Herb. 12,2, tekst - Akademija nauka i umjetnosti BiH

UDK 63/66 ISSN 1840-0809

HERBOLOGIA

An International Journal on Weed Research and Control

Vol. 11, No. 2, October 2010

Issued by: The Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina

and The Weed Science Society of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Editorial Board

Paolo Barberi (Italy) Shamsher S. Narwal (India) Vladimir Borona (Ukraine) Zvonimir Ostojić (Croatia) Daniela Chodova (Czech Republic) Danijela Petrović (B&H) Mirha ðikić (B&H) Marko Skoko (B&H) Azra Hadžić (B&H) Lidija Stefanović (Serbia) Gabriella Kazinczi (Hungary) Taib Šarić (B&H) Senka Milanova (Bulgaria) Dubravka Šoljan (B&H) Ševal Muminović (B&H) Štefan Tyr, Slovakia

Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Dr. Taib Šarić Technical Editor: Dr. Mirha ðikić

Address of the Editorial Board and Administration: Herbološko društvo BiH (Faculty of Agriculture)

71.000 Sarajevo, Zmaja od Bosne 8, Bosnia and Herzegovina Phone: ++387 33 225 727, Fax: ++387 33 667 429

E-mail: [email protected]

Published four times a year The price of a copy of the Journal: 15 €

Papers published in the Herbologia are abstracted and indexed in the CAB International’s journal Weed Abstracts

The Herbologia can be found on the web site: www.anubih.ba links:

Publications and Herbologia

Printed by Štamparija FOJNICA, Fojnica

The printing of this journal was financially supported by the Federal Ministry of

Education and Science of B&H and the Cantonal Ministry of Education and Science, Sarajevo

CONTENTS Page

1. Š. Týr, T. Vereš: Temporal dynamics of weed infestation in the winter oilseed rape canopies…………………………… 1

2. O. Ilić, Lj. Nikolić, Ž. Ilin, J. Baćanović: Taxonomic analysis

of weed flora in potato crop…………………………………… 9

3. S. Maslo: Giant hogweed Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier – a new non-indigenous species in the flora of Bosnia and Herzegovina…………………………………… 17

4. Z. Pacanoski: Biology, ecology, agricultural importance, and management of yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam. ………………………………………………………….. 25 5. B. Konstantinović, M. Meseldžija, M. Korać, N. Mandić: A

study of weed seed bank under wheat, sugar beet and clover crops … 37 6. M. Knežević, M. Antunović, R. Baličević, Lj. Ranogajec:

Weed control in winter wheat as affected by tillage and post emergence herbicides................................................................. 47

7. A. Tanveer, A. Ali, , M. M. Javaid, R. Ahmad, M. Ayub,

R.N. Abbas, H. H. Ali: The effect of fluroxypyr + MCPA applied with urea and terbutryn alone on weeds and yield components of wheat……………………………………….. 57

8. Z. Pacanoski: Role of adjuvants on herbicide behavior: a review of different experiences............................................... 67 Instruction to Authors in Herbologia…………….….................. 82

Herbologia Vol. 11, No. 2, 2010.

TEMPORAL DYNAMICS OF WEED INFESTATION IN THE WINTER OILSEED RAPE CANOPIES

Štefan Týr, Tomáš Vereš

Department of Sustainable Agriculture and Herbology, Faculty of Agrobiology and Food Resources, Slovak University of Agricultural in Nitra, Trieda A. Hlinku 2, 949 01 Nitra,

Slovak Republic, e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

The aim of this study was a survey of the most harmful weeds in winter oilseed rape in the Slovak Republic during the last 16 years (1994-2009). The actual weed infestation was evaluated by a counting method. Temporal dynamics of 16 most common weed species in winter rape were statistically analyzed. The most problematic weeds in the winter were: perennial weed (Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP, Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV), annual weeds (Chenopodium spp., Stellaria media (L.) Vill., Viola spp., Avena fatua L., Anthemis spp., Lamium spp., Papaver spp., Galium aparine L., Apera spica-venti (L.) P. Beauv., Tripleurospermum perforatum (Mérat) M. Lainz, Matricaria spp., Descurainia sophia (L.) WEBB and volunteers: winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Temporal dynamics of actual weed infestation depended on climate conditions of production region, forecrop and health condition of crop. The most dangerous weed species were Anthemis spp. and Matricaria spp., which infested more than 75% of winter rape fields in all production regions. Tripleurospermum perforatum (Mérat) M. Lainz, volunteer winter wheat and Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP were also problematic in the maize production region , infesting 70, 60 and 50% of winter rape fields, respectively. In the sugar beet production region, the dominant species were Galium aparine L. and Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP with more than 50% fields infestate. In the potato production region, the important species were also Galium aparine L. and Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV with 80% and 60% of infested fields, respectively. Keywords: temporal dynamics, actual weed infestation, mapping, winter oilseed rape.

Introduction

Oil-seed rape can be very competitive and will smother many weeds. However, aggressive weeds can compete especially with poorly established crops. A balance has to be made between expenditure on herbicides to control the „worst“weeds and not wasting money on controlling weeds that not affect crop profitability. The crop’s ability to compete is enhanced by adjusting

Tyr and Vereš

2

crop agronomy. Early sowing has been shown to greatly benefit rape’s competitive effects on grass weeds, such as volunteer cereals. August-sown crops will tolerate far more volunteers than mid-September sown crops. The benefits of early sowing for the suppression of other weeds (eg chickweed) are less clear cut. Increasing seed rates to enhance crop competition is not recommended, as the crop production per unit area of land is much the same over a wide range of densities. Crops grown at low densities simply branch more (this relates to optimising canopy architecture). Additional autumn nitrogen, applied to enhance the growth of poor crops in the autumn also seems not very effective as far as weed management is concerned, as it simply encourages the growth of both species and the balance is not altered (Lutman, 2004; Aldrich, Kremer, 1997).

Weeds in a total of 450 fields of winter oilseed rape in nine areas of central England were surveyed, just prior to harvest during summer 1985. Sixty-two species were identified; their levels of infestation were scored and distribution within the field noted. The most frequent species was Galium aparine L., which occurred in 57% of fields. Mayweeds (Tripleurospermum inodorum, Matricaria recutita and Anthemis cotula) occurred in 23% of fields and Papaver rhoeas in 21%. All other species occurred in less than 20% of fields, the most prevalent being Sonchus asper (18%). Grass weeds were relatively infrequent, reflecting the widespread use of effective graminicides; the most prevalent was Avena spp., found in 9% fields. Although most species were distributed throughout the field, Geranium dissection (13%) and Sisymbrium officinale (7%) were virtually confined to field margins (extending 1m in to the crop) and headlands (10m into the crop), respectively. Several species exhibited a well-defined region distribution, Silene alba was virtually restricted to the most southern countries surveyed, whilst Papaver rhoeas and Viola arvensis were conspicuously absent from the eastern area (Froud-Williams, Chancellor, 2006).

Present study assessed the actual weed infestation of weed species in canopy of winter oilseed rape and their dynamic during the years 1994-2009.

Materials and methods

The assessment of the most dangerous weed species and their dynamic in canopy of winter oilseed rape was conducted at the Slovakia in 1994 - 2009. The fields were selected in all production regions of Slovak Republic. An actual weed infestation was evaluated before preemergence application of herbicides. Screening of each field was made on 1 m2 area with four replications. The four randomly established sample quadrants were situated minimally 20 m from field margin and apart from each other,

Temporal dynamics of weed infestation in the winter oilseed rape canopies

3

respectively. The level of infestation was evaluated according to average density of weeds per square meter (Table 1). Obtained data from farms was statistically analysed by correlation analysis in Statistica 7.0.

Table 1: Evaluation scale of actual weed infestation

Actual weed infestation none weak low medium heavy

Infestation level 0 1 2 3 4

Group of weeds*

Number of weeds per m2 Excessively dangerous

- ≤ 2 3-5 6-15 ≥ 16

Less dangerous - ≤ 4 5-8 9-20 ≥ 21 Less important - ≤ 8 9-15 16-30 ≥ 31

*- weed species according to checklist Hron, Vodák, 1959, modified by authors

Table 2: Characteristic of evaluated production region of the Slovak Republic

Characteristics Maize production

region (MPR)

Sugar beet production

region (SBPR)

Potato production

region (PPR) Share of total arable land 24% 16.2% 18.9%

Altitude up to 200 m up to 350 m 350-500 m Average year temperature 9.5-10.5°C 8-9°C 6.5-8°C Average year precipitation 550-600 mm 550-650 mm 700-800 mm

Results and discussion

Results from last 16 years show that winter rape infestation with Anthemis spp. (Graph 1), Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP and Matricaria spp. (Graph 2) has significantly increased in maize production region. Very significant decrease of winter rape infestation was detected by Galium aparine L., Viola spp. (Graph 3) and Stellaria media (L.) Vill. (Graph 4). Similar situation in infestation of winter rape with Anthemis spp., Matricaria spp. and Viola spp. was found in sugar beet production region and in maize production region, as well. Only the infestation with Chenopodium spp. significantly decreased. In potato production region, the infestation with Galium aparine L. and Matricaria spp. significantly increased, and very significantly increased also infestation with Anthemis spp.. Very significant

Tyr and Vereš

4

decrease of winter rape infestation was detected only for Stellaria media (L.) Vill. (Table 3).

The importance of weeds depends on how common they are, how competitive they are and how difficult/expensive is their control. For example, volunteer cereals and chickweed are very common but both are quite easy to control. Cleavers is less common (though increasing but is difficult/ expensive to control. Hogweed and hemlock are not very common as yet in rape but they are very competitive and partially impossible to control. Weed control should be aimed at the potentially damaging species, not simply those that you see most often in the field. Cleavers is probably the most serious weed in rape at the moment; as it is very competitive, contaminates the harvested rape seed and is expensive to control (Lutman, 2004).

The fastly spreading weeds on arable land in Slovakia at present are creeping thistle Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP., followed by Anthemis spp., Chenopodium spp., couch-grass Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV. and cleavers Galium aparine L. (Tóth, 2008). The most dangerous weeds in the canopies of winter rape were: Stellaria media (L.) Vill., Galium aparine L., Capsella bursa pastoris, Lamium spp., Thlaspi arvense, Viola spp., Poa annua, Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV, Alopecurus myosuroides, Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP, Polygonum spp., Chenopodium spp., Myosotis arvensis, Avena fatua L., Convolvulus arvensis (Schroeder, et al. 1993, Jehlík, 1998). According to Soukup et al. (2004) alien weeds, were also important weed species, which occurred and caused yield loss in the winter oilseed rape canopies.

Our results showed that only two perennial weeds infested the winter oilseed rape canopies. Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP was more dangerous than Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV, because their infestation rose up in maize production region from 30% in 1995 to more than 60% at last years of weed survey. In sugar beat and potato production region was infestation with Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP. more than 60%. Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV infested winter oilseed rape mostly in potato production region where the infestation slightly decreased from 90% at the end of nineties to 65% at the last years of weed survey.

Volunteer winter wheat infested mainly winter rape stands in maize and potato production region rather than in sugar beet production region, which was more infestate with volunteer spring barley. As for annual weed species, the highest percentage of weed infestation was found for Anthemis spp. and Matricaria spp., which infested more than 75% of winter rape fields in all production regions. In maize production region, Tripleurospermum perforatum (Mérat) M. Lainz infested around 70% of winter oilseed rape fields. In sugar beet and potato production region, Galium aparine L. was


5

also dominant with more than 50% infestate fields in sugar beet and 80% infested fields in potato production region.

According to Líška et al. (2001) the highest occurrence of Tripleurospermum perforatum and Anthemis arvensis was detected in maize production region in the year 2000. Cirsium arvense was founded at 4% of growing areas. Similar situation was in sugar beet production region. Significantly decrease of weed infestation was observed in potato production region, where Apera spica venti was founded at 4% and Elytrigia repens at 2% of growing areas.

Table 3: Correlations between the occurrence of the most important weed

species and production region during the last 16 years (1994-2009)

Maize production

region

Sugar beet production

region

Potato production

region Anthemis spp. 0.4862 S 0.6897 VS 0.7533 VS

Apera spica venti (L.) P. Beauv. -0.4169 NS -0.3551 NS -0.1636 NS Avena fatua L. -0.3904 NS -0.2846 NS -

Chenopodium spp. -0.2682 NS -0.5783 S 0.1295 NS Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP 0.5103 S 0.2162 NS 0.3391 NS

Descurainia sophia (L.) WEBB -0.2235 NS 0.1134 NS - Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV 0.4233 NS -0.3990 NS -0.3925 NS

Galium aparine L. -0.6660 VS 0.1097 NS 0.5884 S Lamium spp. -0.4101 NS 0.2440 NS 0.4005 NS

Matricaria spp. 0.4797 S 0.6676 VS 0.5790 S Papaver spp. -0.4679 NS -0.0327 NS 0.4518 NS

Stellaria media (L.) Vill. -0.5924 VS 0.0915 NS -0.6717 VS Tripleurospermum perforatum

(Mérat) M. Lainz 0.1271 NS 0.0151 NS -0.2187 NS

Viola spp. -0.6965 VS -0.6028 S -0.1849 NS Volunteer spring barley - 0.3878 NS 0.1291 NS Volunteer winter wheat -0.2746 NS -0.4215 NS -0.3799 NS

Legend: VS-very significant, S-significant, NS-non significant

Tyr and Vereš

6

Temporal dynamic of Anthemis spp. in winter oilseed rape

Anthemis spp. MPR = 6.4824E5-651.0188*x+0.1635*x̂ 2Anthemis spp. SBPR = -3.1653E6+3159.1231*x-0.7882*x̂ 2

Anthemis spp. PPR = -640.8932-2.6153*x+0.0015*x̂ 2

Anthemis spp. MPR Anthemis spp. SBPR Anthemis spp. PPR

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

Graph 1: Temporal dynamics of weed infestation with Anthemis spp. in

winter oilseed rape (% of fields) in production regions of Slovak Republic.

Temporal dynamic of Matricaria spp. in winter oilseed rape

Matricaria spp. MPR = 1.707E6-1709.2859*x+0.4279*x̂ 2Matricaria spp. SBPR = 1.7285E6-1732.7986*x+0.4343*x̂ 2Matricaria spp. PPR = 3.9523E6-3954.3322*x+0.9891*x̂ 2

Matricaria spp. MPR Matricaria spp. SBPR Matricaria spp. PPR

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

Graph 2: Temporal dynamics of weed infestation with Matricaria spp. in

winter oilseed rape (% of fields) in production regions of Slovak Republic.


7

Weed infestation of winter oilseed rape with Viola spp. in %

Viola spp. MPR = 2.2958E6-2288.9856*x+0.5706*x̂ 2Viola spp. SBPR = 1.73E6-1724.8217*x+0.4299*x̂ 2Viola spp. PPR = 3.9392E6-3934.9242*x+0.9827*x̂ 2

Viola spp. MPR Viola spp. SBPR Viola spp. PPR

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

Graph 3: Temporal dynamics of weed infestation with Viola spp. in winter

oilseed rape (% of fields) in production regions of Slovak Republic.

Weed infestation of winter oilseed rape with Stellaria media in %

Stellaria media MPR = -61099.788+64.6563*x-0.017*x̂ 2Stellaria media SBPR = 4.8857E6-4882.7289*x+1.2199*x̂ 2Stellaria media PPR = 2.5529E6-2545.3927*x+0.6345*x̂ 2

Stellaria media MPR Stellaria media SBPR Stellaria media PPR

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

Graph 4: Temporal dynamics of weed infestation with Stellaria media (L.) Vill. in winter oilseed rape (% of fields) in production regions of Slovak

Republic.

Tyr and Vereš

8

Conclusions In the last 16 years, weed infestation of winter oilseed rape with Anthemis spp. and Matricaria spp. significantly increased in all production region of Slovak Republic. 80% and 70% of fields respectively were infestation with these weeds. Infestation of the winter rape with Stellaria media (L.) Vill. very significantly decreased in maize and potato production region. Also infestation with Viola spp. significantly decreased in maize and sugar beet production region. Perennial weed species Cirsium arvense (L.) SCOP infested more than 50% of winter oilseed rape fields in all production regions and Elytrigia repens (L.) DESV more than 60% of winter rape in potato production region. Infestation of winter rape canopies with Tripleurospermum perforatum (Mérat) M. Lainz and Galium aparine L. was also important. Acknowledgements: This paper was supported by VEGA project 1/0466/10 “Adaptation of sustainable agriculture and mitigation of impact of climate change”, and VEGA project 1/0457/08 “Research and Development of Technologies for Sustainable Agricultural Systems”.

Literature ALDRICH, R.J. – KREMER, R.J. 1997. Principles in weed management. Ames, Iowa, USA,

1997, p. 455, ISBN 0-8138-2023-5. FROUD-WILLIAMS, R.J. – CHANCELLOR, R.J. 2006. A survey of weed of oilseed rape

in central southern England. In: Weed Research, vol. 27, no. 3, 2006, pp. 187-194. HAGER, G.A. – WAX, M.L. – BOLLERO, A.G. 2002. Common water hemp (Amaranthus

rudis) interference in soybean. In: Weed science, vol. 50, 2002, pp. 607-610. JEHLÍK, V. 1998. Alien expansive weeds of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic.

Academia, Prague, Czech Republic, 1998, p. 506, ISBN 80-200-0656-7. LÍŠKA, E. – HUNKOVÁ, E. 2001. Weed infestation of winter rape in Slovak Republic. In:

Acta fytotechnica et zootechnica, vol. 4, 2001, pp. 18-19. LUTMAN, P. 2004. Weeds in oilseed crops. Available at: http://www.hgca.com SCHROEDER, D. – MUELLER-SCHAERER, H. – STINSON, C.S.A. 1993. A European

weed survey in 10 major crop systems to identify targets for biological control. In: Weed Research, vol. 33, 1993, pp. 449-458.

SOUKUP, J. – HOLEC, J. – HAMOUZ, P. – TYŠER, L. 2004. Aliens on arable land. In: Scientific Colloquium Weed Science on the Go, Universitaet Hohenheim, 2004, p. 11-22.


TAXONOMIC ANALYSIS OF WEED FLORA IN A POTATO CROP

Olivera Ili ć, Ljiljana Nikoli ć, Žarko Ilin, Jelena Baćanović The Faculty of Agriculture, Dositej Obradovic Sq. 8, Novi Sad, Serbia

Abstract

This paper presents the results of taxonomic analysis of weed flora in a

conventional potato production in vicinity of Bečej, conducted in the period 2008-2010. The soil type was sandy loam and the presence of 29 species of weed plants grouped in 24 genus and 10 families were observed. Twenty three species, classified in 18 genera and 9 families (79.3%) belonged to class Magnoliopsida while 6 species, classified in 6 genera and one family (20.7%), belonged to the class Liliopsida.

With this taxonomic analysis it can be concluded that the most numerous were representatives of the Asteraceae family - 10 species (34.5%) and Poaceae - 6 species (20.7%). Family Polygonaceae is represented by 3 species (10.3%), Brassicaceae, Chenopodiaceae and Solanaceae with 2 species (6.9%), and Caryophyllaceae, Amaranthaceae, Convolvulaceae and Portulacaceae only with one species (3.4%).

Among the weeds present, 7 were invasive (allochthonous) species, such as: Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Xanthium strumarium, Galinsoga parviflora, Erigeron canadensis, Amaranthus retroflexus, Sorghum halepense and Portulaca oleracea.

Key words: taxonomic analysis of weeds, invasive species, potato crop.

Introduction

The potato production in a various climatic, soil and orographic

conditions dictates abundance and composition of the weed flora in a potato crop. The composition of weed flora in a potato crop is the result of abiotic environmental factors, the very potato plants by forming specific microclimate, and human activity which determines the growing conditions, intensity and quality of cropping practices applied.

As permanent companions of cultivated plants, weeds cause great damage to the crop production, in this case potato production (Kojić and Šinžar, 1985, Blake, 2000; Lingenfelter, 2001; Týr, 2008).

In order to implement a successful weed control, good understanding of basic biological characteristics of each weed (floristic composition, size, time of occurrence, time of flowering and fruit making, methods of reproduction,

Ili ć et al.

10

relation to the cultivated plant as well as to the changes of environmental conditions, etc.) is necessary.

