeded establishment. Mesotrione applied as a single application 14, 28, or 42 d after emergence (DAE) injured hybrid bluegrass acceptably from 1 to 11% 7 d after treatment (DAT). A sequential mesotrione application at 0.14 kg/ha 28 DAE did not injure hybrid bluegrass greater than the initial 14 DAE application; however, a sequential application at 0.28 kg/ha 28 DAE injured hybrid bluegrass greater than the initial 14 DAE application. Three sequential mesotrione applications did not reduce hybrid bluegrass ground cover 63 DAE. Quinclorac applied singly at 1.68 kg/ha 14 DAE and sequentially at 0.84 kg/ha 14 and 28 DAE injured hybrid bluegrass that continued throughout the rating period resulting in decreased ground cover at 63 DAE. Quinclorac at 0.84 kg/ha plus mesotrione at 0.28 kg/ha injured hybrid bluegrass < 20% throughout the rating period but reduced ground cover 63 DAE. All quinclorac-containing treatments controlled smooth crabgrass ≥ 92%. All mesotrione sequential-application treatments controlled smooth crabgrass and goosegrass ≥ 87%. These data indicate that sequential mesotrione applications can be used for smooth crabgrass and goosegrass control during seeded hybrid bluegrass establishment. Quinclorac should be applied according to label recommendations at 0.84 kg/ha no earlier than 28 DAE.

Keywords

MesotrionequincloracgoosegrassEleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. ELEINsmooth crabgrass, Digitaria ischaemum (Schreb.) Schreb. ex Muhl. DIGIShybrid bluegrass, Poa pratensis L. × Poa arachnifera Torr. ‘Solar Green’, ‘Durablue’, and ‘Thermal Blue’, Kentucky bluegrass, Poa pratensis L. POAPRSeeded establishmentturfgrass injury

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , September 2007 , pp. 807 - 811
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Abraham, E. M., Huang, B., Wang, Z., Bonos, S. A., and Meyer, W. A. 2002. Physiological responses of Texas bluegrass × Kentucky bluegrass hybrids to drought and heat stress. Madison, WI American Society of Agronomy, Crops Science Society of America, and Soils Science Society of America Proceedings of the International Annual Meetings of ASA, CSSA, and SSSA [Abstract].Google Scholar
Anonymous 2004. Drive® 75DF herbicide product label. Research Triangle Park, NC BASF BASF Corporation Publication No. 557018.Google Scholar
Armel, G. R., Wilson, H. P., Richardson, R. J., and Hines, T. E. 2003. Mesotrione, acetochlor, and atrazine for weed management in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 17:284–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Askew, S. D. and Beam, J. B. 2002. Turfgrass response to flumioxazin, mesotrione, and rimsulfuron. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 56:127–128.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D., Beam, J. B., and Barker, W. L. 2003a. New herbicide options for seeding cool-season turfgrass in spring. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 56:85.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D., Beam, J. B., and Barker, W. L. 2003b. Isoxaflutole and mesotrione for weed management in cool-season turf. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 57:111.Google Scholar
Beam, J. B., Barker, W. L., and Askew, S. D. 2004. Postemergence crabgrass control in Kentucky bluegrass. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 57:104.Google Scholar
Beam, J. B., Barker, W. L., and Askew, S. D. 2006. Selective creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera) control in cool-season grass. Weed Technol. 20:340–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhowmik, P. C. and Drohen, J. A. 1998. Postemergence selectivity and safety of isoxaflutole to cool-season turfgrass species. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:18.Google Scholar
Hart, S. E., Lycan, D. W., and Murphy, J. A. 2004. Use of quinclorac for large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) control in newly summer-seeded creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera). Weed Technol. 18:375–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. C. and Young, B. G. 2002. Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the foliar activity of mesotrione. Weed Sci. 50:157–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. C., Young, B. G., and Matthews, J. L. 2002. Effects of postemergence application rate and timing of mesotrione on corn (Zea mays) response and weed control. Weed Technol. 16:414–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. J. 1996. Tank-mixed postemergence herbicides for large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) and goosegrass (Eleusine indica) control in bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) turf. Weed Technol. 10:716–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matringe, M., Sailland, A., Pelissier, B., Rolland, A., and Zink, O. 2005. p-Hydroxyphenyl pyruvate dioxygenase inhibitor-resistant plants. Pest Manag. Sci. 61:269–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, M. S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75:153–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, G., Bartlett, D. W., Fraser, T. E. M., Hawkes, T. R., Holt, D. C., Townson, J. K., and Wichert, R. A. 2001. Mesotrione: a new selective herbicide for use in maize. Pest Manag. Sci. 57:120–128.3.0.CO;2-E>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moshier, L., Turgeon, A. J., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of glyphosate and siduron on turfgrass establishment. Weed Sci. 24:445–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimoto, R. K. and McCarty, L. B. 1997. Fluctuating temperature and light influence seed germination of goosegrass (Eleusine indica). Weed Sci. 45:426–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pallett, K. E., Little, J. P., Sheekey, M., and Veerasekaran, P. 1998. The mode of action of isoxaflutole, I: physiological effects, metabolism, and selectivity. Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 62:113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reicher, Z. J., Weisenberger, D. V., and Throssell, C. S. 1999. Turf safety and effectiveness of dithiopyr and quinclorac for large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) control in spring-seeded turf. Weed Technol. 13:253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secor, J. 1994. Inhibition of barnyardgrass 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase by sulcotrione. Plant Physiol. 106:1429–1433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shearman, R. C., Kinbacher, E. J., and Reierson, K. A. 1980. Siduron effects on tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) emergence, growth, and high temperature injury. Weed Sci. 194–196.Google Scholar
Steele, R. G. D., Torrie, J. H., and Dickey, D. A. 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 3rd ed. New York WCB McGraw-Hill. 157–167.352–399.Google Scholar
Vencill, W. K. et al. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th ed. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 395–396.Google Scholar
Willis, J. B., Askew, S. D., and McElroy, J. S. 2005. Selective nimblewill (Muhlenbergia schreberi) control in cool-season turfgrass. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America 102 [Abstract].Google Scholar
Zawierucha, J. E. and Penner, D. 2001. Adjuvant efficacy with quinclorac in canola (Brassica napus) and turfgrass. Weed Technol. 15:220–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar