4 results
Herbicide carryover to various fall-planted cover crop species
- Lucas S. Rector, Kara B. Pittman, Shawn C. Beam, Kevin W. Bamber, Charles W. Cahoon, William H. Frame, Michael L. Flessner
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 34 / Issue 1 / February 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 22 August 2019, pp. 25-34
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Residual herbicides applied to summer cash crops have the potential to injure subsequent winter annual cover crops, yet little information is available to guide growers’ choices. Field studies were conducted in 2016 and 2017 in Blacksburg and Suffolk, Virginia, to determine carryover of 30 herbicides commonly used in corn, soybean, or cotton on wheat, barley, cereal rye, oats, annual ryegrass, forage radish, Austrian winter pea, crimson clover, hairy vetch, and rapeseed cover crops. Herbicides were applied to bare ground either 14 wk before cover crop planting for a PRE timing or 10 wk for a POST timing. Visible injury was recorded 3 and 6 wk after planting (WAP), and cover crop biomass was collected 6 WAP. There were no differences observed in cover crop biomass among herbicide treatments, despite visible injury that suggested some residual herbicides have the potential to effect cover crop establishment. Visible injury on grass cover crop species did not exceed 20% from any herbicide. Fomesafen resulted in the greatest injury recorded on forage radish, with greater than 50% injury in 1 site-year. Trifloxysulfuron and atrazine resulted in greater than 20% visible injury on forage radish. Trifloxysulfuron resulted in the greatest injury (30%) observed on crimson clover in 1 site-year. Prosulfuron and isoxaflutole significantly injured rapeseed (17% to 21%). Results indicate that commonly used residual herbicides applied in the previous cash crop growing season result in little injury on grass cover crop species, and only a few residual herbicides could potentially affect the establishment of a forage radish, crimson clover, or rapeseed cover crop.
Evaluation of cover crop sensitivity to residual herbicides applied in the previous soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr] crop
- Derek M. Whalen, Mandy D. Bish, Bryan G. Young, Aaron G. Hager, Shawn P. Conley, Daniel B. Reynolds, Lawrence E. Steckel, Jason K. Norsworthy, Kevin W. Bradley
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 33 / Issue 2 / April 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 April 2019, pp. 312-320
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
In recent years, the use of cover crops has increased in U.S. crop production systems. An important aspect of successful cover crop establishment is the preceding crop and herbicide program, because some herbicides have the potential to persist in the soil for several months. Few studies have been conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of cover crops to common residual herbicides used in soybean production. The same field experiment was conducted in 2016 in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, and repeated in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, and Missouri in 2017 to evaluate the potential of residual soybean herbicides to carryover and reduce cover crop establishment. Herbicides applied during the soybean growing season included acetochlor; acetochlor plus fomesafen; chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron; fomesafen; fomesafen plus S-metolachlor followed by acetochlor; imazethapyr; pyroxasulfone; S-metolachlor; S-metolachlor plus fomesafen; sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor; sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor; and sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor followed by acetochlor. Across all herbicide treatments, the sensitivity of cover crops to herbicide residues in the fall, from greatest to least, was forage radish = turnip > annual ryegrass = winter oat = triticale > cereal rye = Austrian winter pea = hairy vetch = wheat > crimson clover. Fomesafen (applied 21 and 42 days after planting [(DAP]); chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron and pyroxasulfone applied 42 DAP; sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor; and sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor followed by acetochlor caused the highest visual ground cover reduction to cover crop species at the fall rating. Study results indicate cover crops are most at risk when following herbicide applications in soybean containing certain active ingredients such as fomesafen, but overall there is a fairly low risk of cover crop injury from residual soybean herbicides applied in the previous soybean crop.
Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Suppression from Cover Crop Mixtures and Fall-Applied Residual Herbicides
- Kara B. Pittman, Jacob N. Barney, Michael L. Flessner
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 33 / Issue 2 / April 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 March 2019, pp. 303-311
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Horseweed is a problematic weed to control, especially in no-tillage production. Increasing cases of herbicide resistance have exacerbated the problem, necessitating alternative control options and an integrated weed management approach. Field experiments were conducted to evaluate horseweed suppression from fall-planted cover crop monocultures and mixtures as well as two fall-applied residual herbicide treatments. Prior to cover crop termination, horseweed density was reduced by 88% to 96% from cover crops. At cover crop termination in late spring, cereal rye biomass was 7,671 kg ha–1, which was similar to cereal rye–containing mixtures (7,720 kg ha–1) but greater than legumes in monoculture (3,335 kg ha–1). After cover crops were terminated in late spring using a roller crimper, corn and soybeans were planted and horseweed was evaluated using density counts, visible ratings, and biomass collection until harvest. Forage radish winterkilled, offering no competition in late winter or biomass to contribute to horseweed suppression after termination. Excluding forage radish in monoculture, no difference in horseweed suppression was detected between cereal rye–containing cover crops and legumes (crimson clover and hairy vetch) in monoculture. Likewise, horseweed suppression was similar between monocultures and mixtures, with the exception of one site-year in which mixtures provided better suppression. In this experiment, the cover crop treatments performed as well as or better than the fall-applied residual herbicides, flumioxazin+paraquat and metribuzin+chlorimuron-ethyl. These results indicate that fall-planted cover crops are a viable option to suppress horseweed and can be an effective part of an integrated weed management program. Furthermore, cover crop mixtures can be used to gain the benefits of legume or brassica cover crop species without sacrificing horseweed suppression.
Weed Suppression in Cover Crop Monocultures and Mixtures
- Barbara Baraibar, Mitchell C. Hunter, Meagan E. Schipanski, Abbe Hamilton, David A. Mortensen
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 66 / Issue 1 / January 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 October 2017, pp. 121-133
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Interest in planting mixtures of cover crop species has grown in recent years as farmers seek to increase the breadth of ecosystem services cover crops provide. As part of a multidisciplinary project, we quantified the degree to which monocultures and mixtures of cover crops suppress weeds during the fall-to-spring cover crop growing period. Weed-suppressive cover crop stands can limit weed seed rain from summer- and winter-annual species, reducing weed population growth and ultimately weed pressure in future cash crop stands. We established monocultures and mixtures of two legumes (medium red clover and Austrian winter pea), two grasses (cereal rye and oats), and two brassicas (forage radish and canola) in a long fall growing window following winter wheat harvest and in a shorter window following silage corn harvest. In fall of the long window, grass cover crops and mixtures were the most weed suppressive, whereas legume cover crops were the least weed suppressive. All mixtures also effectively suppressed weeds. This was likely primarily due to the presence of fast-growing grass species, which were effective even when they were seeded at only 20% of their monoculture rate. In spring, weed biomass was low in all treatments due to winter kill of summer-annual weeds and low germination of winter annuals. In the short window following silage corn, biomass accumulation by cover crops and weeds in the fall was more than an order of magnitude lower than in the longer window. However, there was substantial weed seed production in the spring in all treatments not containing cereal rye (monoculture or mixture). Our results suggest that cover crop mixtures require only low seeding rates of aggressive grass species to provide weed suppression. This creates an opportunity for other species to deliver additional ecosystem services, though careful species selection may be required to maintain mixture diversity and avoid dominance of winter-hardy cover crop grasses in the spring.