Integrated plant protection methods for the weed control are complex and consist of various measures, which in turn depend on the floristic composition, synecological and other characteristics of agrophytocenosis (Kovačević and Momirović, 2008).

The aim of this taxonomic analysis of weed flora in a potato crop is to improve measures for weed control. Research results will contribute to finding appropriate measures to control and suppress weed to the tolerant level in agrophytocenosis of potato crop and at the same time will contribute to the production of safe food, while preserving and protecting the environment.


Taxonomic analysis of the weed flora in potato crop (Solanum tuberosum L.) was conducted during years 2008, 2009 and 2010, on the experimental field in the vicinity of Bečej. Collected plant material was determined and herbarized. The species were determined according to Josifović (1970-1977) and Tutin (1960-1980).

On the sandy loam soil, twofactorial experiment was set, and it involved conventional potato production with and without application of herbicides, with different number of ridging ("earthing up") in potato crop.

This paper contains a taxonomic review and observed presence of weed species in the control treatment of the experiment that included only tillage and planting without any measure of crop protection. Plots of 25 m² in five replications were used as a control treatments.

Floristic studies were carried out in the fitocenological research using methods of Braun-Blanquet (Braun-Blanquet, 1964) for the entire period of vegetation for the potato plants (April-September).


The state of weed infestation, floristic composition and ecological analysis of weed communities in potato crop are very poorly studied in our country (Kojić et al., 1985; Jakovljević, 1994; Ilić et al., 2009).

Taxonomic analysis of the weed flora in a conventional potato production in Bečej area showed the presence of 29 species of vascular macrophytes grouped in 24 genus and 10 families (Tab.1).

All species belong to the Magnoliophyta division. Twenty three species belonged to the class of Magnoliopsida (Dicotyledones), and they were classified in 18 genera and 9 families (79.3%), while 6 species belonged to

Taxonomic analysis of weed flora in potato crops

11

the class Liliopsida (Monocotyledones) and they were classified in 6 genera and one family (20.7%), Tab.1.

Table 1. The number of weed species of the higher taxonomic categories in potato crop

Division Class Family Genus Species %

Magnoliopsida 9 18 23 79.3 Magnoliophyta

Liliopsida 1 6 6 20.7 Total 1 2 10 24 29 100

From the Magnoliopsida class, representatives of the Asteraceae family

are dominating - 10 species (34.5%), while representatives of other families are present in small numbers: Polygonaceae - 3 species (10.3%), Brassicaceae, Chenopodiaceae and Solanaceae - 2 species (6.9%), and Caryophylaceae, Amaranthaceae, Convolvulaceae and Portulacaceae with one species (3.4%). Class Liliopsida is represented by only one family, Poaceae, with 6 species (20.7%), Tab. 2.

Table 2. Floristic range of families according to species number

Floristic composition and the presence of weeds in the studied area in

the three-year period are shown in Table 3. In 2008, the presence of 23 weed species was observed. Slightly higher

number of 28 and 24 weed species was recorded in 2009 and in 2010 respectively.

The greatest number of weed plants was present in all three years of the research: Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Cirsium arvense, Galinsoga parviflora, Erigeron canadensis, Xanthium strumarium, Sonchus arvensis, Amaranthus retroflexus, Capsella bursa-pastoris, Sinapis arvensis, Chenopodium album,

Family Number of

species %

Asteraceae 10 34.5 Poaceae 6 20.7 Polygonaceae 3 10.3 Brassicaceae 2 6.9 Chenopodiaceae 2 6.9 Solanaceae 2 6.9 Caryophyllaceae 1 3.4 Amaranthaceae 1 3.4 Convolvulaceae 1 3.4 Portulacaceae 1 3.4 Total 29 100

Ili ć et al.

12

Convolvulus arvensis, Datura stramonium, Solanum nigrum, Agropyrum repens, Cynodon dactylon, Panicum cruse-galli, Sorghum halepense, Polygonum convolvulus, P. lapathifolium and P. persicaria.

In 2008 and 2009, in addition to these species Senecio vulgaris and Chenopodium hybridum were present, and in 2009 and 2010: Matricaria chamomilla, Sonchus oleraceus, Stellaria media and Setaria glauca. Species of Matricaria inodora was found only in 2008, while Digitaria sanguinalis and Portulaca oleracea were present only in 2009 (Table 3).

Floristic analysis of weed association showed that it is a typical segetal (cropland) weed association (Kojić, 1975, Kojić et al., 1988), which is characterized by a permanent floristic composition. Close interdependence between weeds and crops in relation to environmental factors, dictates and determines the composition of the weed flora in a potato crop.

The relative floristic poverty is a consequence of a numerous agrotechnical measures and intensive application of herbicides (Kojić, 1975; Šinžar, 1986; Kojić et al., 1988). Numerous results indicate that repeated application of herbicides caused a significant impoverishment of weed flora and leads to changes in composition and structure of weed communities (Mišović et al. 1988; 1992; Šinžar et al., 1992). Consequently, in researches of weed vegetation, these weed communities have an incomplete floristic structure because many species characteristic of the class, order and alliance are less frequent or completely absent (Knežević and Baketa, 1990).

Table 3. Review of weed species and their presence in potato crop (2008-2010)

Year Family Genus Species 2008 2009 2010

Ambrosia A. artemisiifolia L + + + Cirsium C. arvense (L.) Scop. + + + Galinsoga G. parviflora Cav. + + +

Erigeron E. canadensis L + + +

M. chamomilla L. - + + Matricaria

M. inodora L. + - - Senecio S. vulgaris L. + + -

S. arvensis L. + + + Sonchus

S. oleraceus L. - + +

Asteraceae

Xanthium X. strumarium L. + + + Amaranthaceae Amaranthus A. retroflexus L. + + +

Capsella C. bursa-pastoris (L.) Med + + + Brassicaceae

Sinapis S. arvensis L. + + + C. album L. + + +

Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium C. hybridum L. + + -

Convolvulaceae Convolvulus C. arvensis L. + + + Caryophyllaceae Stellaria S. media L. + +

Datura D. stramonium L. + + + Solanaceae

Solanum S. nigrum L. + + +


13

Agropyrum A. repens Beauv. + + + Cynodon C. dactylon Pers. + + + Digitaria D. sanguinalis Scop. - + - Panicum P. crus-galli L. + + + Setaria S. glauca P.B. - + +

Poaceae

Sorghum S. halepense L. + + + P. convolvulus L. + + + P. lapathifolium L. + + + Polygonaceae Polygonum

P. persicaria L. + + + Portulacaceae Portulaca P. oleracea L. - + -

Total 23 28 24

From the aspect of environmental protection, particularly protection of

biodiversity, the study of biology and ecology of invasive (allochthonous) weed species in agrophytocenosis and their suppression is very important (Vrbničanin et al., 2004, Stojanović et al., 2009).

In observed weed flora, the following invasive species were noted: Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Xanthium strumarium, Galinsoga parviflora, Erigeron canadensis, Amaranthus retroflexus, Sorghum halepense and Portulaca oleracea. The presence of invasive species reduces the number of indigenous species and has adverse effects on the biodiversity of oberved area. Because of its environmental characteristics, primarily the ability of self-preservation, adaptation and a wide ecological valence, invasive weeds are easily adapted to new environmental conditions and to a new crop.

Spreading of invasive species in natural ecosystems disturbs the ecological balance, changes the floristic composition and structure of phytocenosis. Because of it, recently a greater importance is given to this issue.

Hence, the knowledge of the biology of weeds is the main prerequisite for the development of environmentally and economically acceptable concept of weed control and for the improvement of potato production.

Conclusions

Based on the results of taxonomic analysis of weed plants in

conventional potato production following conclusions can be made: At the experimental plots in the vicinity of Bečej, the presence of 29

species classified in 24 genera and 10 families is observed. The presence of weeds and its floristic composition in potato crop

indicates that this is typical weed association of arable crops. Magnoliopsida class contains 23 species, classified in 18 genera and 9

families (79.3%), while the class Liliopsida is represented with 6 species classified in 6 genera, and one family (20.7%).

Ili ć et al.

14

Specific characteristics of observed weed species in potato crop is the result of not only climate and soil conditions, but also of applied cropping practices.

The most dominant were representatives of the Asteraceae family, 10 species (34.5%) and Poaceae, 6 species (20.7%). Contrary to that, the Polygonaceae family is represented by 3 species (10.3%), Brassicaceae, Chenopodiaceae and Solanaceae with 2 species (6.9%), and Caryophyllaceae, Amaranthaceae, Convolvulaceae and Portulacaceae only with one species (3.4%).

Among the weeds present, 7 species were invasive (allochthonous) species: Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Xanthium strumarium, Galinsoga parviflora, Erigeron canadensis, Amaranthus retroflexus, Sorghum halepense and Portulaca oleracea.

As a result of the common cropping practice and the increasing application of herbicides, there is a permanent change in the composition of weed community with an increase in the number of undesirable plant species.

References BLAKE, ANDREW ABEL, CHARLES, 2000: Weed control key to profits. Farmers weekly,

040305; 140 (10): 58. BRAUN-BLANQUET J., 1964: Pflanzensociologie. Springer- Ferlag, Wien-New York. JAKOVLJEVIĆ, M., 1994: Krompir, Institut za istraživanja u poljoprivredi „Srbija“, Nolit,

Beograd. JOSIFOVIĆ, M. (ed), (1970-1980): Flora SR Srbije, 1-10, SANU, Beograd. ILIĆ, O., NIKOLIĆ, LJ. I ILIN, Ž., 2009: Asocijacija Panico-Galinsogetum Tx. Et. Beck.

1942. pri konvencionalnoj proizvodnji krompira, XIV Savetovanje o biotehnologiji, Zbornik radova, Univerzitet u Kragujevcu, Agronomski fakultet, Čačak, Vol. 14. (15):173-179.

KNEŽEVIĆ, M., BAKETA, E., 1990: Phytocenological characteristics of the buckweat weed community in north-eastern Croatia, Fagopyrum 11, 15-18.

KOJIĆ, M. (1975): Pregled korovske vegetacije okopavina i strnih žita Jugoslavije, 11. jugoslovensko savetovanje o borbi protiv korova, Novi Sad, 5-32.

КOJIĆ, M., ŠINŽAR B., 1985: Korovi. Naučna knjiga, Beograd. КOJIĆ, M., MIŠOVIĆ, M., ŠINŽAR B., 1985: Prilog proučavanju korovske vegetacije

krompira u zapadnoj Srbiji. Zbornik radova,sveska 4-5, Guča. КOJIĆ, M., ŠINŽAR, B., STEPIĆ, R., 1988: Korovska vegetacija severozapadne Srbije,

Zbornik radova Poljoprivrednog fakulteta, Beograd, God. 32-33, Sv. 589, 83-107. KOVAČEVIĆ, D., MOMIROVIĆ, N., 2008: Uloga argotehničkih mera u suzbijanju korova

u savremenim konceptima razvoja poljoprivrede, Acta Herbologica, Vol. 17, No.2, 23-38.

LINGENFELTER, DWIGHT D., 2001: Weed Management, American Vegetable Grower, 071001; 55 (10):18.

MIŠOVIĆ M., ŠINŽAR, B., 1988 : Proučavanje efikasnosti herbicida u usevu krompira, Treći kongres o korovima, Fragmenta herbologica Jugoslavica, Vol.16, (No 1-2), 221-236.


15

MIŠOVIĆ M., ŠINŽAR, B., BROĆIĆ, Z., ŠUŠIĆ, S., 1992: Ispitivanje efikasnosti herbicida na suzbijanje korova u usevu krompira u brdskom iravničarskom području, Četvrti kongres o korovima, Zbornik radova, Banja Koviljača, 463-475.

STOJANOVIĆ, S., KNEŽEVIĆ, A., NIKOLIĆ, LJ., DŽIGURSKI, D., LJEVNAIĆ, B., 2009: Prisustvo adventivnih elemenata flore u biljnom pokrivaču formiranom u sistemu „Mokra polja“, Tematski zbornik radova Melioracije 09, Poljoprivredni fakultet, Novi Sad, 144-151.

ŠINŽAR, B., 1986: Promene u sastavu korovske vegetacije pod uticajem intenzivne primene herbicida. Jugoslovensko savetovanje o primeni pesticida, Zbornik radova, Sv. 8, str. 45-53.

ŠINŽAR, B., STEFANOVIĆ, L., ŽIVANOVIĆ, M., 1992: Korovske zajednice i faktori sredine, Četvrti kongres o korovima, Zbornik radova, Banja Koviljača, 18-36.

TUTIN, G., HEYWOOD, V.H., BURGES, N.A., VALENTINE, D.H., WALTERS, S.M., WEBB, D.A. (eds.), 1960-1980: Flora Europea. 1-5, University press, Camridge.

TÝR, Š., 2008: Actual Weed Infestation of Potato Crops in Slovakia, Acta Herbologica, Vol. 17, No.2, 125-130.

VRBIČANIN, S., KARADŽIĆ, B., DAJIĆ-STEVANOVIĆ, Z., 2004: Adventivne i invazivne korovske vrste na području Srbije, Acta Herbologica, Vol. 13, No. 1: 1-12.


GIANT HOGWEED Heracleum mantegazzianum Somier&Levier – A NEW NON-INDIGENOUS SPECIES IN THE FLORA OF BOSNIA AND

HERZEGOVINA

Semir Maslo Lundåkerskola Gislaved, Sweden E.mail: [email protected]

Abstract

This finding of the Asian species Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier in Hadžići near Sarajevo city, presents its first record in the flora of Bosnia and Herzegovina and it is probably the most southern record in Europe. Giant hogweed is a perennial flowering plant in the carrot family (Apiaceae). This is a very dangerous weed, introduced from its native range in Caucasus to European gardens as an ornamental species during the 19th century. The species current range includes parts of Europe N of the Alps and parts of North America. It competes with native species for light, and can change the composition and reduce the diversity of native plant communities. The plant has a strong resinous smell and can cause dermatitis when it is handled in bright sunlight. Giant hogweed is on the list of 100 of the most invasive alien species in Europe. Keywords: invasive species, morphology, distribution, health hazards, control methods.

Introduction Giant hogweed was introduced as an ornamental at least in Europa and North America, now regarded as a pest in N and C Europe (Fröberg, 2010). The first record from the area of secondary distribution relates to Great Britain in 1817 (Nentwig et al., 2008). In 1828, the first natural population was recorded, growing wild in Cambridgeshire, England (Nielsen et al., 2005). Soon after, the plant began to spread rapidly across Europe. It has been reported as established in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia (native), Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Russia (Southern Russia) (native), Slovakia, Sweden and Switzerland (Brummitt, 1968; Nielsen et al., 2005). Outside Europe, this species can be found in Canada and the United States where it is known as giant cow parsnip (Tiley, 1996).

S. Maslo

18

In the area of the former Yugoslavia, giant hogweed was found in Slovenia, escaped from the Ljubljana Botanical Gardens (Martinčič et al., 1999). It was even recently found in NW Croatia near Žabnik in Meñimurje area (Stunković, 2010). In the literature available to me, this plant was not known in the flora of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and may be now considered a new member of it. Even Beck (Beck, 1927) did not mention it in the flora of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Material and methods In identification of H. mantegazzianum the following sources were used: Flora europaea (Tutin et al., 1968), Flora nordica (Jonsell & Karlsson, 2010), Nordiske skærmplanter (Faurholdt & Schou, 2004), The giant hogweed best practice manual (Nielsen et al., 2005), Heracleum montegazzianum Sommier & Levier (Tiley et al., 1996) and Umbellifers of the British Isles (Tutin, 1980). Herbarium samples (No.inv. 51405) are stored in the Herbarium of the National Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina (SARA).

Gaint hogweed Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier – a new non-indi…

19

Fig.1. Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier

(drawing from the book Nordiske skærmplanter, by Jens Christian Schou, with permission of author)

S. Maslo

20

Results and discussion The first record of giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier) at the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina is reported for the town Hadžići south west of Sarajevo city. Giant hogweed is one of the most aggressive invasive plant species in Europe and North America. It has spread rapidly in many European countries after introduction as an ornamental plant from its native area in Caucasus. The main mechanism of introduction into Europe, accounting for first records in most of western and northern Europe, was as ornamental curiosity (Nielsen et al., 2005). In regions where it has recently been introduced, it occurs mainly in riparian areas and near human habitations.


21

Fig. 2. Dense stand of giant hogweed near the southern entrance to the town of Hadžići H. mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier (Fig. 1) is monocarpic perennial, which persist usually 3-5 years in rosette stage. After reaching the mature stage it flowers and dies. The flowering steam single, annual, hollow, up to 10 cm thick at base can be up to 5 m high. Leaves alternate, lower up to 300 cm, ternately or pinnately lobed and coarsely toothed (Fig. 3). Flowers white, in compound umbels up to 80 cm in diameter with about 100 unequal hairy rays. The terminal umbel is largest and hermaphrodite, surrounded by up to eight satellite umbels on elongated curving stalks raising them up to 40 cm above the level of the terminal umbel. Fruit elliptical 15 mm long and 5-10 mm wide, narrowly winged, usually glabrous to villous, dorsally much

S. Maslo

22

compressed (Fig. 4). The fruit consists of two winged mericarps, each containing one seed. The species reproduces only by seeds, which are dispersed by wind, water and humans. A single plant produces 5000 to more than 100.000 seeds (Tiley et al., 1996).

Fig. 3. Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier


23

Giant hogweed is generally an early colonizer of open ruderal communities, disturbed habitats, or bare ground. It is most invasive in regions with cool, moist climates that are similar to its native habitat. Population near the town of Hadžići grows in plant community along railway line Sarajevo – Mostar and the main road M 17 (Fig. 2). There were about 20 plants in flowering stage at my visit in late July 2010. Given that the flowers develop after three to five years, population must be in place at least since 2007.

Fig. 4. Details

The terminal umbel Leaf

Umbellule with fruits Fruit

S. Maslo

24

Giant hogweed is the largest herbaceous plant in the European flora and is a highly competitive species owning to its rapid and prolific growth (Pyšek et al., 2007). The species often develops large and dominant stands and replaces the native vegetation. Besides the ecological problems, plants also represent a serious health hazard to humans. The plant produces a sickly yellow sap that contains toxins causing severe dermatitis. Contact with the eyes can cause temporary and possibly permanent blindness. However, the health hazards of the species via serious dermatological effects on skin contact are the main reasons for concern over its spread. Although conspicuous and attractive, H. mantegazzianum is now considered a noxious weed (Tiley et al., 1996), and management consists largely of measures to control it. Current control methods are grazing, mechanical cutting or other damage and chemical treatment. Acknowledgement Author would like to thank Jens Christian Schou from Denmark for his permission to use the species' drawings.

Literature

BECK, G. (1927): Flora Bosne i Hercegovine i oblasti Novog Pazara. Srpska akademija

nauka, Beograd. BRUMMITT, R.K. (1968): Heracleum L. In Tutin, T.G., Heywood, V.H., Burges, N.A.,

Moore, D.M., Valentine, D.H. & Walters, S.M. (eds.): Flora europaea. Vol. 2: 364-366, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

FAURHOLDT, N. & SCHOU, J.C. (2004): Nordiske skærmplanter. 166 pp., Dansk Botanisk Forenings Forlag, Copenhagen /In Danish: Nordic Umbelliferous Plants.

FRÖBERG, L. (2010): Heracleum L. In Jonsell, B. & Karlsson, T. (eds.) Flora nordica. Vol. 6. Stockholm.

MARTINČIČ, A., WRABER, T., JOGAN, N., RAVNIK, V., PODOBNIK, A., TURK, B., VREŠ, B. (1999): Mala flora Slovenije, Ljubljana: Tehniška založba Slovenije.

NENTWIG, W., HULME, P.E., PYŠEK P. & VILÁ, M. (eds.) (2008): DAISIE: The handbook of alien species in Europe. Springer, Berlin.

NIELSEN, C., RAVN, H.P., NENTWIG, W., WADE, M. (eds.) (2005): The Giant Hogweed best practice manual. Guidelines for the management and control of an invasive weed in Europe. Forest and Landscape, Hoersholm, Denmark.

PYŠEK, P., COCK, M.J. W. & RAVN, H.P. (2007): Ecology and management of Giant Hogweed. Oxfordshire.

STUNKOVIĆ, H. (2010): Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier. In Nikolić, T. (ed.): Flora croatica, baza podataka. On-Line http://hirc.botanic.hr/fcd. Botanički zavod, Prirodoslovno-matematički fakultet, Sveučilište u Zagrebu.

TILEY, G.E.D, DODD, F.S., WADE, P.M. (1996): Heracleum mantegazzianum Sommier & Levier. Journal of Ecology 84: 297-319.

TUTIN, T.G. (1980): Umbellifers of the British Isles. Handbook Number 2. London: Botanical Society of the British Isles.


BIOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AGRICULURAL IMPORTANCE, AND MANAGEMENT OF YELLOW SWEETCLOVER (MELILOTUS

OFFICINALIS (L.) LAM.

Zvonko Pacanoski Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Food, Skopje, R. Macedonia

E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstract

Melilotus officinalis, an annual or biennial dicot species of the family Fabaceae, is a common herb that is often found in disturbed habitats and agricultural areas in many parts of the temperate and tropical regions of the world. It is a native of Mediterranean area through central Eurasia east to Tibet. M. officinalis is considered to be an aggressive, highly invasive species, noxious and “cosmopolitan” weed in native prairie community, meadows and several crops of major importance, such as wheat, soybean, onion, olive trees and strawberry. It is adapted to a wide range of climatic conditions and grows on a wide variety of soil types. As opportunistic biennial, M. officinalis possesses characteristics that make it competitive in nature and alter soil characteristics. It colonizes disturbed areas, produces a large number of seeds, grows early in the season to create a tall dense colony, producee extensive root systems and fixes nitrogen for its immediate use. The management of M. officinalis can be achieved by herbicide application, mechanical (hand pulling, mowing, grazing), physical (fire) and biological control methods. The plant is reported to be honey plant as well as for forage and for green manure, edible and is also used for medicinal purposes.

Keywords: Melilotus officinalis, biology, ecology, agriculture importance, control

Introduction

Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam. is distributed worldwide and is known

as common yellow sweetclover, yellow melilot or medicinal sweet clover (Bisby et al., 1994). Yellow sweetclover is a monocarpic, annual, winter annual, or biennial herb of the family Fabaceae. M. officinalis is native of the Mediterranean area through central Eurasia east to Tibet. It is one of the most widely distributed species. Meusel et al. (1965) determined it as an European-caucasian-centralasiatic-anatolian-siberian-westnorthafrican geoelement. M. officinalis has become naturalized throughout the world and now is cosmopolitan weed in the temperate and tropical regions of the world - South Africa, North and South America, New Zealand, Australia and Tasmania (Sauer 1988; Klebesadel 2001; Wu et al., 2003). M. officinalis is

Z. Pacanoski

26

native to temperate Asia (Middle East to eastern Siberia and western China), tropical Asia (northern India, northern Pakistan), and Europe (GRIN, 2000; Guertin and Halvorson, 2003; Marwat et al., 2009). M. officinalis was known to the Greeks over 2000 years ago. It has been valued for about as long in the Mediterranean region and valued as a honey plant as well as for forage and for green manure (Horwood, 1919). It was reported in North America as early as 1664 as an impurity in forage seed.

The plant has been extensively used by agriculturalists as forage crops. Yellow sweetclover has escaped from cultivation and thrives in disturbed areas throughout the United States and Canada (Turkington et al., 1978). Nowadays, M. officinalis is highly invasive on the Northern Great Plains (Lesica and DeLuca, 2000). It is pandemic in the United States and nearly so in Canada, occurring more frequently in the southern third (Smith and Gorz, 1965; Smoliak et al.,1981; Stubbendiek and Conard, 1989).

M. officinalis is an aggressive species that can reproduce in large numbers and is often the first plant to appear on disturbed sites. The plant degrades native grasslands and reduces biodiversity by covering and shading native sun-loving plant species (Wolf et al., 2004; Riper, Van and Larson, 2009). It is moderately toxic to animals because of a series of coumarins (being melilotoside, one of the main components), flavonoids and terpenoids (Whitson et al., 2000). Also, it has an allelopathy potential (USDA, 2002). M. officinalis is associated with over 28 viral diseases (CUPPID, 2003, Royer and Dickinson, 1999). Beside its invasive potential, yellow sweetclover is considered highly productive in terms of biomass production and N2 fixation needed to minimize erosion and improve soil quality (Schlegel and Havlin, 1997; Sparrow et al., 1993). It is an excellent source of nectar for honey production and also an excellent source of pollen (Smith and Gorz, 1965). Yellow sweetclover is used medicinally as a source of an anticoagulant (dicoumarol and derivatives) used to reduce postsurgical blood clots (Smith and Gorz, 1965) and in treating cellulite (Nicotra et al., 2009).

In many countries, including the Republic of Macedonia, M. officinalis is not cultivated. It commonly occurs along roadsides, railway lines, settlements and in waste areas as a low competitive adventive species or as a ruderal plant on disturbed terrains, in the lowlands (Kozuharov S., 1992 (cit. by Pavlova and Tosheva, 2004); Martino et al., 2006). But recently, according Kostov and Pacanoski (2006), yellow sweetclover became important weed which has a negative, primarily economical impact on grain crops in the Republic of Macedonia.

Although Melilotus officinalis is common in many parts of the world and it has remarkable features as a cosmopolitan weed and highly invasive and aggressive species, limited experimental data are available, particularly from an agronomic point of view. Thus, the aim of this report was to summarize the available information and bring together new information and

Biology, ecology, agricultural importance, and management of yellow sweetclover ..

27

recent trends on the biology, ecology, agriculural importance, and management of yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam.

Biology, ecology and invasive potential

Melilotus officinalis has a deep long tap root, erect, branched, glabrous or glabrate stem 50-150 cm high. Leaflets are oblong-elliptic, narrowed at both ends. Flowers are yellow, 5-6 mm long in many-flowered terminal and axillary racems with a deciduous corolla. Pods are ovate, leathery compressed, yellowish-brown, and 1- or 2-seeded. The weight of 1000 kernels is 2.3 to 2.4 g (Fernald, 1950; Hultén, 1968; Rydberg, 1971). Each plant is capable of producing between 14,000 to 350,000 seeds (Rutledge and McLendon, 2002). The seeds are "hard" (impervious to water). Various studies showed seeds can remain viable for approximately 40 years (Turkington et al., 1978; Eckard, 1987). Rainwater runoff, stream flow and animals are the most important means of seed dispersal (Smith and Gorz, 1965; Smoliak et al.,1981; Drezner et al., 2001). Although M. officinalis is biennial plant, no vegetative reproduction appears to occur in this species (Turkington et al., 1978).

Germination of Melilotus officinalis can occur at any time of year, with the largest flush of new seedlings in March and April. The first year of growth involves a primary, branched stem and a primary root, sometimes branched. M. officinalis only rarely flowers the first year. The first year is characterized by rapid top growth through late summer, then a critical growth phase that occurs in mid-September, in which carbohydrates and nitrogen are transferred to the roots. During this phase and into winter dormancy the crown buds become enlarged and conspicuous. First year shoots die back with freezing temperatures (Turkington et al., 1978 ). The second year of growth begins in early spring with rapid growth from the crown buds or rhizomes, using the previous fall-accumulated reserves, which are not replenished. Flowering begins in May and June, continuing through frost, with seed set in June and July (Smith and Gorz, 1965; Turkington et al., 1978; Kostov, 2006).

Melilotus officinalis is adapted to a wide range of climatic conditions. It grows on a wide variety of soil types, but it is found most commonly on fine to medium textured and calcareous soils and grow best on rich loams and clay loams with pH levels of 6.5 or higher (Eckard, 1987). M. officinalis can also grow on soils of moderately low fertility (Smith and Gorz, 1965), because this species has a symbiotic relationship with Rhizobium bacteria which permits M. officinalis to grow in nitrogen-depleted soils. It is tolerant of moderately saline and alkaline soils (Lavado and Nella, 1972; Eichhorn and Watts, 1984; Welsh et al., 1987), but is not tolerant of acidic soils (Hulbert, 1986). M. officinalis is highly drought tolerant (Duke, 1981) and

Z. Pacanoski

28

water stress is critical only for a short period during germination (Richardson, 1985). It withstands temperatures to -40°C, and requires 110 frost-free days (USDA, 2002). This species has relatively porous summer vegetation, and no coppice potential.

As opportunistic biennial, Melilotus officinalis possesses characteristics that make it competitive in nature and alter soil characteristics. It colonizes disturbed areas, produce a large number of seeds, grows early in the season to create a tall dense colony, produces extensive root systems and fixes nitrogen for its immediate use (Wolf et al., 2004).

Agriculural importance and management considerations

Melilotus officinalis is considered to be an aggressive, highly invasive species, noxious and “cosmopolitan” weed with a worldwide distribution (USDA et al., 2008), that is mainly attributed to human activity (Duke, 1981). M. officinalis strongly decreased the abundance of all other species, species diversity; caused large saturating declines in species richness and diversity (Dickson et al., 2010). M. officinalis is a threat to prairies because it spreads rapidly into open areas and may out-compete the native species for available resources (Graves and Allison, 2010). It is reported as a part of an invasive community of exotics in the native prairie community (Eckard, 1987). M. officinalis is categorized in the second category of the exotic species that are highly invasive and dominates meadows and prairies in Southern Ontario (UFA, 2002), Tennessee and Wisconsin (USDA, 2002). Auld et al., (2003) reported that M.officinalis is invading exotic plant species (mostly regarded as weeds) common to Japan and eastern Australia. Mehmeti, (2009) found M. officinalis as a ruderal and grassland species in recently abandoned arable fields in Kosovo.

In cropping systems, Melilotus officinalis decreases crop yield through competition for sunlight, soil water, and nutrients (Graves and Allison, 2010). Sweetclover is common in nonagricultural and agricultural fields in Pakistan (Marwat et al., 2009), particularly in wheat fields (Ahmad and Shaikh, 2003; Riaz et al., 2006; Kazi et al., 2007; Chachar, et al., 2009). M. officinalis is considered to be a potential weed with high importance in wheat fields in Serbia (Markovic et al., 2005), but recently, in the Republic of Macedonia, yellow sweetclover became important weed with negative economical impact on grain crops (Kostov and Pacanoski, 2006). M. officinalis is recorded as one of the invasive weed species in onion (Mennan and Işik, 2003) and olive trees (Uremis, 2005; Özhan et al., 2010), but weed with less density in chickpea (Kantar et al., 1999) in Turkey. M. officinalis is also mentioned as a weed with increasing populations in Arizona onion fields (Umeda et al., 1999), and one of the difficult controlling weeds in strawberry production fields in California (Daugovish et al., 2009). Knezevic and Klein


29

(2005, 2006) compiled a list of problematic weed species in roundup-ready soybean in which M. officinalis was included.

Control methods should be combined into an integrated management system for the best long-term control of the Melilotus officinalis. Management techniques selected are dependent upon a specific site and will be determined by land use objectives, extent of yellow sweetclover infestations, desired plant community and effectiveness and limitations of available control measures (Eckard, 1987). In an effort to restore native prairie, invading yellow sweetclover is controlled with a combination of brush-hogging, herbicides, and prescribed fire (Bronny, 1991). Yellow sweetclover is sensitive to 2,4-D, dicamba, tordon, afalon, neburon, and dalapon. It is more difficult to kill with 2,4-D in the second year (Turkington et al., 1978). Chlorsulfuron, 2,4-DB, clopyralid, triclopyr, and 2,4-D controlled white sweetclover, very similar species to yellow sweetclover, below recommended rates in the Alaska glacial river floodplains and roadsides adjacent to natural areas. Flaming and cutting had similar effects on white sweetclover density and viable seed production (Conn and Seefeldt, 2009). Clopyralid plus 2,4-D at 2.5 and 2 l/ha controlled M. officinalis at five locations in wheat growing areas in Iran (Zand et al., 2007). Sweetclover is quite sensitive to buctril and dicamba in Pakistan wheat fields (Ahmad and Shaikh, 2003). In contrary, in investigation of Umeda et al., (1999) M. officinalis was only marginally controlled by both, buctril and oxyfluorfen. Similar results are obtained by Daugovish et al., (2009); in eight studies in California strawberry production fields, oxyfluorfen a full rate was needed for 45-95% control of yellow sweetclover. Markovic et al., (2005) found M. officinalis among the broad-leaved weed species sensitive to 2,4-D in wheat fields in Serbia.

Yellow sweetclover can be managed using mechanical (hand pulling, mowing, grazing), physical (fire) and biological control methods as well.

Hand pulling is effective for small to moderate infestations (Rutledge and McLendon, 2002) but follow-up efforts must be repeated consistently for the overall effort to be effective (Cole, 2001). In general, the best times to pull M. officinalis is in the late fall after the first-year plants develop root caudex buds, or any time in early spring before second year plants initiate flower buds (Cole, 2001, Rutledge and McLendon 2002). Turkington et al. (1978) report that mowing sites having M. officinalis generally favors this species. Cutting white sweetclover at either 2.5 cm (1 in) or 10 cm (4 in) height above the ground did not effectively control first-year plants because of regrowth below the cut (Conn and Seefeldt, 2009). Removal of the vegetative growth of M. officinalis while the plants are producing the caudex buds and increasing their root size (late August or early September) impeded subsequent growth, diminished winter survival and vigor in second year surviving plants (Turkington et al. 1978, Smith and Gorz 1965). M.

Z. Pacanoski

30

officinalis is suitable for grazing (FAO, 2002). Heavy grazing has been observed to reduce Melilotus densities (Rutledge and McLendon, 2002). Livestock and wildlife will consume sweetclovers when available, especially relishing the flowers (Uchytil, 1992). The older sweetclover gets, the more unpalatable it is due to “woodiness” and a buildup of coumarin.

Fire can damage tissues of yellow sweetclover, particularly the crown buds of second-year plants. If these are killed by an early spring fire, the plant cannot produce any new stems. Fire can kill or injure stems at the base (Heitlinger, 1975). In this line are results of Conn and Seefeldt (2009), who found that flamed first year white sweetclover wilted immediately after the treatment and did not recover.

A few biological control agents have an impact on Melilotus officinalis. The sweetclover weevil, Sitona cylindricollis, is capable of causing severe damage to this plant. Adult insects feed on the foliage and larvae feed on the roots of the plant. The sweetclover root borer, Walshia iscecolrella, is a native insect that may damage the plants on rare occasions. Ash-gray blister beetle, Epicauta fabricii, a striped blister beetle, Epicauta vittata, and a margined blister beetle, Epicauta pestifera, are also known to feed on sweetclover (Graves and Allison, 2010).

Uses and values of Melilotus officinalis

In humid regions of western Canada, yellow sweetclover has

improved soil fertility and soil structure (Turkington et al., 1978). In addition, to increasing available soil nitrogen, M. officinalis improves drainage, aerates the soil, and increases water absorption in heavy clay soils (Smith and Gorz, 1965). Yellow sweetclover is used for soil stabilization and erosion control on mine sites, road cuts, overgrazed rangeland, and following fires (Sullivan, 1992; Uchytil, 1992). M. officinalis is a vital tool for improving soil fertility and suppressing weeds. Moyer et al. (2007) found that killing M. officinalis with a wide blade cultivator and leaving the residues on the surface could suppress weeds, and in some cases, virtually eliminate them for the rest of the season. Rietveld (1977) noted that the M. officinalis roots contain substances allelopathic to Agropyron cristatum, Psathyrostachys juncea, Thinipyrum intermedium Bromus inermis and Phleum pratense. M. officinalis is attractive to bee species and halictids and a wider array of other insects, including wasps and flies (Turkingtson et al., 1978). Eaten by most herbivores, including elk, deer (all species), pronghorn, and domestic livestock, yellow sweetclover is an important range, forage, hay, and pasture species (Smith and Gorz, 1965; Smoliak et al., 1981; Stubbendiek and Conard, 1989). Yellow sweetclover will comprise up to 35 percent of pronghorn diet (Bayless, 1971). Mule deer diet consists of up to 77 percent yellow sweetclover in summer and early fall (Neff, 1974; Dusek,


31

1975). In several western states (Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota), M. officinalis is good for cover for small mammals, birds, waterfowl, and ungulates such as deer and pronghorn (Sullivan, 1992; Uchytil, 1992).

The flowering stems or just the flowers of the plant are used medicinally (Hirakawa et al., 2000; Anwer, 2008). The medicinal properties of M. officinalis were known since ancient times. Pliny and Galen (1st and 2nd century A.D.) used to prescribe Melilotus preparations for inflammations, ulcerations and swellings (Smith and Gorz, 1965). Later (15th-19th century), many herbalists and physicians used this plant for similar purposes, and as a digestive, diuretic, expectorant, for eye inflammation, hemorrhoids, phlebitis, varicose veins, ulcers, and for mitigating pain of various origin (Madaus, 1979; Grieve, 1996). Nowadays, an extract of dried flowering tops of M. officinalis is the main active component of pharmaceutical preparations for the symptomatic treatment of venous-lymphatic insufficiency.

References AHMAD, R. and SHAIKH, A. S. (2003): Common Weeds of Wheat and Their Control.

Pakistan Journal of Water Resources, 7(1):73-76. ANWER, M.S., MOHTASHEEM, M., AZHAR, I., AHMED, S. W., BANO, H. (2008):

Chemical constituents from Melilotus officinalis. Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 4(2): 89-94.

AULD, B., MORITA, H., NISHIDA,T., ITO, M., MICHAEL, P. (2003): Shared exotica: Plant invasions of Japan and south eastern Australia. 5,6 Cunninghamia 8(1):147-152.

BAYLESS, S. (1971): Relationships between big game and sagebrush. Annual meeting of the Northwest Section of the Wildlife Society; On file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT.

BISBY, F. A., BUCKINGHAM, J., HARBORNE, J. B. (1994): (eds.), Phytochemical Dictionary of the Leguminosae, Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 472—474.

BRONNY, C. (1991): Dolomite hill prairie restoration underway at Byron Forest Preserve District (Illinois). Restoration & Management Notes. 9(2): 106-107.

CHACHAR, Q.I., CHACHAR, M.A., CHACHAR, S.D. (2009): Studies on integrated weed management in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Agricultural Technology, 5(2): 405-412.

COLE, M. (2001): Vegetation management guideline. White and Yellow Sweet Clover[Melilotus alba Medic. and Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pallas]. edited by Conservation Commission of Missouri, Missouri Department of Conservation. http://www.conservation.state.mo.us/nathis/exotic/vegman/twentyfi.htm

CONN, J. S. and SEEFELDT, S.S. (2009): Invasive White Sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis) Control with Herbicides,Cutting, and Flaming. Invasive Plant Science and Management, 2:270–277.

CUPPID. (2003): Cornel University: Poisonous Plants Informational Database. http://www.ansci.cornell.edu

Z. Pacanoski

32

DAUGOVISH, O., MOCHIZUKI, M., FENNIMORE, S. (2009): Control of Difficult Weeds for California Strawberry Production. ISHS Acta Horticulturae 842: VI International Strawberry Symposium.

DICKSON, T. L., WILSEY, B. J., BUSBY, R. R., GEBHART, D. L. (2010): Melilotus officinalis (yellow sweetclover) causes large changes in community and ecosystem processes in both the presence and absence of a cover crop. Biol. Invasions 12:65–76.

DREZNER, T.D., FALL, P.L., STROMBERG, J.C. (2001): Plant distribution and dispersal mechanisms at the Hassayampa River Preserve, Arizona, USA. Global Ecology and Biogeograpghy 10:205-217.

DUKE, J.A. (1981): Handbook of legumes of world economic importance. Plenum Press, New York.

DUSEK, G. L. (1975): Range relations of mule deer and cattle in prairie habitat. Journal of Wildlife Management. 39(3): 605-616.

ECKARD, N. (1987): Element stewardship abstract for Melilotus officinalis - Sweetclover. Prepared for The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA 10 pp. http://www.tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/documnts/melioff.pdf.

EICHHORN, L.C. and WATTS, C. R. (1984): Plant succession on burns in the river breaks of central Montana. Proceedings, Montana Academy of Science. 43: 21-34. FAO, (2002): Melilotus alba Medikus. Grassland Index. http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGP/AGPC/doc/GBASE/Data/Pf000488.HTM

FERNALD, M.L. (1950): Gray's Manual of Botany. 8th Ed. American Book Co., N.Y. 1632 pp.

GRAVES, M. and ALLISON, E. (2010): Yellow sweet clover (Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam.) Montana State University http://wiki.bugwood.org/HPIPM:Yellow_sweet_clover.

GRIEVE, M. A. (1996): Modern Herbal, C.F. Leyel (Ed.), Barnes & Noble Inc., New York, 1996, pp 525-527.

GRIN (Germplasm Resources Information Network) (online database). (2000): United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Genetic Resources Program, National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland. http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgibin/npgs/html/index.pl.

GUERTIN, P. and HALVORSON, W.L. (2003): Status of Fifty Introduced Plants in Southern Arizona Parks. U.S. Geological Survey, Sonoran Desert Research Station, School of Natural Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson. http://sdrsnet.srnr.arizona.edu/index.php?page=datamenu&lib=2&sublib=13

HEITLINGER, M. E. (1975): Burning a protected tallgrass prairie to suppress sweetclover, Melilotus alba Desr. In: Wali, Mohan K, ed. Prairie: a multiple view. Grand Forks, ND: University of North Dakota Press: 123-132.

HIRAKAWA, T., OKAWA, M., KINJO, J., NOHARA, T. (2000): A New Oleanene Glucuronide Obtained from the Aerial Parts of Melilotus officinalis. Chem. Pharm. Bull. 48(2): 286—287.

HORWOOD, A. R. (1919): British Wild Flowers - In Their Natural Haunts, vol. 2-4. The Gresham Publishing Company.

HULBERT, L. C. (1986): Fire effects on tallgrass prairie. In: Clambey,Gary K.; Pemble, Richard H., eds. The prairie: past, present and future: Proceedings, 9th North American prairie conference; Moorhead, MN. Fargo, ND: Tri-College University Center for Environmental Studies: 138-142.

HULTÉN, E. (1968): Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. 1008 pp.


33

KANTAR, F., ELKOCA, E., ZENGIN, H. (1999): Chemical and Agronomical Weed Control in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L. cv. Aziziye-94). Tr. J. of Agriculture and Forestry 23: 631-635.

KAZI, B.R., BURIRO, A.H., KUBAR, R.A., JAGIRANI, A. W. (2007): Weed spectrum frequency and density in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under Tandojam conditions. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res. 13(3-4): 241-246.

KLEBESADEL, L.J. (2001): Extreme northern acclimatization in biennial yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis) at the Arctic Circle. Univ Alsk Agric For Experiment Stn Bull 89:1–21.

KNEZEVIC, Z.S. and KLEIN, R. (2005): Glyphosate rates and selectivity for control of problem weeds in Roundup-Ready soybean. Proc. Weed Sci. Soc. of America Abstracts.

KNEZEVIC, Z.S. and KLEIN, R. (2006): Glyphosate dose response curves and selectivity for control of problem weeds in Roundup-Ready soybean. Proc. North Central Weed Sci. Soc. Abstracts.

KOSTOV, T. (2006): Herbology, Scientific book, Skopje. KOSTOV, T. and PACANOSKI, Z. (2007): Weeds with Major Economic Impact on

Agriculture in Republic of Macedonia. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res. 13(3-4):227-239. LAVADO, R.S., and NELLA, J.C. (1972): Modifications to a saline-alkaline soil after 2

years of cropping with forage species. Idia 291:77-80. LESICA, P.L. and DeLUCA, T.H. (2000): Sweetclover: a potential problem for the Northern

Great Plains. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 55, 259–261. MADAUS, G. (1979): Lehrbuch der biologischen Heilmittel, Band 2, 2nd ed., G. Olms

Verlag, Hildesheim, 1979, pp 1862-1865. MARKOVIC, M., PROTIC, N., PROTIC, R., JANKOVIC, S. (2005): New Possibilities of

Weed Control in Wheat. Romanian Agricultural Research, No.22. MARTINO, E., RAMAIOLA, I., URBANO, M., BRACCO, F., COLLINA, S. (2006):

Microwave-assisted extraction of coumarin and related compounds from Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pallas as an alternative to Soxhlet and ultrasound-assisted extraction. Journal of Chromatography A, 1125: 147–151.

MARWAT, S. K., KHAN, M. A., AHMAD, M., ZAFAR, M., AHMAD, F., NAZIR, A. (2009): Taxonomic studies of nodulated leguminous weeds from the flora of North Western part (Dera Ismail Khan) of Pakistan. African Journal of Biotechnology, 8 (10), pp. 2163-2168.

MEHMETI, A. (2009): Arable weed vegetation and germination traits of frequent weeds in Kosovo. Doctoral dissertation, Agricultural Sciences, Nutritional Sciences and Environmental Managament Justus-Liebig University Giessen.

MENNAN, H. and IŞIK, D. (2003): Invasive Weed Species in Onion Production Systems During the Last 25 Years in Amasya, Turkey. Pak. J. Bot., 35(2): 155-160.

MEUSEL, H., JAGER, E., RAUSCHART, S., WEINERT E. (1965): Vergleichende chorologie der zentraleuropaischen flora, Part 1. VEB G. Fischer Verlag Jena.

MOYER, J. R., BLACKSHAW, R. E., HUANG, H. C. (2007): Effect of sweetclover cultivars and management practices on following weed infestations and wheat. Can. J. Plant. Sci. 87: 973–983.

NEFF, D.J. (1974): Forage preferences of trained deer on the Beaver Creek watersheds. Special Report No. 4. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Game and Fish Department. 61 p.

NICOTRA, M., MELI, R., SAVOCA, F. (2009): Efficacy of Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pallas in cellulitis treatment Bollettino Accademia Gioenia Sci. Nat. 42 :19-27.

ÖZHAN, B., DERYA, Ö., DOĞAN, M. N. (2010): The phytotoxicity potential of olive processing waste on selected weeds and crop plants. Phytoparasitica 38(3), 291-298.

Z. Pacanoski

34

PAVLOVA, D. and TOSHEVA, A. (2004): Notes on karyomorphology of Melilotus officinalis populations in Bulgaria. Caryologia 57(2): 151-157.

RIAZ, M., MALIK, A.M., MAHMOOD, T. Z., JAMIL, M. (2006): Effect of Various Weed Control Methods on Yield and Yield Components of Wheat under Different Cropping Patterns. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 8, (5):636-640.

RICHARDSON, B.Z. (1985): Reclamation in the Intermountain Rocky Mountain Region. In: McCarter, M. K., ed. Design of non-impounding mine waste dumps. New York: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc: 177-192.

RIETVELD, W. J. (1977): Phytotoxic effects of bunchgrass residues on germination and initial root growth of yellow sweetclover. Journal of Range Management. 30(1): 39-43.

RIPER, VAN L. C., LARSON, D. L. (2009): Role of invasive Melilotus officinalis in two native plant communities. Plant Ecology, 200: 129-139.

ROYER, F. and DICKINSON, R. (1999): Weeds of the Northern U.S. and Canada. The University of Alberta press. 434 pp.

RUTLEDGE, C.R. and McLENDON, T. (2002). An assessment of exotic plant species of Rocky Mountain National Park: Summary information for remaining exotic plant species. Department of Rangeland Ecosystem Science, Colorado State University. 97 pp. United States Geological Survey, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home Page. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/othrdata/Explant/explant.htm

RYDBERG, P.A. (1971): Flora of the prairies and plains of central North America. Dover Publications, New York. 503 pp., 2 vol.

SAUER, J. (1988): Plant Migration: The Dynamics of Geographic Patterning in Seed Plant Species. University of California Press, Berkeley.

SCHLEGEL, A.J. and HAVLIN, J.L. (1997): Green fallow for the central great plains. Agron. J. 89:762–767.

SMITH, W. K. AND GORZ, H. J. (1965): Sweetclover improvement. Advances in Agronomy. 17: 163-231.

SMOLIAK, S., PENNEY, D., HARPER, A. M., HORRICKS, J. S. (1981): Alberta forage manual. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Agriculture, Print Media Branch. 87p.

SPARROW, S.D., COCHRAN, V.L., SPARROW, E.B. (1993): Herbage yield and nitrogen accumulation by seven legume crops on acid and neutral soils in a subarctic environment. Can. J. Plant Sci. 73: 1037–1045.

STUBBENDIEK, J. and CONARD, E. C. (1989): Common legumes of the Great Plains: an illustrated guide. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. 330 p.

SULLIVAN, J. (1992): Melilotus officinalis. In: Fischer, W.C., compiler. The fire effects information system [Database]. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Intermountain Fire Science Laboratory. Magnetic tape reels; 9 track; 1600 bpi, ACXII with Common LISP present. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/meloff/all.html

TURKINGTON, R.A., CAVERS, P.B., EMPEL, E. (1978): The biology of Canadian weeds. 29. Melilotus alba Desr. and M. officinalis (L.) Lam. Can. J. Pl. Sci. 58:523-537.

UCHYTIL, R. (1992): Melilotus alba. In: Fischer, William C., compiler. The fire effects information system [Database]. Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Intermountain Fire Science Laboratory. Magnetic tape reels; 9 track; 1600 bpi, ACXII with Common LISP present. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forbmelalb/all.html

UFA (Urban Forest Associates) (2002): Invasive Exotic Species Ranking for Southern Ontario http://www.serontario.org/pdfs/exotics.pdf


35

UMEDA, K., GAL, G., STRICKLAND, B. (1999): Timing of Postemergence Herbicides for Onion Weed Control University of Arizona College of Agriculture.Vegetable Report, index at http://ag.arizona.edu/pubs/crops/az1143/az1143_16.pdf

UREMIS, I. (2005): Determination of weed species and their frequency and density in olive groves in Hatay province in Turkey. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 8(1):164-167.

USDA (United States Department of Agriculture),NRCS (Natural Resource Conservation Service) (2002): The PLANTS Database,Version 3.5 (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.

USDA, ARS, NGRP (2008) Germplasm Resources Information Network. National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, MD 20705-2325, USA. (http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/ taxon.pl?24009.

WELSH, S. L., ATWOOD, N. D., GOODRICH, S., HIGGINS, L.C. (1987): A Utah flora. Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p.

WHITSON, T. D., BURRILL, L. C., DEWEY, S. A., CUDNEY, D. W., NELSON, B. E., LEE, R. D., PARKER, R. (2000): Weeds of the West. The Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with the Western United States Land Grant Universities, Cooperative Extension Services. University of Wyoming. Laramie, Wyoming. 630 pp.

WOLF, J. J., BEATTY, S. W., SEASTEDT, T. R. (2004): Soil characteristics of Rocky Mountain National Park grasslands invaded by Melilotus officinalis and Melilotus alba. Journal of Biogeography. 31, 415–424.

WU, S.H., CHAW, S.M., REJMANEK, M. (2003): Naturalized Fabaceae (Leguminosae) species in Taiwan: the first approximation. Bot Bull Acad Sin 44:59–66.

ZAND, E., BAGHESTANI, M.A., SOUFIZADEH, S., AZAR, R.P., VEYSI, M., BAGHERANI, N., BARJASTEH, A., KHAYAMI, M.M., NEZAMABADI, N. (2007): Broadleaved weed control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with post-emergence herbicides in Iran. Crop Protection 26, (5): 746-752.


A STUDY OF WEED SEED BANK UNDER WHEAT, SUGAR BEET AND CLOVER CROPS

Branko Konstantinović, Maja Meseldžija, Milena Korać, Nataša

Mandić Faculty of Agrcuilture, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 8, Novi Sad

E-mail:[email protected]

Abstract

As presence of weeds in the field has the influence on yield reduction, their timely control is the main precondition for obtaining of optimal yields. Study of weed seed bank under different cultures provides possibility of prediction, which weed species, in what volume and time will occur in the field. According to this, more efficient and economical plan of their control measures can be made. Mapping and monitoring of weeds of different weed species on agricultural and non-agricultural areas is long-standing praxis in many countries, whereas in ours it has been applied recently. During 2009 vegetation period, studies of weed seed bank were performed under wheat, sugar beet and clover crops in locality Ratkovo. Soil samples that were in average 1.5 kg of weight were taken separately from depths of 0-10 cm, 10-20 cm and 20-30 cm, from each plot in four replications diagonally. After sieving of the samples through copper sieves of specific diameters, they were dried and seeds were separated and determined. Under wheat crops were separated seeds of 15 weed species. According their abundance in all studied layers dominant were seeds of Amaranthus retroflexus, Datura stramonium and Solanum nigrum. In sugar beet were found seeds of 12 different weed species, of which dominant were seeds of Amaranthus retroflexus in all arable layers, as well as seeds of Chenopodium album in the shallowest soil layer.

In clover field were determined seeds of 12 weed species, of which Amaranthus retroflexus seeds dominated in the shallowest soil layer, and Chenopodium album in the deepest one. In all studied plots, the greatest total weed seed quantity was found in the most shallow soil layer. Seeds of dicotyledonous weed species proved to be dominant in all of the studied plots. Keywords: seed bank, wheat, sugar beet, clover

Konstantinović et al.

38

Introduction As weeds have inconvenient impact to yield and quality of agricultural products, their correct and efficient control in the field is necessary. From year to year, soil seed bank certainly represents the primary source of infection (Bellinder et al., 2004; Fenner and Thompson 2005). A characteristic of the majority of weed species is high reproductive ability. Even small populations of weeds in the field can provide a significant contribution to the soil seed bank, producing large amounts of seeds that maintain viability. Often, characteristic of weed seed is also the occurrence of dormancy, i.e. possibility of seeds to postpone germination thus ensuring their survival during longer period in the soil seed bank. Weed remained in the field will not only be competition to cultivated plant, but it will produce huge quantity of seeds that in the following years will collect itself in the soil and make inexhaustible source of infection (Mesbah et al, 1994). Studies of weed soil seed bank enables forecast of weed occurrence in the following period, and study of vertical weed distribution in the arable soil layer gives the insight into efficiency of cultural practices, above all deep tillage and pre-sowing preparation. Based upon this, adequate weed crop protection can be timely planed and performed.


During 2009, in locality Ratkovo composition of weed seed bank in various depths of the arable soil layers in wheat, sugar beet and clover crops were studied. On the plot under wheat, pre-crop was seed maize. Previous year the plot under sugar beet was under the same crop, and clover crop was preceded by soybean crop. Trial plots were nearby, and therefore influence of climatic and edaphic factors was everywhere the same. The climate is moderate continental and in all plots, soil was of chernozem type in loess, with 3.5% of humus. The applied cultural practices on all of the studied plots were autumn deep tillage and pre-sowing soil preparation. Soil sampling was performed by the end of vegetation period, in four replications diagonally in each plot, separately from depths of 0-10 cm, 10-20 cm and 20-30 cm (Smutný and Křen, 2002). The samples that contained about 1.5 kg of soil were rinsed with water through copper sieves of 0.25 cm in diameter. After drying of the obtained samples followed manual separation of weed seeds and their determination by binocular and keys for seed determination (Kronaveter and Boža, 1994). The obtained results were processed in the program Statistica 7. The aim of the paper was to study composition of weed seed bank in arable soil layer under different field cultures.

Study of weed seed bank under wheat, sugar beet and clover crops

39


Based upon studies of weed seed quantity and distribution in wheat, sugar beet and clover crops in locality Ratkovo, the obtained results are presented on Graphs 1, 2 and 3.

Graph 1. The average number of seeds of different weed species per m2, found in wheat crop

During 2009 the plot under wheat was treated by iodo-sulphuron-methyl – sodium + amidosulphuron herbicides. The previous maize crop was treated by herbicides based upon S-metolachlor after sowing and before shooting of maize, after which followed treatment by mezotrione in the four leaves phase of maize and nicosulfuron in the phase of six maize leaves. In wheat crop were found seeds of 15 weed species (Graph 1). The greatest total quantity of seeds of all weed species was separated from the top layer of 0-10 cm (854 seeds/m2), somewhat lower (745 seeds/m2) from the layer of 10/20 cm, and the lowest one from the deepest soil layer of a 20-30 cm (715 seeds/m2). Generally, total number of weed seeds at all studied layer was similar (Table 1). Menalled (2008) obtained similar results of vertical distribution of weed seeds as the consequence of regular deep tillage on clay loam. In all of the studied layers, according to their high abundance, seeds of Amaranthus retroflexus, Datura stramonium and Solanum nigrum proved to be dominant. LSD test showed statistically highly significant differences in the number of these seeds in relation to other found weed species. For different soil depths there were no statistically significant differences in the total number of isolated seeds. Seed of A. retroflexus was the most numerous in the shallowest arable layer with 314 seeds/m2, as well as seed of D.


40

stramonium with 134 seeds/m2, while seed of Solanum nigrum was dominant in the deepest studied layer with 234 seeds/m2. As A. retroflexus, D. stramonium and S. nigrum are strong competitive for nutrition and living space, their dominance in the field and eventual over propagation in the following season would have negative impact to the yield of the following crop. Nesterov and Chukanova (1981) established that the highest reduction in wheat yield is caused by the presence of A. retroflexus as well as Convolvulus arvensis and Cirsium arvense. Therefore, quality soil cultivation and timely chemical control of potentially dominant weeds represent basis for achievement of high yields.

Table 1. Number of seeds of weed species in wheat crop (the average number of seeds per m2 in four replications for each of the studied depth of the arable layer and total average of seeds per m2 for whole depth of the arable layer)

The depth of the arable layer (cm) Weed species 0-10 10-20 20-30

Average

Abutilon theophrasti Medic. 29.69 15.63 25 23.44 d Amaranthus retroflexus L. 314.06 304.69 257.81 292.18 a Bilderdykia convolvulus (L.) Dum. 1.56 0 1.56 1.04 d Chenopodium album L. 14.06 15.63 14.06 14.58 d Capsicum annum L. 50 46.88 31.25 42.71 d Datura stramonium L. 134.38 87.5 121.88 114.58 c Euphorbia cyparissias L. 0 1.56 0 0.52 d Hibiscus trionum L. 3.13 4.69 0 2.60 d Polygonum aviculare L. 0 1.56 1.56 1.04 d Polygonum lapathifolium L. 68.75 46.88 28.13 47.92 d Sinapis arvensis L. 1.56 1.56 0 1.04 d Setaria glauca (L.) Beauv. 0 0 1.56 0.52 d Solanum nigrom L. 182.81 215.63 234.38 210.94 b Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. 56.25 0 0 18.75 d Veronica hederifolia L. 0 3.13 0 1.04 d Average: %

57.08 a 36.92

49.69 a 32.14

47.81 a 30.93

LSD – weed species: 0.01 = 35.80 LSD- depth of the arable layer: 0.01 = 15.86 Correct herbicide choice and timely application in the previous crop contributed to the reduction of weed occurrence in the field, and led to the reduction of weed seed bank. Herbicides based upon S-metalochlor highly efficiently controled weeds in maize crops (Khan and Haq, 2004) reducing seeds of S. halepense and S. arvensis, while herbicides based upon mezotrione successfuly controled weeds such as A. theophrasti, and Polygonum sp. (Elezović et al, 2003). Seed of Johnson grass was also reduced by use of herbicides based upon nicosulforon (Gubbiga et al., 1995).


41

Seeds of weed species typical for wheat crop such as Sinapis arvensis and Veronica sp. were found in a low number. Their occurrence in wheat crop was not recorded as the consequence of application of herbicides based upon iodo-sulphuron and amidosulphuron to which these weeds otherwise show significant susceptibility (Radivojevic et al., 2004).

Graph 2. The average number of seeds of different weed species per m2, found in sugar beet crop

During 2009 sugar beet crop was treated by herbicides based upon

triflusulfuron-methyl, desmedifam + fenmedifam + ethofumesate and clopiralid. Inter-row cultivation was also performed once. At the end of vegetation period, in arable soil layer under this crop seeds of 12 different weed species were found (Graph 2). Seeds of Amaranthus retroflexus proved to be dominant in all soil layers. The highest quantity of A. retroflexus seed was established in the soil layer of 10-20 cm depth (221 seeds/m2), somewhat lower in the layer of 20-30 cm (209 seeds/m2), and the lowest one in the shallowest top arable layer (187 seeds/m2). Beside these, seed of Chenopodium album dominated in the shallowest soil layer with 89 seeds/m2, while seeds of the other weed species occurred in significantly lower number (Table 2). LSD test showed statistically highly significant differences in the number of A. retroflexus and C. album seeds in relation to other found weed species. Total number of all separated seeds was the highest in the shallowest studied layer (502 seeds/m2), and somewhat lower number of seeds was found in layers of 10-20 cm and 20-30 cm, i.e. 482 seeds/ m2 and 484 seeds/ m2, respectively. In 2008, studied plot under sugar beet crop was treated by herbicides based upon triflusulforon-methyl, izodecil-alcohol-etoxilate,


42

clopiralid and metamitron. Herbicide rotation was to some extent omitted, which contributed to dominance of seeds of certain weed species such as A. retroflexus and C. album. Clopiralid significantly reduced seed bank of weed species D. stramonium and C. arvense (Renner, 1991), as well as triflusulforon-methyl (Smatana et al., 2008). Weeds in sugar beet make the greatest problem in sugar beet as competitor for light, for they often overgrow the crop and overshadow it, and any reduction in the available light in sugar beet may drastically reduce the yield. (Mesbah at al., 1994). Therefore, it is necessary to reduce quantities of viable seeds in the soil by correct protection and cultivation as much as possible, as well as to reduce presence of weeds in the field, especially of those with coarse habitus such as Abutilon theophrasti.

Table 2. Number of seeds of weed species in sugar beet crop (the average number of seeds per m2 in four replications for each of the studied depth of the arable layer and total average of seeds per m2 for whole depth of the arable layer)


Average

Abutilon theophrasti Medic. 32.81 25 20.31 8.68 cd Amaranthus retroflexus L. 187.5 221.88 209.38 206.25 a Bilderdykia convolvulus (L.) Dum. 26.56 14.06 21.88 20.83 cd Chenopodium album L. 89.06 56.25 82.81 76.04 b Capsicum annum L. 42.19 29.69 37.5 36.46 c Datura stramonium L. 45.31 42.19 17.19 34.89 c Polygonum aviculare L. 0 0 4.69 1.56 d Polygonum lapathifolium L. 10.94 23.44 25 19.79 cd Sinapis arvensis L. 21.88 32.81 12.5 22.39 cd Solanum nigrom L. 35.94 34.38 39.06 36.46 c Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. 0 0 1.56 0.52 d Veronica hederifolia L. 9.38 3.13 12.5 8.33 cd Average: %

41.79 a 34.14

40.23 a 32.87

40.36 a 32.97

LSD – weed species: 0.01 = 23.58 LSD- depth of the arable layer: 0.01 = 11.78


43

Graph 3. The average number of seeds of different weeds species per m2, found in clover crop

Clover was treated by herbicides based upon metribuzine. In soybean crop that was preceding crop, herbicides based upon active ingredients imazethapyr had been used. Imazethapyr had significant effect to reduction of weeds in the field (Stankovic et al., 1995), and therefore at this studied plot in the arable soil layer the lowest total quantities of weed seeds were found. The highest total number of weed seeds was found in soil layer of 0/10 cm and the lowest one in the layer of 10/20 cm, i.e. 288 seeds/ m2 and 223 seeds/ m2, respectively. In clover were also determined seeds of 12 weed species (Graph 3), with dominance of Amaranthus retroflexus seeds in the shallowest soil layer (144 seeds/m2) and Chenopodium album in the deepest studied layer (95 seeds/m2). LSD test showed statistically highly significant difference in number of A. retroflexus seeds in relation to other found weed species, except seed of C. album.


44

Table 3. Number of seeds of weed species in clover crop (the average number of seeds per m2 in four replications for each of the studied depth of the arable layer and total average of seeds per m2 for whole depth of the arable layer)


Average

Amaranthus retroflexus L. 143.75 84.38 67.19 98.44 a Bilderdykia convolvulus (L.) Dum. 21.88 14.06 12.5 16.14 b Capsicum annum L. 35.94 14.06 20.31 23.43 b Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. 0 0 1.56 0.52 b Chenopodium album L. 28.13 35.94 95.31 53.12 ab Datura stramonium L. 7.81 3.13 9.38 6.77 b Polygonum aviculare L. 3.13 1.56 0 1.56 b Polygonum lapathifolium L. 7.81 15.63 4.69 9.37 b Rumex crispus L. 9.38 29.69 32.81 23.96 b Sinapis arvensis L. 0 1.56 0 0.52 b Solanum nigrom L. 21.88 21.88 28.13 23.96 b Veronica hederifolia L. 7.81 1.56 4.69 4.68 b Average: %

23.96 a 36.51

18.62 a 28.37

23.04 a 35.12

LSD – weed species: 0.01 = 48.91 LSD - depth of the arable layer: 0.01 = 23.30 A. retroflexus has tiny seed that easily resist to predators, without greater difficulties reaches soil seed bank and maintains viability in long period (Bekker et al., 1998). In certain extent, this explains its wide distribution in almost all crops. Seed of C. album belongs to the group of persistent seeds in the soil that can maintain many years lasting viability (Funes et al, 1999), and it is the main reason of its accumulation and constant occurrence in the field, as well as its wide distribution. Sjursen et al. (2008) established increase in weed seed bank, as well as in number and density of germinated weeds in crop rotations that included clover crop. Therefore, timely and efficient protection from weeds is necessary to be applied in order to avoid similar results. In each weed bank, being even frequently of high diversity, dominate only seeds of several weed species (Buhler, 1999). This can represent great problem, for these weed species often can hardly be controlled due to great seed reserves in the soil that enable their continuing occurrence in the field In all of the studied plots dominated seeds of dicotyledonous weed species, while seeds of Setaria glauca and Sorghum halepense were the only ones monocotyledonous separated in wheat and sugar beet crops. In all three studied plots the highest seed quantity was established in the shallowest layer of 0-10 cm, which is the consequence of inadequate application of cultural practices, above all lack of deep soil tillage. In weed community of all studied crops dominant were annual weed species of therophytic life form,


45

participating in the overall weed infestation with over 90%, indicating that this community adapted to the conditions of intensive use of herbicides and cultural practices. Based upon the obtained results it is possible to predict which weed species and in what volume will occur in the studied plots in the following vegetation season and to make as efficient plant of cultivation and chemical protection of crops from weeds as possible.

References BEKKER, R.M., J.P. BAKKER, U. GRANDIN, R. KALAMESS, P. MILBERG, P.

POSCHLOD, K. THOMPSON & J.H. WILLEMS, 1998: Seed size, shape and vertical distribution in the soil: indicators of seed longevity. Funcional Ecology, 12, 834-842.

BELLINDER, R.R., H.R. DILLARD & D.A. SHAH, 2004: Weed seedbank community responses to crop rotation schemes. Crop Protection, 23, 95–101.

BUHLER, D.D., 1999: Weed population responses to weed control practices. I. Seed bank, weed populations, and crop yields. Weed Sci., 47, 416–422.

ELEZOVIĆ, I., M. STEVIĆ & K. JOVANOVIĆ-RADOVANOV, 2003: Mezotrion - novi herbicid za suzbijanje korova u kukuruzu. Pesticidi, 18, 4, 245-256.

FENNER, M. & K. THOMPSON, 2005: The Ecology of Seeds. Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press., 250.

FUNES, G., S. BASCONCELO, S. DÍAZ & M. CABIDO, 1999: Seed size and shape are good predictors of seed persistence in soil in temperate mountain grasslands of Argentina. Seed Science Research, 9, 341–345.

GUBBIGA, N. G., A. D. WORSHMAN, H. D. COBLE & R. W. LEMONS, 1995: Effect of Nicosulfuron on Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) Control and Corn (Zea mays) Performance. Weed Technology, 9, 3, 574-581 .

KHAN, M. & N. HAQ, 2004: Weed Control in Maize (Zea mays L.) With Pre And Post-Emergence Herbicides. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res., 10, 39-46.

KRONAVETER, ð. & P. BOŽA, 1994: Poznavanje semena najčešćih korova u semenarstvu. Univerzitet u Novom Sadu, Institut za ratarstvo i povrtarstvo, Novi Sad, Srbija.

MENALLED, F., 2008: Weed Seedbank Dynamics - Integrated Management of Agricultural Weeds. Agriculture and Natural Resources (Weeds). Montana State University.

MESHAB, A., S.D. MILLER, K.J. FORNSTROM & D.E. LEGG, 1994: Sugar beet - weed interaction. University of Wyoming.

NESTEROVE, Q.N & C.V. CHUKANOVA, 1981: The harmfulness of predominant weed species in wheat. Field Crop Absts. 38, 540

RADIVOJEVIĆ, LJ., R. STANKOVIĆ-KALEZIĆ, D. PAVLOVIĆ & R. STANKOVIĆ, 2004: Efikasnost nekih hebicida u suzbijanju korova u pšenici. Acta herbologica, 13, 2, 483-488.

RENNER, K. A.,1991: Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) Control in Sugarbeet with Clopyralid. Weed Technology, 5, 392-395.

SJURSEN, H., L.O. BRANDSÆTER & R. SELJÅSEN, 2008: Change in the weed seed bank during the first four years of a fivecourse crop rotation with organically grown vegetables. 16th IFOAM Organic World Congress, Modena, Italy, June 16-20.

SMATANA, J., M. MACAK, E. DEMJANOVA & I. ðALOVIĆ, 2008: Suzbijanje korova herbicidima u šećernoj repi. Acta herbologica, 17, 131-135.

SMUZNÝ, V. & J. KŘEN, 2002: Improvement of an elutriation method for estimation of weed seedbank in the soil. Rostlinna výroba, 48, 271-278


46

STANKOVIĆ, R., B. ŠINŽAR & I. ELEZOVIĆ, 1995: Investigation of Imazakvin and Imazetapir herbicides efficacy in soybean crop [in southern Banat, Yugoslavia]. Pesticides,10, 121-127


WEED CONTROL IN WINTER WHEAT AS AFFECTED BY TILLAGE AND POST-EMERGENCE HERBICIDES

Mira Knežević, Manda Antunović, Renata Baličević, Ljubica

Ranogajec Faculty of Agriculture, J.J. Strossmayer University in Osijek

Trg sv. Trojstva 3, 31000 Osijek, Croatia e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in north-eastern part of Croatia to

evaluate the impact of tillage systems in combination with low rates of post-emergence herbicides on weed density, weed dry biomass and grain yield of winter wheat under winter wheat-soybean cropping system. The treatments comprised of two tillage systems, including conventional tillage with mouldboard ploughing (CT) and reduced tillage with disk harrowing (RT), while four herbicide treatments (g a. i. ha-1) were: triasulfuron+chlortoluron (9.75+1027), prosulfocarb (2400), prosulfocarb plus triasulfuron (2400+7), pinoxaden plus triasulfuron (30+8) and untreated controls.

Weed density and weed dry biomass were affected by year, tillage systems and weed management. The main weed was Apera spica-venti with greater shoots density m-2 of 43.7 in the wet 2007-08 compared to 26.1 shoots in the drier season of 2008-09 that made up 76-82% of total weed density, on average. In a two year average, CT tillage systems provided better suppressing of weed biomass (66.8 g m-2) than RT tillage (114.95 g m-2) with significant differences. All herbicide treatments with prosulfocarb or pinoxaden ensured a high level of A. spica-venti control (97-98%). When prosulfokarb was applied alone it brought an unsatisfactory control of Viola arvensis, Matricaria inodora and Papaver rhoeas, while the combination with triasulfuron gave a consistent control of the mentioned and other annual broad-leaved weeds. Across years and tillage systems, the best total weed control was achieved with herbicide combinations of prosulfocarb plus triasulfuron (98%), followed by pinoxaden plus triasulfuron (97%), tank mixture of triasulfuron + chlortoluron (94%) and prosulfocarb (91%). In a two-year average, no significant differences in crop yield were revealed between tillage systems and herbicide treatments that ranged from 7817 kg to 8006 kg ha-1. The average yield increase ensured by herbicides was 6% and 15% in conventional and reduced tillage systems, respectively, compared to yields from weedy control plots. Keywords: Winter wheat, tillage systems, herbicides, weed density, weed dry biomass, crop yield.

Knežević et al.

48

Introduction

The negative impact of weeds on winter wheat grain production has been demonstrated by numeruos authors under different agroecological conditions. Van Heemst (1985) reported that 19 percent of life cycle of the winter wheat must be without weeds in order to avoid yield loss. Grass weeds occuring in winter wheat are especially strongly competitive to the crop and may cause significant yield loss, even at low densities (Mennan et al., 2002). For example, infestation of winter wheat by Apera spica venti in Poland inflicted grain yield losses of 60 percent as a consequence of reduced ear number, ear lenght, and grain weight (Rola & Rola, 1983). Other researches estimate that average losses of worldwide wheat and barley production to weeds are between 20-24 percent (Oerke, 1994).

In Europe, the greater emphasis on reduced soil tillage or minimal cultivation techniques has favored greater weed infestation in winter wheat (Froud-Williams, 1981; Blackshow et al.,1994). There has been a demand for information on the effect of reduced tillage on the efficiency of weed control and some weed populations under environmental conditions. Our previous researches in winter wheat and spring barley have shown good weed control with the application of triasulfuron & chlortoluron as tank mixture in the post-emergence weed control of annual broad-leaved weeds in different tillage systems and also suggested a possibility of high herbicide doses substitution with reduced doses, without significant yield decreases (Knežević et al., 2003, 2008, 2009). An increasing occurrence of Apera spica-venti in cereal crops, makes it necessary to search new selective herbicides for a high effect in reduction of this grass weed (Hofer et al., 2006; Kieloch et al., 2006; Tomczak et al., 2007; Adamczewski et al., 2009).

The objective of this study is to know the impact of tillage systems in combination with low rates of new post-emergence herbicides on weed density, weed dry biomass and crop yield.


Field experiments on winter wheat (cv. Matea) were conducted on

lessive pseudogley soil at Zdenci locality in north-eastern Croatia during 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 seasons. Previous crop in both years was soybean. Tillage systems were conventional (CT) – ploughing with mouldboard plough at 30-35 cm depth and reduced tillage (RT) with disk harrowing at 15 cm depth. Two tillage and four herbicide treatments and untreated controls were assigned in randomized complete block design with split-plot arrangement and four replications. Tillage was taken as the main plot, and weed control management as subplots. The size of subplot was 3x9.3 m. The herbicide treatments are presented in Table 2. All herbicides and their

Weed control in winter wheat as affected by tillage and post emergence herbicides

49

combinations were applied in spring when winter wheat was at the tillering stage, corresponding to Zadok's scale 25-29, while annual grass of Apera spica venti and broad-leaved weeds were in the 2-4 leaf stages. Herbicides were applied by a knapsack-sprayer Solo (Lurmark AN 1.0 nozzle type) in 300 l ha-1 of water volume at a pressure of 300 kPa. Monthly average temperatures and total precipitation for the two seasons are presented in Table 1.

Weed density m-2 was recorded first time 3 weeks after the herbicide's spray (visual assessment of weed reduction in comparison with the untreated plot) and again in June when weeds were cut at above ground level from 0.25 m2, replicated 16 times within each treatment (both untreated and treated with the tested herbicides). Weed samples were collected by counting plant numbers of each weed species and oven dried at 65oC and weighed. Relative weed density m-2 was calculated by dividing weed counts m-2 of each species by total weed density and multiplied by 100. The efficacy of herbicides is shown according to weed density in relation to the weedy control plots. Phytotoxic effects of herbicides on crop plants were estimated using EWRS scale. For recording grain yield, each subplot was mechanically harvested and grain yield was recorded and adjusted to 14% of the moisture content.

The data on weed density, weed dry biomass and crop yield in tillage and weed control treatments were subjected to analysis of variance using Microsoft Excel 5.0 The mean values were compared using Fisher's Protected LSD test (P< 0.05). Table 1. Average air temperature and rainfall of experimental area during the winter wheat growing seasons (2007-2008 – 2009-2010)

M o n t h Total X. XI. XII. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. Mean

2007-2008

P T

126 10.1

113 4.8

76 0.4

26 1.9

8 5.4

93 7.7

54 12.8

45 18.1

86 21.8

138 21.6

765 10.5

2008-2009

P T

50 13.6

53 7.5

45 4.1

69 -1.3

32 2.8

37 7.5

25 14.6

94 18.3

84 19.7

28 23.0

517 10.9

Source: Meteorological Station of Čačinci located near the experimental site.

Knežević et al.

50

Table 2. Post-emergence herbicidal treatments and rates used in the experiment Herbicide treatment

Trade name* Active ingredient* Rate g a.i.ha-1

1 Tena (Herbos) triasulfuron - 0.75% + chlortoluron - 79%

9.75 +1027

2 Filon 80EC (Syngenta) prosulfocarb (N) - 80%

2400

3 Filon 80EC + Logran 20WG (Syngenta)

prosulfocarb (N) - 80% + triasulfuron - 20%

2400 + 7

4 Axial 5 EC (Syngenta) + Logran 20 WG (Syngenta)

pinoxaden - 5% + cloquintocet-mexyl - 12.5% triasulfuron - 20%

30 + 8

* Source: Cvjetković et al. (2010)


During the experiment, 13 weed species were recorded in winter wheat, 9 of which were annual broad-leaved species, 3 perennials and one annual grass species. The greatest weed density on untreated plots was in the season of 2007-08 and it reached 57.1 shoots m-2 across two tillage treatments, while the lowest weed density of 27.8 shoots m-2 was recorded in 2008-09 (Table 3). Also, the weed dry weight revealed that maximum weed biomass of 112.59 g m-2 was in 2007-08, corresponing to 63% higher weed biomass production compared to 69.2 g m-2 in the season of 2008-09 (Table 4).The probable reason for a large number of weed population in 2007-08 could be higher rainfall compared to 2008-09. The season of 2008-09 had 248 mm less rainfall than the previous year (Table 1). The long-time quantity rainfall in this region is 646 mm on average (Knežević, 2008). In a two year average, the maximum level of weed infestation has been observed in RT tillage (55.6 plats m-2) while the minimum was found in CT tillage (33.1 plants m-2) that provided a better suppressing of weed growth than RT tillage system (Table 3, 4). These results confirm our earlier findings that reduced tillage system with disk harrowing corresponds with higher weediness of cereal crops (Knežević et al., 2009).

Annual grass of Apera spica venti (L.) PB. was the most abundant weed on untreated control plots. Across tillage, it reached 43.7 shoots m-2 in the wet season of 2007-08 and 26.1 shoots m-2 in drier season of 2008-09 that made up on average 76-82% of total weed density (Table 5, 6). Annual broad-leaved weeds constituted from 18 to 23% of total weed density. Papaver rhoeas L. was the most abundant annual broad-leaved weed, especially in wet season of 2007-08, when it reached 4-7 plants m-2. Other


51

annual broad-leaved weed species with average densities of one or more plants m-2 were: Capsella bursa- pastoris (L.) Med., Stellaria media (L.) Vill., Lamium purpureum L., Matricaria inodora L., Viola arvensis Murray, Matricaria chamomilla L., Galium aparine L. and Veronica persica Poir. Perennial weeds of Calystegia sepium (L.) R.Br., Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. and Convolvulus arvensis L. had a little importance having negligible weed infestation in both seasons. The tillage and herbicide effects on weed species composition and plant density are presented in the Tables 5, 6.

Table 3. Weed density (shoots m-2) in winter wheat as affected by year and tillage

Tillage 2007-2008 2008-2009 Average Conventional tillage 43.8 b 22.5 b 33.1 b Reduced tillage 70.5 a 40.8 a 55.6 a Average 57.1 a 27.8 b

LSD value for year = 10.8; LSD value for tillage = 12.9 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P < 0.05 Table 4. Weed dry biomass (g m-2) in winter wheat as affected by year and tillage

Tillage 2007-2008 2008-2009 Average Conventional tillage 82.31 b 51.32 b 66.81 b Reduced tillage 142.87 a 87.03 a 114.95 a Average 112.59 a 69.18 b

LSD value for year = 42.8; LSD value for tillage = 38.4 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P < 0.05

A. spica-venti is the most serious and widespread annual grass weed that affects yield of winter wheat. Bartels (2004) found a grain yield loss of 3 t ha-1 in untreated plots, which were infested with 200 shoots m-2, compared to the treatments providing successful grass weed conrol. In this regard, Rola (1982) suggested that the economic weed control threshold for A. spica venti grass is between 5-10 shoots m-2.

All herbicide treatments in the field trials provided high level of A. spica-venti reduction (94-98%). The best control efficacy (97-98%) was achieved with prosulfocarb or with low rate of pinoxaden (30 g a.i. ha-1) in the treatments 2, 3, and 4. Similarly, a high activity of these two herbicides against A. spica-venti was observed by Kieloch et al. (2006) and Adamczewski et al. (2009) according to experiments in Polish conditions. In our trials, when prosulfokarb was applied alone it brought an unsatisfactory control of some broad-leaved weeds as well as V. arvensis (46%), M. inodora (51%) and P. rhoeas (57%). These findings are in agreement with results of Tomczak et al. (2007) who also report the unsatisfactory efficacy of

Knežević et al.

52

prosulfocarb on the mentioned weeds, as well as on G. aparine. The combination of prosulfocarb with triasulfuron (Logran 20 WG) gave a very high reduction of the mentioned weed species and other annual broad-leaved weeds (99% of control). Also, triasulfuron ensured a high level of broadleaf weed control in the treatment (4) where it was combined with pinoxaden (97%).

Table 5. Weed density (shoots m-2) of annual grass and broad leaved weeds in winter wheat as affected by tillage and herbicides in 2007-2008

Conventional tillage Reduced tillage Herbicide treatments Herbicide treatments

Weed species Weedy

control 1 2 3 4 Weedy control 1 2 3 4

Weed control (%) Weed control (%) Apera spica-venti 35.3 2.2 1.0 0.4 1.3 52.0 3.6 2.5 1.8 2.7

Papaver rhoeas 4.3 - 1.8 - 0.1 7.5 - 3.1 0.3 0.1 Capsella bursa-pastoris

1.1 - - - - 1.6 - - - -

Stellaria media 1.0 - - - - 2.5 - - - - Lamium purpureum 0.8 - - - - 1.1 - - - - Matricaria chamomilla

0.4 - 0.1 - - 0.1 - 0.1 - -

Viola arvensis 0.3 - 0.1 - - 1.4 - 0.7 - - Galium aparine 0.3 - - - - 0.6 - - - 0.1 Matricaria inodora 0.3 - 0.5 0.3 0.2 2.0 0.5 0.8 - 0.1 Veronica persica - - - - - 1.7 - - - - Total weed density m-2

43.8 2.2 3.5 0.7 1.6 70.5 4.1 7.5 2.1 3.0

Percentage of weed control (%)

95

92

98

96

94

89

97

95

Table 6. Weed density (shoots m-2) of annual grass and broad leaved weeds in winter wheat as affected by tillage and herbicides in 2008-2009

Conventional tillage Reduced tillage Herbicide treatments Herbicide

treatments

Weed species Weedy

control 1 2 3 4

Weedy control

1 2 3 4 Apera spica-venti 17.8 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.8 34.3 1.3 0.8 0.9 1.0 Papaver rhoeas 1.8 - 0.3 - - 2.3 - 0.9 - - Viola arvensis 1.5 - 0.7 - - 0.4 - 0.4 - - Matricaria inodora

1.4 0.6 0.8 - - 0.8 0.3 - -

Galium aparine - 0.3 - - - 1.5 0.3 - - - Capsella bursa-pastoris

- - - - - - - - - -


53

Matricaria chamomilla

- - - - - 1.5 - - - -

Total weed density m-2

22.5 1.9 2.3 0.4 0.8 40.8 1.6 2.4 0.9 1.0

Percentage of weed control (%)

92

90

98

97

96

94

98

98

The standard herbicide tank mixture of triasulfuron + chlortoluron (1),

with broad spectrum activities, provided on average consistent control of A. spica-venti grass (94%), as well as broad leaved weeds (90%), even at a rate lower than recommended.

Across years and tillage systems, the best total weed control was achieved with herbicide treatments of prosulfocarb plus triasulfuron (98%), followed by pinoxaden plus triasulfuron (97%), triasulfuron + chlortoluron (94%) as the standard and prosulfocarb (91%) applied alone. All herbicides used in these experiments were selective for the winter wheat with no phytotoxicity symptoms.

Table 7. Effects of tillage and herbicide treatments on grain yield (kg ha-1) of

winter wheat (average of 2 years)

Herbicide treatments

Conventional tillage

Reduced tillage

Average for herbicides

Triasulfuron + chlortoluron

7849 a 7936 ab

Prosulfocarb

7766 a 7867 b 7817 a

Prosulfocarb + triasulfuron

7916 a 8095 a 8006 a

Pinoxaden + triasulfuron

7811 a 8139 a 7975 a

Untreated control

7303 b 6711 b 7007 b

Average for tillage

7729 a 7750 a

LSD value for tillage = 172.7 ; LSD value for herbicides = 225.9 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P < 0.05

No significant differences in crop yield were revealed between CT

and RT tillage systems. Grain yield was affected by weed management

Knežević et al.

54

(Table 7). In a two-year average, crop yields from herbicide treated plots ranged from 7817 kg to 8006 kg ha-1 while the yields from the weedy control plots ranged from 6711 to 7303 kg ha-1. The average yield increase ensured by herbicides was 6% and 15% in conventional and reduced tillage systems, respectively, compared to the crop yields without weed control.

Conclusions

Two years of tillage and herbicide experiments in winter wheat showed that total weed density and weed dry biomass were significantly influenced by year, tillage and weed management. Annual grass of A. spica venti (L.) PB. was the most abundant weed that reached 43.7 shoots m-2 in the wet season of 2007-08 and 26.1 shoots m-2 in the drier season of 2008-09 that made up 76-82% of total weed density on control plots. Conventional tillage with mouldboard ploughing provided better suppressing of total weed biomass (66.81 g m-2) than reduced disk harrowing tillage system (114.95 g m-2).

All herbicide treatments with prosulfocarb or pinoxaden provided a high level of A. spica-venti control (97-98%). When applied alone, prosulfokarb brought an unsatisfactory control of some broad-leaved weeds, including V. arvensis (46%), M. inodora (51%) and P. rhoeas (57%). The application of prosulfocarb as the combination with triasulfuron ensured consistent control of the mentioned and other annual broad-leaved weeds. On average, the best total weed control was achieved with herbicide treatment of prosulfocarb plus triasulfuron (98%), followed by pinoxaden plus triasulfuron (97%), triasulfuron + chlortoluron (94%), as the standard tank mixture and prosulfocarb (91%) applied alone. All herbicides were selective for the winter wheat with no phytotoxicity symptoms.

In a two-year average, no significant differences were observed in yields between tillage systems and all herbicide treatments, ranging from 7817 kg to 8006 kg ha-1. Average yield increase ensured by herbicides was 6% and 15% in conventional and reduced tillage systems, respectively, compared to yields from weedy control plots. Acknowledgements This work was supported by the Croatian Ministry of Science, Education and Sports ("Integrated arable crop protection from weeds"- 079-0790570-2716).

References

ADAMCZEWSKI, K., R. KIERZEK, M. URBAN, J. PIETRYGA, 2009: Ocena dzialania pinoksadenu Ii prosulfokarbu w zwalczaniu miotly zboźowej (Apera spica-venti (L.) P.B.) odpornej na herbicydy sulfonylomocznikowe. Progress in Plant Protection/Postepy w Ochronie Roślin 49 (1), 307- 312.

BARTELS, m., 2004: Ungräser sollten Sie im Herbst beseitigen. Top Agrar 9, 50-55.


55

BLACKSHAW, R.E., F.O. LARNEY, C.W. LINDWALL, G.C. KOZUB, 1994: Crop rotation and tillage effects on weed populations on the semi-arid Canadian Prairies. Weed Technology 8, 231-237.

CVJETKOVIĆ, B., R. BAŽOK, J. IGRC BARČIĆ, K. BARIĆ, Z. OSTOJIĆ, G. PEČEK 2010: Pregled sredstava za zaštitu bilja u Hrvatskoj za 2010. godinu. Glasilo biljne zaštite, God. X, No.1-2, 1-137.

FROUD-WILLIAMS, R..J., R.J. CHANCELLOR¸ D.S.H. DRENNAN, 1981: Potential changes in weed floras associated with reduced-cultivation systems for cereal production in temperature regions. Weed Research 21, 99-109.

HOFER, U., M. MUEHLEBACH, S. HOLE, A. ZOSCHKE, 2006: Pinoxaden – for broad spectrum grass management in cereal crops. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, Sonderheft XX, 989-995.

KIEHLOCH, R., K. DOMARADZKI, J. GÓRNJAK, 2006: Pinoxaden – a new active ingredient for grass weed control in cereals of South-West Poland. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, Sonderheft XX, 1067-1072.

KNEŽEVIĆ, M., M. ðURKIĆ, I. KNEŽEVIĆ, O. ANTONIĆ, S. JELASKA, 2003: Effects of tillage and reduced herbicide doses on weed biomass production in winter and spring cereals. Plant Soil Environ., 49 (9), 414-421.

KNEŽEVIĆ, M., B. STIPEŠEVIĆ, LJ. RANOGAJEC, I. KNEŽEVIĆ, 2008: Long-term effects of soil tillage on weed populations in winter wheat. Herbologia 9, 73 – 85.

KNEŽEVIĆ, M., R. BALIČEVIĆ, LJ. RANOGAJEC, 2009: Influence of soil tillage and low herbicide doses on weed dry weight and cereal crop yields. Herbologia 10, 79-88.

MENNAN, H., D. ISIK, M. BOZOĞLU, F.N. UYGUR, 2002: Economic thresholds of Avena spp. And Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. In winter wheat. Zeitschrift für Pflanzrnkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, Sonderheft XVIII, 375-381.

OERKE, E.C., 1994: Estimated crop losses due to pathogens, animal pests and weeds. In: Oerke, E.C., H.W. DEHNE, F. SCHÖNBECK, A. WEBER (eds.): Crop Production and Crop Protection. Estimated losses in major food and cash crops. Elsevier, Chapter 3, 179-364.

ROLA, H. 1982:Zjawisko konkurencji wśród roślin uprawnych I jej skutki na przykladzie wybranych gatunków wystepujacych w pszenicy ozimej. Wyd. IUNG, Ser. R (162), 1-64.

ROLA, H., J. ROLA, 1983: Competition of Apera spica-venti in winter wheat. Proc. 10th Int. Congress Plant Protection, 122. Brighton, British Crop Protection Council, Surrey, UK.

TOMCZAK, B., E. BACZKOWSKA, P. BUBNIEWICZ, J. GÓRNIAK, 2007: Prosulfokarb – herbicyd do ochrony zbóŜ i ziemniaków przed chwastami jedno- i dwuliściennymi. Progress in Plant Protection/Postepy w Ochronie Roślin 47 (3), 280-284.

VAN HEEMST, H.D.J., 1985: The Influence of Weed Competition on Crop Yield. Agricultural Systems 18, 81-93.


THE EFFECT OF FLUROXYPYR + MCPA APPLIED WITH UREA AND TERBUTRYN ALONE ON WEEDS AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF

WHEAT

A. Tanveer*, A. Ali, , M. M. Javaid, R. Ahmad1, M. Ayub, , R.N. Abbas, H. H. Ali

*corresponding author Email: [email protected] Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan.

1 Department of crop physiology, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Abstract

Two field experiments were conducted to compare the effects of adding urea to fluroxypyr + MCPA and terbutryn alone on broad-leaved weeds and yield components of wheat. The application of fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 and 450 g. a. i. ha-1 controlled weeds (Fumaria indica, Melilotus indica and Anagallis arvensis) up to 87.0 and 86%, respectively.

Combination of MCPA + fluroxypyr with 3% urea reduced the weed density up to 92. 8 and 94.9% at aforesaid rates. Increase in grain yield of wheat with herbicide alone was 22-54%, whereas the increase with combined application of herbicide and urea was 16-60%. Terbutryn @ 380 g. a. i. ha-1 gave the most effective control of Fumaria indica (Hausskn) pugsley, Rumex dentatus L. Melilotus indica L., Chenopodium album L , Anagallis arvensis L. and Convolvulus arvensis L. (75 to 93%) and provided higher wheat yields (20-30%) over weedy check and proved to be the best economical treatment. Unchecked growth of weeds resulted in significantly maximum N (4.89-11.68 Kg ha-1), P (0.79-1.95 Kg ha-1) and K (6.50-16.09 Kg ha-1) uptake by weeds. Keywords: fluroxypyr + MCPA, terbutryn, urea, wheat, broad-leaf weeds

Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is one of the most important cereals grown in Pakistan for its nutritive value and economic importance. Its cultivation is, however, threatened by infestation of divergent weed flora causing 17-35% reduction in yield, which necessitates an immediate attention for weed control. Due to high fertility and irrigation requirements, wheat is infested with heavy population of broad-leaved weeds. Weed control would be advantageous for optimizing the input efficiency and has the potential to raise grain yields, decrease labour requirements, and increase profitability. Chemical control is the most commonly used and reliable method for controlling weeds in wheat. During the decades ago herbicides and nitrogenous fertilizers like urea and ammonium sulphate as an adjuvants have

Tanveer et al.

58

been combined for joint application to increase efficacy of herbicides. This practice has been labeled the "weed and feed" concept and gave best control of weeds (Gronwald et al., 1993; Young and Hart, 1998) with an increase in grain yield. Bazuglov and Gafurov, (2002) and Acciaresi et al., (2003) reported that tank mixed application of N with herbicides significantly increased the wheat biomass and grain yield and decreased the weed biomass. In light of the crop losses due to weeds in wheat, present experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of fluroxypyr + MCPA and terbutryn alone and fluroxypyr + MCPA with urea on broad-leaved weeds and yield and yield components of wheat.


Two field experiments were conducted for two consecutive years to study the effect of fluroxypyr + MCPA alone and with urea and terbutryn on weeds and yield components of wheat at University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (Latitude 1.26o N, Longitude 73 o E and Altitude 84.4 cm), Pakistan, during 2004-05 and 2005-06. The soil was sandy loam with 8.2 pH and 0.65% organic matter. The trial was laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with 4-replications, having a net plot size of 1.25 cm x 8 m. Wheat genotype “Watan” was sown on 22 November, 2004 and 2005, in 25 cm apart rows using a seed rate of 125 kg ha-1 with a single row hand drill. Fertilizer was applied @ 125 kg N and 100 kg P2O5

ha-1. Urea and Diammonium phosphate were used as source of N and P, respectively. Whole of P and half of N was applied as a basal dose while, remaining half of N was applied at first irrigation (21 DAS). Treatments included in first experiment were: weedy check, fluroxypyr + MCPA (Strive-M 30WP) @ 450, 360 g a. i. ha-1 alone and each with 3% urea solution. In second experiment terbutryn (Topgrow-90WDG) was sprayed @ 180, 270 and 380 g a. i. ha-1 in comparison with weedy check.

Fluroxypyr + MCPA was available in pre-mixed form. Both fluroxypyr + MCPA and terbutryn were applied after the first irrigation (at 3-4 leaf stage of crop growth) with the help of knapsack hand sprayer fitted with a flat-fan nozzle using spray volume of 300 L ha-1. Data on weed count (21days after treatment application), weed dry weight and number of spike bearing tillers at harvest in both experiments were collected from an area of 1 m2 selected at random from each experimental plot. Weeds were analyzed at harvest for NPK uptake. Average number of grains per spike was taken from ten spikes selected at random from each plot. Two samples each of 1000-grains were taken from produce of each plot to record average 1000-grain weight. Data collected were analyzed statistically using the Fisher’s analysis of variance techniques. Treatment means were compared by using LSD at 5% probability (Steel et al., 1997).

The effect of fluroxypyr + MCPA applied with urea and terbutryn alone on ...

59


Experiment I Effect on weeds

The common weeds Fumaria indica L. (Fumitory), Melilotus indica L. (Indian clover) and Anagalis arvensis L. (Blue pimpernel) were recorded in the field in first experiment. Fumaria indica was dominant weed in both years. Application of fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 and 450 g a. i. ha-1 alone or with 3% urea solution significantly reduced the density of F. indica at 21days after treatment (DAT) over weedy check (Table 1). In the growing season of 2004-05 fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 and 450 g a. i.ha-1 showed significantly more control of M. indica than both rates of this herbicide applied with 3% urea solution. During 2005-06 season combined application of fluroxypyr + MCPA at 450 g a. i. ha-1 and 3% urea solution performed better in respect of M. indica control. Fluroxypyr + MCPA completely controlled A. arvensis when applied at 450 g a. i. ha-1 with 3% urea solution (Table 1). It did not differ significantly from other treatments, except fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 g a. i. ha-1 in 2004-05. Fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 and 450 g a. i. ha-1 with and without 3% urea solution gave statistically similar control of weeds during 2004-05, but better control of weeds was noted when fluroxypyr + MCPA was applied either at 350 or 450 g a. i. ha-1 with 3% urea solution in 2005-06. Sole application of fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 or 450 g a. i. ha-1 or in combination with 3% urea solution caused statistically significant reduction in total dry weight of weeds at harvest in 2004-05. Maximum reduction in dry weight of weeds was recorded in plots treated with fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 g a. i. ha-1 followed by fluroxypyr + MCPA at 450 g a. i. ha-1 each applied with 3% urea solution. Yield attributes and grain yield The number of spike bearing tillers of wheat was significantly increased at either rate of fluroxypyr + MCPA compared to untreated weedy check (Table 2). The rates of fluroxypyr + MCPA each with 3% urea solution resulted in more grains per spike than weedy check in 2004-05 whereas, both rates of herbicide with and without 3% urea solution resulted in more grains per spike than weedy check in 2005-06. Both rates of fluroxypyr + MCPA with and without urea gave higher grain weight than weedy check during both years. Maximum weight was recorded in fluroxypyr + MCPA at 360 g a. i. ha-1 and 360 g a. i. ha-1 + 3% urea solution in 2004-05 and 2005-06, respectively. Herbicidal treatments of fluroxypyr + MCPA with and without urea increased grain yield of wheat in both years compared to weedy check. Maximum increase in grain yield (6.23%) over weedy check in 2004-05 was recorded in plots treated with fluroxypyr + MCPA @ 450 g a. i. ha-1 without

Tanveer et al.

60

urea (Table 2) which was statistically at par with other weed control treatments. Whereas, in 2005-06 maximum increase (8.8%) was noted in plots treated with lower rate of herbicide mixed with 3% urea. Experiment II Effect on weeds

The major weed species present in the second experimental area were F. indica L. Rumex dentatus, M. indica, Chenopodium album, A. arvensis L. and Convolvulus arvensis. Application of terbutryn significantly reduced the weed density and its dry weight (Table 3). The weed control efficiency of terbutryn was increased with increasing rate of application. Application of terbutryn @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 showed higher weed control efficiency (WCE) than its other two rates. Terbutryn applied @ 180 g a. i. ha-1 was less effective in controlling F. indica and M. indica.

Nutrient uptake

Application of terbutryn at different rates resulted in significant decrease in NPK uptake by broad-leaved weeds than weedy check during both the years (Table 4). Among the different rates of terbutryn, 380 g a. i. ha-1 though at par with other rates but reduced the N (0.37-0.51Kg ha-1), P (0.08-0.11Kg ha-1) and K (0.23-0.32 Kg ha-1) uptake by weeds significantly than weedy check.

Yield attributes and grain yield

Maximum spike bearing tillers were recorded with terbutryn applied @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 and remained at par with terbutryn @ 180 and 270 g a. i. ha-1 in 2004-2005 but it was significantly higher than other levels in 2005-06. Terbutryn @ 180, 270 and 380 g a. i. ha-1 gave statistically similar number of grains per spike and 1000-grain weight but significantly higher over weedy check during both years. Maximum grain yield (4827 Kg ha-1) (Table 4) of wheat was observed with terbutryn applied @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 but remained at par with rest of two levels of terbutryn in 2004-05. In 2005-06 application of terbutryn @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 again produced the highest grain yield and it was significantly higher than terbutryn @ 180 g a. i. ha-1. Terbutryn @ 180, 270 and 380 g a. i. ha-1 increased the grain yield of wheat by 27.12, 28.20 and 30.20%, respectively over weedy check in 2004-05. In 2005-06 terbutryn @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 resulted in an increase of 33.16% in grain yield.

Maximum number of weeds per unit area in weedy check was due to undisturbed weed growth, whereas significant decrease in individual and total number of F. indica, M. Indica and A. arvensis could be attributed to better weed control with fluroxypyr + MCPA applied either alone or with 3% urea solution. These results are supported by the findings of Gronwald et al., (1993) and Young and Hart, (1998).


61

The dry weight of weeds decreased significantly at both rates of fluroxypyr + MCPA applied with or without urea solution compared to weedy check. This might be related to the less number of weeds per unit area in treated plots. Acciaresi et al., (2003) also reported decrease in weed biomass by tank mix application of N with herbicides. Significant decrease in number of weeds and NPK uptake by weeds in terbutryn treatments than weedy check was due to mortality caused by terbutryn that also resulted in decreased dry weight of weeds.

The spike bearing tillers were generally more in treated plots. It could be attributed to better weed control and less competition which might had favoured wheat plants to absorb more water and nutrients for better growth. There was an increase in number of grains and 1000-grain weight of wheat with the application of herbicide at both rates with or without urea solution. Better utilization of environmental resources by wheat due to better weed control resulted in better grain development and bigger grain size in treated plots. Increase in spike bearing tillers, grains per spike, 1000-grain weight as a result of herbicide application had also been reported by Khan et al., (2003). The grain yield of wheat at both rates of fluroxypyr + MCPA applied either alone or after mixing with urea solution was higher than the weedy check. This is result of increase in number of spike bearing tillers, grains per spike and 1000-grain weight. Increase in grain yield of wheat as a result of better weed control either with herbicide alone or with combined use of herbicide and urea was reported by Prishchepa, (2001), Bazuglov and Gafurov, (2002) and Acciaresi et al., (2003).

Increase in grain yield in terbutryn treatments compared with weedy check again might had been due to an increase in yield contributing attributes. More grain yield in plots where terbutryn was applied @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 than that of 180 and 270 g a. i. ha-1 treated plots was due to more number of spike bearing tillers in 2005-06.

Conclusion

On the basis of two years results, it could be concluded that the application of fluroxypyre+MCPA @ 360 g a. i. ha-1 and terbutryn @ 380 g a. i. ha-1 is an option for the farmers to control broad-leaved weeds in wheat.

References

ACCIARESI, H. A., M. L. BRAVO, BALBI H V AND CHIDICHIMO H O. (2003): Response of weed population to tillage, reduced herbicide and fertilizer rate in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production. Planta Daninha 21: 105-110 (CAB Absts., 2003).

Tanveer et al.

62

BAZUGLOV V G, AND GAFUROV R M. 2002. Effectiveness of fertilizer containing sodium in spray tank mixture with herbicides on sowing of winter wheat. Agrokhimiya 9: 41-46 (CAB Absts., 2004).

GORONWALD J W, JORDAN S W, WYSE D L, SOMERS D A AND MAGNUSSON M U. (1993): Effect of ammonium sulphate on absorption of imazethapyr by quack grass and maize cell suspension culture. Weed Science 41: 325-334.

KHAN N, NAVEED K AND KHAN I. (2003): Find out the efficacy of different weed control measures on weed control and on yield and yield components of wheat crop. Pakistan Journal of Agriculture Science 2: 1024-1026.

PRISHCHEPA I A. (2001): Biological aspects of changes in the action of herbicides when used in combination with mineral salts and surface-active substances in crops of spring barley and winter wheat. Vestsi Akademii Agrarnykh Navuk Respubliki Belarus 4: 47-53 (CAB Absts., 2003).

STEEL RGD, TORRIE JH, DICKY D. (1997): Principles and Procedures of Statistics. Multiple comparison. 3rd Ed. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, U.S.A, pp. 178-198.

YOUNG B G AND HART S E. (1998): Optimizing foliar activity of isoxaflutele on giant foxtail with various adjuvants. Weed Science 46: 397-402.


63

Table 1. Effect of fluroxypyr + MCPA with and without urea on broad-leaved weeds and their dry weight in wheat

Weed density (No m-2) 21 DAS

F. indica

M. indica

A. arvensis

Total density

Total Weed dry weight (g

m-2)

Herbicide

Dose g a. i.

ha-

1

Urea solution %

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

Weedy check

- - 71.7 a

18.2 a

8.0 a

7.5 a

6.0 a

4.0 a

85.7 a

39.5 a

10.4 a

8.2 a Fluroxypyr+

MCPA 360

- 12.2 b

0.5 b

1.0 c

3.2 b

1.7 b

0.0b

15.0 b

4.5 b

7.2 b

2.5 b

Fluroxypyr+MCPA

450

- 11.5 b

0.5 b

0.5 c

1.5c

0.2 c

0.2 b

12.2 b

4.7 b

7.9 b

2.8 b

Fluroxypyr+MCPA

360

3 11.7 b

0.1 b

4.2 b

0.0d

1.0 bc

0.1 b

17.2 b

2.5 c

6.8 b

0.0 d

Fluroxypyr+MCPA

450

3 14.0 b

0.5 b

2.7 bc

0.2 d

0.0 c

0.0 b

16.7 b

1.7 c

7.2 b

1.0 c

LSD (P=0.05)

13.3

0.7 6

2.46

1.024

1.342

0.660

13.293

1.807

1.203

0.674

Means sharing the same letter in a column did not differ significantly at 5% probability level. DAS: Days after spray

Tanveer et al.

64

Table 2. Effect of fluroxypyr + MCPA with and without urea on yield components and yield of wheat

Means sharing the same letter in a column did not differ significantly at 5% probability level.

Spike bearing tillers (No m-2)

Grains per spike (No)

1000-grain weight (g)

Grain yield t ha-1

% increase in yield over

weedy check

Herbicide

Dose g a. i. ha-1

Urea solution %

2004-05 2005-06 2004- 05

2005 - 06

2004-05 2005-06 2004- 05

2005- 06

2004-05

2005-06

Weedy check - - 238b 258c 48.17b 38.50c 40.15c 40.64d 3.63b 3.77c

Fluroxypyr+MCPA 360 - 266a 276b 49.27ab 43.50a 40.82bc 43.70ab 4.54a 5.83a 20.07 54.64

Fluroxypyr+MCPA 450 - 284a 275b 48.77ab 42.00b 42.62a 42.50c 4.44a 5.22b 22.31 38.46

Fluroxypyr+MCPA 360 3 285a 279b 51.02a 41.75b 42.02ab 44.25a 4.36a 6.05a 20.1 60.48

Fluroxypyr+MCPA 450 3 276a 290a 50.75a 42.00b 41.62ab 43.25bc 4.22a 5.77a 16.25 53.05

LSD (P=0.05) 20.35 5.41 2.27 1.36 1.39 0.75 0.31 0.41


65

Table 3. Effect of terbutryn on broad leaved weeds count and their dry weight in wheat Weed density (No m-2) 21 DAS

F. indica R. dentatus M. indica C. album A. arvensis C. arvensis Total Dry weight (g) WCE% Herbicide

Dose g a. i. ha-1

2004- 05

2005- 06

2004-05

2005- 06

2004- 05

2005- 06

2004-05

2005 -06

2004- 05

2005-06

2004- 05

2005-06

2004- 05

2005- 06

2004- 05

2005- 06

2004- 05

2004- 05

Terbutryn 180 48.25 b 17.00 b 4.00 b 2.00 b 19.25 b 3.00 b 2.00 b 1.00 b 0.75 b 0.50 b 5.00 b 1.50 b 71.25 b 22.75 b 4.50 b 5.25 b 91.16 75.86

Terbutryn 270 20.75 c 11.75 c 2.50 c 1.00 bc 12.50 c 2.50 b 1.00 b 1.00 b 0.75 b 0.50 b 4.00 bc 1.25 b 48.25 c 18.25 b 4.25 b 5.00 b 92.1 77.0

Terbutryn 380 7.00 d 7.25 d 1.00 d 0.50 c 9.0 c 2.00 b 0.75 b 0.00 b 0.50 b 0.00 b 3.00 c 1.00 b 21.25 d 12.75 c 3.25 b 4.50 b 93..9 79.31

Weedy check

- 137.3a 18.50 a 9.00 a 4.50 a 52.50 a 21.25a 19.50 a 4.25 a 41.50a 10.00a 25.25a 10.0 a 285.0 a 68.50 a 53.75a 21.75a - -

LSD (P=0.05)

- 2.247 1.202 1.079 0.917 3.472 2.001 1.437 0.871 10.844 0.808 1.468 0.691 7.159 3.719 1.404 0.649 - -

Means sharing the same letter in a column did not differ significantly at 5% probability level. DAS: Days after spray

Tanveer et al.

66

Table 4. Effect of terbutryn on nutrient uptake by broad-leaved weeds, yield and yield components of wheat Spike bearing

tillers m-2 Grains per spike 1000-grain

weight (g) Grain yield (t ha-1)

N uptake P uptake (kg ha-1)

K uptake Treatment

Dose g a. i. ha-1

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06 2004-05 2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

2004-05

2005-06

Terbutryn 180 358 a 293b 45.25 a 47.25 a 35.97 a 43.51 a 3.70 a (27.12)

4.50 b (24.14)

0.87 b 0.96 b 0.34 b 0.16 b 0.73 b 0.81 b

Terbutryn 270 356 a 294b 46.25 a 49.00 a 36.25 a 42.97 a 3.78 a (28.20)

4.61 ab (27.23)

0.73 b 0.91 b 0.14 b 0.13 b 0.46 b 0.57 c

Terbutryn 360 359a 314a 47.75 a 48.00 a 39.98 a 42.97 a 3.84 a (30.33)

4.82 a (33.16)

0.37 b 0.51 b 0.08 b 0.11 b 0.23 b 0.32 d

Weedy check - 305b 227c 39.50 b 36.20 b 29.16 b 33.90 b 2.95 b 3.63 c 11.68 a 4.89 a 1.95 a 0.79 a 16.09 a 6.50 a

LSD 12.29 6.72 2.630 2.346 3.365 0.458 58.307 126.707 0.900 0.388 0.326 0.425 0.480 0.953

Means sharing the same letter in a column did not differ significantly at 5% probability level.

Figures in parenthesis showed increase in grain yield (%) over weedy check.


ROLE OF ADJUVANTS ON HERBICIDE BEHAVIOR: A REVIEW OF DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES

Zvonko Pacanoski

Faculty for Agricultural Sciences and Food, Skopje, R. Macedonia E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstract

Adjuvants are any substance either in a herbicide formulation or

added to the spray tank, that modifies herbicidal activity or application characteristics.The interactions between herbicide formulations and adjuvants, however, are not simple and depend on factors which include crop/weed leaf surface, droplet characteristics, adjuvant type, chemical form of the herbicide and environmental conditions. Understanding the complexity of these interactions is essential for herbicide optimum utilization, particularly in prolonging, enhancing and improving the efficacy, reduction of the critical rain-free period, minimizes herbicide leaching into groundwater and decrease harmful affects to non-target plants and animals.

Keywords: adjuvants, herbicide efficacy, interactions

Introduction

Pesticide adjuvants or additives are commonly used in agriculture to

improve the performance of pesticides (Curran et al., 1999). Holland (1996) defined adjuvant generally as a “formulant designed to enhance the activity or other properties of a pesticide mixture”. Foy (1989) and Ferrell et al., (2008) shortly describe adjuvants as a “additives, or an ingredients that aid or modifie the action of the principal ingredient” and “substances used with a herbicide or other pesticide to enhance performance”, respectively. From the other side, many other authors defined adjuvant on more detail ways. According Curran et al., (1999) “an adjuvant is any substance in a herbicide formulation or added to the spray tank to improve herbicidal activity or application characteristics” or “an adjuvant is any compound that can be added to a herbicide formulation to facilitate the mixing, application, or effectiveness of that herbicide” (Tu and Randall, 2003). For Storrie et al., (2002) adjuvants are “any substance either in a herbicide formulation or added to the spray tank, that modifies herbicidal activity or application characteristics”. According the last definition, adjuvants are already included in the formulations of some herbicides available for sale, or they may be purchased separately and added into a tank mix prior to use (Pringnitz, 1998).

Z. Pacanoski

68

In order to be effective, herbicides must overcome a variety of barriers to their entry into plants. Adjuvants have been developed to assist herbicides firstly contact the weed target, then remain on and penetrate the weed leaf surface (DiTomaso, 1999; Hull et al., 1982). Formulation adjuvants allow better mixing and handling with herbicide active ingredient. Adjuvants can significantly enhance and improve a herbicide’s efficacy so that the concentration or total amount of herbicide required to achieve a given effect is reduced (WSSA, 1982; Hart et al., 1992; Knoche, 1994; Nalewaja et al., 1995; Jordan 1996; Green and Hazen, 1998; Bunting et al., 2004). In this way, adding an appropriate adjuvant can decrease the amount of herbicide applied and lower total costs for weed control (Green, 1992; Underwood, 2000). In some situations, an adjuvant may enhance the formulation’s ability to kill the targeted species without harming other plants (Hess and Foy, 2000). From environmental aspect, adjuvants can reduce leaching of herbicide through the soil profile (Reddy, 1993).

However, it is important to note that in some circumstances, adding adjuvants will not significantly improve control (Bunting et al., 2004). Sometimes adjuvants can have negative effects, such as actually decreasing the killing power of the herbicide (antagonistic effects) (Kammler et al., 2010), increasing the formulation’s ability to spread or persist in the environment where it is not wanted (Swarcewicz et al., 1998; Kucharski, 2004), or otherwise increasing harmful affects to non-target plants (Johnson, 1985; Frihauf et al., 2005) and aquatic species (Tyler, 1997; Parr, 1982).

Therefore, the objective of this report was to summarize the available information and bring together new information and recent trends on the role of adjuvants on herbicides behavior using different examples and experiences.

Herbicide efficacy – adjuvant interactions

Surfactants are the most widely used and probably the most important of all adjuvants (Miller and Westra, 1998). Surfactants reduce surface tension in the spray droplet and directly influence the absorption of herbicides by changing the viscosity and crystalline structure of waxes on leaf and stem surfaces, so that they are more easily penetrated by the herbicide (Kirkwood 1999; Coret et al., 1993). Surfactants can be especially effective in improving the biological activity of many herbicides (Green and Cahill, 2003; Green and Green, 1993; Manthey et al., 1992). Methylated seed oils (MSO) increases foliar absorption and efficacy of primisulfuron, rimsulfuron, imazethapyr, quinclorac and several graminicides for grass weed control (Hart et al., 1992; Hart and Wax, 1996; Zawierucha and Penner, 2001; Hutchinson et al., 2004). Crop oil concentrates (COC) and MSO have been

Role of adjuvants on herbicide behavior: a review of different experiences

69

shown to further enhance the effectiveness of chlorimuron and imazethapyr on purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus L.). Chlorimuron controlled Cyperus rotundus L. more effectively with COC than with a nonionic surfactant (NIS) or organosilicone surfactant (OSS), but imazethapyr was more effective with OSS or COC than NIS (Jordan, 1996). Seed-oil-based crop oils and organosilicone adjuvants combined with halosulfuron provided greater control of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus L.) (100%) 8 weeks after treatment (WAT) than the nonionic or paraffin-based crop oil adjuvants (<90%) ( McDaniel et al., 2001). Similar results were found in studies of McDaniel et al., (1999) who reported that >90% control of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) in container landscape plants was achieved with late-spring applications of halosulfuron at 18 g/ha combined with 0.5% (v/v) rate of either the soybean crop oil Scoil®, or the sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) crop oil Sun-It II®. Increased control with nicosulfuron on yellow foxtail [Setaria glauca (L.) Beauv.] and large crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop.] with MSO compared with other oil and surfactant adjuvants has been reported by Nalewaja et al., (1995). The other researchers have shown that the addition of MSO increases foliar efficacy and herbicide absorption (Hart and Wax, 1996; Jordan et al., 1996). Young and Hart (1998) reported that isoxaflutole applied with MSO provided greater giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm.) control compared with isoxaflutole applied with NIS or COC. The addition of an organosilicone (OSL) adjuvant to primisulfuron spray solution increased foliar herbicide absorption, spray retention, and control of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm.) compared with adding a NIS to the spray solution (Hart et al., 1992). The addition of ammonium sulfate (AMS) or urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) to the spray solution can enhance herbicide effectiveness by further increasing herbicide absorption (Bunting et al., 2004; Miller et al., 1999) which gives better result up to 12 to 13.5 percent than use of herbicide alone (Getmanetz et al., 1991). McWhorter (1971) with johnsongrass [Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.] and Wills (1971) with purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus L.) enhanced the phytotoxicity of MSMA and dalapon by the addition of AMS and potassium phosphate to the spray solutions. Wills (1973) reported that AMS and potassium phosphate each increased the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Wills and McWhorter (1985) further reported that the monovalent cations NH4

+ and K+ in combination with anions including NO3

-, Cl-, and CO32- increased the phytotoxicity of

glyphosate. Glyphosate isopropylamine, bentazon sodium, 2,4-D dimethylamine, and dicamba sodium were all equally effective when AMS was added to the spray tank before or after the herbicide. The benefit of AMS in enhancing herbicide efficacy was greatest when used with spray water high in cations (Nalewaja et al., 2007). Also, several studies have indicated that AMS may be used to overcome an antagonism between two herbicides

Z. Pacanoski

70

(Jordan et al., 1989; Young et al., 1996). The antagonism between bentazon and sethoxydim was overcome with the addition of AMS and by changing the adjuvant from a COC to a highly concentrated oil-based adjuvant (Cantwell and Kapustra, 1986; Jordan et al., 1989). Applying UAN (0.4 or 0.8 g/ha) and organosilicone-based nonionic surfactant (OSL/NIS) or methylated seed oil/organosilicone (MSO/OSL) adjuvant with bispyribac enhanced efficacy and reduced the time period required affected bispyribac efficacy on barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv]. Bunting et al., (2004) reported 90% or greater giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm.) control with the addition of MSO or MSO plus 28% UAN. 20% control of giant foxtail was obtained when a COC or a NIS was added to foramsulfuron, whereas control increased to 90 and 85%, when 28% UAN was added to COC or NIS, respectively. Density, fresh and dry weight of Trianthema portulacastrum L., Cyperus rotundus L. and Coronopus didymus L. 40 days after sowing and at harvest of maize decreased significantly when foramsulfuron + isoxadifen-ethyl was applied at 1125 g/ha a.i. plus 3% UAN solution as adjuvant as compared to herbicide alone. Finally, UAN used as adjuvant reduced up to 10 percent herbicide dose without compromising on maize yield loss due to weeds (Naveed et al., 2008). Considering the wide-spread use of tribenuron-methyl, the identification of the most appropriate adjuvant for tribenuron-methyl against different weed species was found to be necessary (Zollinger, 2005). The activity of tribenuron-methyl was significantly enhanced by NIS (20% isodecyl alcohol ethoxylate plus 0.7% silicone surfactants), an anionic surfactant (25.5% alkylethersulfate sodium salt), and a vegetable oil (95% natural rapeseed oil with 5% compound emulsifiers) on Sinapis arvensis L., Tripleurospermum inodorum (L.) Sch.Bip., Papaver rhoeas L. and Chenopodium album L., and only minor differences were observed among the tested adjuvants (Pannacci et al., 2010). Beside on the sulfonylureas, addition of adjuvants greatly improved efficacy of saflufenacil, a new PPO-inhibited herbicide. For example, ED90 values for field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.) control at 28 days after treatment (DAT) were 71, 20, 11, and 7 g/ha for saflufenacil applied alone, or with nonionic surfactant (NIS), crop oil concentrate (COC), or methylated seed oil (MSO), respectively. MSO was the adjuvant that provided the greatest enhancement of saflufenacil across all broadleaf weed species tested- Taraxacum officinale Web., Convolvulus arvensis L., Thlaspi arvense L., Lamium amplexicaule L., Lactuca serriola L. and Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medis. (Knezevic, et al., 2009). Murphy et al., (1995) investigated the influence of different adjuvants on flamprop-M-isopropyl efficacy in controlling of Avena spp. The mean results from six trials (five wheat, one barley) showed that the addition of adjuvants, “Swirl” and “Dobanol” 25–7 was beneficial, increasing wild oat floret control from a mean value of 80%


71

to 92% at current recommended rates (flamprop-M-isopropyl, 600 g/ha; “Swirl”, 2.5 l/ha). However, combinations of flamprop-M-isopropyl and “Dobanol” 25-7 gave superior levels of control even at lower a.i. application rates. For example, a mean level of 96% control of Avena spp. was obtained at 300 g/ha a.i. with 1200 g/ha ‘Dobanol’ 25–7; with even better control at higher rates of application of both components.

Herbicide absorption/translocation – adjuvant interaction

Considering environmental factors, rain shortly after herbicide application is one of the most detrimental issues for herbicide performance. Adjuvants have been shown to improve the rainfastness of herbicides and the effect on rainfastness should be considered when selecting an adjuvant (Kudsk et al. 1989; Kudsk and Mathiassen, 2004). Field and Bishop (1988) and Roggenbuck et al., (1990) reported that the addition of an OSL adjuvant to glyphosate reduced its critical rain-free period. The reduction of the critical rain-free period was attributed to decreased liquid surface tension of glyphosate caused by the OSL adjuvant and subsequent promotion of stomatal infiltration of glyphosate into the plant. Reddy and Singh (1992) reported the benefit of OSL adjuvants in reducing the critical rain-free period after glyphosate application at 0.125%. Studies with 14C-labeled glyphosate have demonstrated that plants absorb as little as 22% of the amount applied; however, the addition of surfactant improved absorption up to 35% (Ruiter and Meinen, 1998). For instance, the OSL adjuvants produced rapid absorption of the 14C-glyphosate into the redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) leaves, reaching maximum absorption within 0.5–1.0 h after application (HAT). The conventional adjuvants produced slower absorption of the 14C-glyphosate, as the maximum absorption was not achieved until at least 24 HAT in redroot pigweed, remaining similar until 72 h (Singh and Singh, 2008). Non-silicone surfactant (NSS) “Browndown” increased the speed and quantity of glyphosate uptake, with no adverse effects on herbicide translocation. At the recommended rate (0.25% v/v), this surfactant reduced spray retention compared to OSS, “Pulse” (0.1% v/v), but provided faster brown-out of foliage and equivalent herbicide efficacy on glyphosate-tolerant ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) in spring (Murray et al., 1998). Surfactants of higher ethylene oxide (EO) content provided greater uptake enhancement in wheat, broad bean and common lambsquarters for glyphosate, whereas those of lower EO content were more beneficial for 2,4-D uptake (Liu, 2004). Addition of the water conditioning agent Quest® (0.25% v/v) to glyphosate spray mixtures diminished the influence of simulated rain events following glyphosate application (Smith et al., 1999). OSS increased rainfastness of primisulfuron on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medicus) more than other

Z. Pacanoski

72

adjuvants, although no differences in velvetleaf control occurred under rain-free conditions (Sun et al., 1996). NIS (20% isodecyl alcohol ethoxylate plus 0.7% silicone surfactants), an anionic surfactant (25.5% alkylethersulfate sodium salt), and a vegetable oil (95% natural rapeseed oil with 5% compound emulsifiers) significantly improved the rainfastness of tribenuron-methyl on Tripleurospermum inodorum, with differences among the adjuvants being more pronounced when rain occurred shortly after herbicide application. The effect of the vegetable oil on tribenuron-methyl’s rainfastness was significantly lower than that of the surfactants with rain at 1 HAT, while no significant differences among the three adjuvants were observed when rain occurred at 2 and 4 HAT (Pannacci et al., 2010). The addition of UAN decreased the rainfast period from 8 h (registered rainfast period) to 1 or 4 h (99 to 100% control) when either the between bispyribac application and wash-off during a rainfall event (Koger et al., 2007).

Contrary of the surfactants, water repellents adjuvants increase surface tension, thus inhibiting wetting of the leaf surface. The water repellent DC 1-6184 may have some utility for reducing corn injury when isoxaflutole is applied to corn foliage at early growth stages (Sprague et al., 1999). These results are consistent with the observation of Nelson and Penner, (2006) that DC 1-6184 applied in combination with herbicide safener R-29148 and isoxaflutole reduced injury to spike-stage corn (28%) as compared with isoxaflutole applied alone (53%) or isoxaflutole applied with only R-29148 (37%). Same authors (Penner and Fausey, 2001) found that DC 1-6184 consistently reduced retention of flumioxazin spray on plant foliage by increasing the number of droplets that bounced off the foliage. Flumioxazin spray had the greatest retention of all herbicide treatments on tomato when DC 1-6184 was included. Also, the same water repellent, DC 1-6184, reduced isoxaflutole retention on tomato, wheat and cabbage (Nelson and Penner, 2006).

Herbicide - environment – adjuvant interaction From environmental aspect, adjuvants can weakly bind herbicides and

release them slowly in order to prolong the efficacy of herbicides and to minimize their leaching into groundwater. Enersol 12% adjuvant resulted in a 13%–18% reduction in leaching of dicamba and bromacil in five pore volumes of leachate. The leaching of simazine was significantly decreased when charcoal, three humic substances (Enersol SP 85%, Enersol 12%, and Agroliz), and a synthetic polymer (Hydrosorb) were used. However, the decrease in leaching was significantly greater when using Enersol SP 85% or Enersol 12% (24%–28%) than when using the other adjuvants (12%–16%) (Alva and Singh, 1991). In study of Locke et al., (2002) nonionic, cationic,


73

and anionic adjuvants generally increased the water solubility of cyanazine, atrazine and norflurazon (10 to 91%). Cyanazine and atrazine sorption (Kd) was reduced in most soils with nonionic adjuvant (ranged 1.18 to 4.50 and 1.59 to 4.28, respectively) compared with water alone (1.36 to 5.59 and 1.75 to 4.59, respectively), whereas norflurazon sorption was increased with nonionic adjuvant (range: 3.88 to 8.76 in water; 4.66 to 9.82 in adjuvant). Similarly, more cyanazine and atrazine were desorbed by solutions containing adjuvant than in water, indicating that adjuvants may be useful in remediating some soils contaminated with certain herbicides.

No or negative herbicide – adjuvant interactions

In many situations, as it was mentioned above, adjuvant can

significantly enhance an herbicide’s effect (Green and Hazen, 1998). However, it is important to note that in some circumstances, adding adjuvants will not significantly improve control. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) control with annual picloram or picloram plus 2,4-D treatments was similar whether applied alone or with a variety of adjuvants in the field (Lym and Manthey, 1996). Addition of laffmul DA and ethoxylated castor oil (EO 40) – both non-ionic crop oil concentrates surfactants reduced the efficacy of glufosinate ammonium and 2,4-D Na salts in controlling of Cyperus rotundus and Oxalis latifolia (Devendra et al., 2004). Addition of sulphuric acid and/or of AMS to spray solution does not increase herbicide activity of glyphosate (Vargas et al., 1997). This claim is corroborated by results of Breeden et al., (1998) who reported that AMS additions to glyphosate, while not decreasing effectiveness, did not improve efficacy over glyphosate applied alone to sicklepod [Senna obtusifolia (L.) Irwin and Barneby]. The addition of two polysaccharide adjuvants decreased the percentage of the spray volume in small diam spray droplets (<141 mm) and either had no effect or increased glyphosate efficacy (Jones et al., 2007). One disadvantage to the use of surfactants with glyphosate is the postapplication effect. Surfactants tend to reduce the translocation efficiency of glyphosate within the plant (Ruiter and Meinen, 1998). Studies with water-stressed plants have shown that surfactants do enhance absorption, even under stress, but they decrease movement of the herbicide once it is inside the plant tissue (Ruiter and Meinen, 1998). Glyphosate application rate was more important than adjuvant addition or sprayer type, with the higher rates of application providing greater control (Faircloth et al., 2004).

Sometimes adjuvants can decrease the killing power of the herbicide (antagonistic effects). The efficacy of sethoxydim or clethodim on large crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop.] was antagonized by the addition of halosulfuron with NIS or COC. From the other side, combinations of

Z. Pacanoski

74

sethoxydim and halosulfuron with COC or MSO were antagonistic on smooth crabgrass (Digitaria ischaemum Schreb. ex Muhl.) (Kammler et al., 2010).

Some adjuvants can increase harmful affects to non-target plants. Imazamox applied at 108 g/ha plus 1% (v/v) methylated seed oil (MSO) applied in the fall consistently injured all wheat cultivars more than the same rate with NIS at 0.25% and 54 g/ha imazamox regardless of adjuvant and timing (Frihauf et al., 2005). Injury caused by these treatments ranged from 23 to 70% for all cultivars. Adjuvant affected cotton injury from CGA 362622. NIS resulted in increased cotton injury at 29%, whereas COC increased cotton injury to 37%. (Richardson et al., 2004). Crooks et al., (2003) reported similar injury from CGA 362622 with either NIS or COC. Flumioxazin did not injure wheat or cabbage except when the silicone adjuvant was added, which increased retention of the spray solution (Nelson and Penner, 2006)

Sometimes adjuvants can have negative effects, such as increasing the formulation’s ability to spread or persist in the environment where it is not wanted. According Kucharski and Sadowski, (2006) the addition of adjuvants caused an increase of the residues of active ingredients in the soil and roots of sugar beet compared to plots with a reduced dose of herbicide without adjuvants. Swarcewicz (1996) and Swarcewicz et al. (1998) described experiments in which influence of adjuvants on trifluralin degradation were tested. 50 DAT residues of trifluralin amounted 38% of initial dose and in treatments with adjuvants residues ranged from 42 to 49% of initial dose. In similar experiment Kucharski, (2004) also proved that the addition of adjuvants slowed down the degradation and increased the level of phenmedipham residue in the soil. Some adjuvants can have adverse effects on aquatic species, and certain types can be extremely toxic to fish and shellfish (Tyler, 1997). Parr (1982) reports that some adjuvants caused noticeable alterations in fish gill tissue, and that the toxicity of these adjuvants increased as exposure time increased.

Conclusions

From all previous mentioned results it can be concluded that the herbicide-adjuvant-plant-environment interaction is a complex system. Understanding the different roles of adjuvants in behavior of herbicides is essential for their optimum utilization. Adjuvants can improve the biological activity of the active ingredient, the performance of the spray application and the economics of herbicide applications, but in some circumstances adjuvants can manifest different negative effects. Therefore, there is no universal


75

adjuvant that can improve the performance for all herbicides, against all weeds, or under all environmental conditions. The herbicide and adjuvant selected and the relative amounts used must be tailored to the specific conditions of each application.

References

ALVA, A.K. and SINGH, M. (1991): Use of adjuvants to minimize leaching of herbicides in soil. Environmental Management .15(2): 263-267.

BREEDEN, G. K., RHODES, G. N., MUELLER, T. C., HAYES, R. M. (1998): Influence of fertilizer additives and surfactants on performance of Roundup Ultra and Touchdown. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:276–277.

BUNTING, J.A., SPRAGUE, C.L., RIECHERS, D.E. (2004): Absorption and activity of foramsulfuron in giant foxtail (Setaria faberi ) and woolly cupgrass (Eriochloa villosa) with various adjuvants. Weed Sci. 52:513–517.

CANTWELL, J.R. and KAPUSTRA, G. (1986): Application of bentazon and sethoxydim in soybean oil with rotary atomizers. Agron. J. 78:478-482.

CORET, J., BAMBONNET, B., BRABET, F., CHAMEL, A. (1993): Diffusion of three ethoxylated octylphenols across isolated plant cuticles. Pesticide Science 38: 201-209.

CROOKS, H. L., YORK, A. C., CULPEPPER, S., BROWNIE, C. (2003): CGA-362622 antagonizes annual grass control by graminicides in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 17:373–380.

CURRAN, W. S., MCGLAMERY, M. D., LIEBL, R. A., LINGENFELTER, D. D. (1999): Adjuvants for enhancing herbicide performance. Agronomy Facts 37. The Pennsylvania State University.

DEVENDRA, R., UMAMAHESH, V., RAMACHANDRA PRASAD, T.V., PRASAD, T.G., ASHA, S.T. (2004): Influence of surfactants on efficacy of different herbicides in control of Cyperus rotundus and Oxalis latifolia. Current Science, 86 (8):1148-1151.

DITOMASO, J.M. (1999): Barriers to foliar penetration and uptake of herbicides. Proceedings of the California Weed Science Society 51: 150-155.

FAIRCLOTH, W.H., PATTERSON, M.G.,BELCHER, S.B., SANDERS, J.C., STEPHENSON, D.O. (2004): Field Performance of glyphosate as influenced by selected adjuvants and a low-volume, air-assisted sprayer. Weed Technol. 18:458–463.

FERRELL, J.A., MACDONALD, G. E., SELLERS, B. (2008): Adjuvants. Agronomy Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

FIELD, R. J. and BISHOP, N. C. (1988): Promotion of stomatal infiltration of glyphosate by an organosilicone surfactant reduces the critical rainfall period. Pestic. Sci. 24:55–62.

FOY, C.L. (1989): Adjuvants terminology, classification and mode of action. In: Adjuvants and Agrochemicals, Vol. I. (ed. by Chow P.N.P., Grant C.A., Hinshalwood A.M. and Simundsson E.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1–17.

Z. Pacanoski

76

FRIHAUF, J.C., MILLER, S.D., ALFORD, G.M. (2005): Imazamox rates, timings, and adjuvants affect imidazolinone-tolerant winter wheat cultivars. Weed Technol.19:599–607.

GETMANETZ, A. Y., KRAMAREV, S. M., VITTSENKO, V. P., BOVYKIN, B. A., TISHKINA, N.S., MATROSOV, A. S. (1991): Chemical compatibility of ZhkU 10-34-0, KAS-28 and herbicides and their combined use in intensive maize growing technology. Agrokhimiya. 11:38-44.

GREEN, J.M. 1992. Increasing efficiency with adjuvants and herbicide mixtures. Proceedings of the First International Weed Control Congress, Melbourne, AU. Pp. 187-192.

GREEN, J. M., BROWN, P. A., BERENGUT, D., KING, M. J. (1992): Nonionic surfactant property effects on thifensulfuron methyl performance. Pages 525–532 in C. L. Foy, ed. Adjuvants for Agrochemicals. Boca Raton,FL: CRC.

GREEN, J. M. and GREEN, J. H. (1993): Surfactant structure and concentration strongly affect rimsulfuron activity. Weed Technol. 7:633–640.

GREEN, J.M. and HAZEN, J.L. (1998): Understanding and using adjuvants properties to enhance pesticide activity. In: McMullan, P.M. (ed.) Adjuvants for Agrochemicals: Challenges and Opportunities. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Adjuvants for Agrochemicals, Chemical Producers Distributors Association, Memphis, TN. pp. 25-36.

HART, S. E., KELLS, J. J., PENNER, D. (1992): Influence of adjuvants on the efficacy, absorption, and spray retention of primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 6:592–598.

HART, S. E. and WAX, L. M. (1996): Dicamba antagonizes grass weed control with imazethapyr by reducing foliar absorption. Weed Technol. 10:828–834.

HESS, F.D. and FOY, C.L. (2000): Interaction of surfactants with plant cuticles. Weed Technol. 14:807-813.

HOLLAND, P.T. (1996): Glossary of terms relating to pesticides. Pure and Applied Chemistry 68, 1167-1193.

HULL, H.M., DAVIS, D.G., STOLZENBERG, G.E. (1982): Action of adjuvants on plant surfaces. In: Adjuvants for Herbicides, WSSA, Champaign, IL. Pgs. 26-67.

HUTCHINSON, P.J.S., EBERLEIN, C. V., TONKS D. J. (2004): Broadleaf weed control and potato crop safety with postemergence rimsulfuron, metribuzin, and adjuvant combinations. Weed Technol. 18:750–756.

JOHNSON, W.T. (1985): Horticultural oils. J. Environ.Hort. 3:188-191. JONES, E.J., HANKS, J.E., WILLS, G.D., MACK, R.E. (2007): Effect of two

polysaccharide adjuvants on glyphosate spray droplet size and efficacy. Weed Technol. 21:171–174.

JORDAN, D. L., YORK, A. C., CORBIN, R. J. (1989): Effect of ammonium sulfate and bentazon on sethoxydim absorption. Weed Technol. 3:674–677.

JORDAN, D. L., VIDRINE, P. R. GRIFFIN, J. L. REYNOLDS, D. B. (1996): Influence of adjuvants on efficacy of clethodim. Weed Technol. 10:738–743.

JORDAN, D. L. (1996): Adjuvants and growth stage affect purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control with chlorimuron and imazethapyr. Weed Technol.10:359–362.

KAMMLER, K.J., WALTERS, S.A., YOUNG, B.G. (2010): Effects of adjuvants, halosulfuron, and grass herbicides on Cucurbita spp. injury and grass control. Weed Technol.24:147–152.

KIRKWOOD, R.C. (1999): Recent developments in our understanding of the plant cuticle as a barrier to the foliar uptake of pesticides. Pesticide Science 55: 69-77.

KNEZEVIC, S.Z., DATTA, A., SCOTT, J., CHARVAT, L.D. (2009): Adjuvants influenced saflufenacil efficacy on fall-emerging weeds. Weed Technol. 23:340–345


77

KNOCHE, M. (1994): Organosilicone surfactant performance in agricultural spray application - a review. Weed Research 34, 221-239.

KOGER, C.H., DODDS, D.M., REYNOLDS, D.B. (2007): effect of adjuvants and urea ammonium nitrate on bispyribac efficacy, absorption, and translocation in barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv).I. Efficacy, rainfastness, and soil moisture. Weed Sci. 55:399–405.

KUCHARSKI, M. (2004): Degradation of phenmedipham in soil under laboratory conditions. Vegetable Crops Research Bulletin 60, 63-70.

KUCHARSKI, M., and SADOWSKI, J. (2006): Effect of adjuvants on herbicide residues level in soil and plant. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection XX, 971-975.

KUDSK, P., MATHIASSEN, S.K., KRISTENSEN, J. (1989): The rainfastness of five sulfonylurea herbicides on Sinapis alba L. Med. Fac. Landbouww. Rijksuniv. Gent. 54, 327–332.

KUDSK, P. and MATHIASSEN, S.K. (2004): Adjuvant effects on the rainfastness of iodosulfuron-methyl + mesosulfuron formulations. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Adjuvants for Agrochemicals . Michael North, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 159–164.

LOCKE, M. A., REDDY, K. N., GASTON, L. A., ZABLOTOWICZ, R. M. (2002): Adjuvant modification of herbicide interactions in aqueous soil suspensions. Soil Science, 167 (7): 444-452.

LIU, Z. (2004): Effects of surfactants on foliar uptake of herbicides – a complex scenario Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces.35 (3-4): 149-153.

LYM, R. G. and MANTHEY, F. A. (1996): Do spray adjuvants increase herbicide effectiveness on leafy spurge? Rangelands, 18(1):17-20.

MANTHEY, F. A., HORSLEY, R. D., NALEWAJA, J. D. (1992): Relationship between surfactant characterisitics and the phytotoxicity of CGA- 136872. Pages 258–270 in L. E. Bode and D. G. Chasin, eds. Pesticide Formulations and Application Systems. Philadelphia, PA:ASTM.

MCDANIEL, G.L., FARE, D.C., WITTE, W.T., FLANAGAN, P.C. (1999): Yellow nutsedge control and nursery crop tolerance with Manage as affected by adjuvant choice. J. Environ.Hort.17 (3):114119.

MCDANIEL, G.L., KLINGEMAN, W.E., WITTE, W.T., FLANAGAN, P.C. (2001): choice of adjuvant with halosulfuron affects purple nutsedge control and nursery crop tolerance. Hortscience 36(6): 1085-1088.

MCWHORTER, C. G. (1971): The effect of alkali metal salts on the toxicity of MSMA and dalapon to johnsongrass. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 11:84.

MILLER, P. A. and WESTRA, P. (1998): How surfactants work, no. 0.564. Colorado State University Cooperative Extension, Crop Fact Sheet. http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/crops/00564.html

MILLER, P. A., WESTRA, P., NISSEN, S. J. (1999): The influence of surfactant and nitrogen on foliar absorption of MON 37500. Weed Sci. 47:270–274.

MURPHY, M. W., CRAVEN, M. L., GRAYSON, B. T. (1995): Reinvestigating adjuvants for the wild oat herbicide, flamprop-M-isopropyl. II: Field performance. Pesticide Sci. 43: 157–162.

MURRAY, R.J., GASKIN, R.E., GRASSAM, M.R. (1998): Evaluation of a novel adjuvant for use with glyphosate on perennial ryegrass. Pesticide Performance and Monitoring Proc. 51st N.Z. Plant Protection Conf. 162-165.

NALEWAJA, J. D., PRACZYK, T., MATYSIAK, R. (1995): Surfactants and oil adjuvants with nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 9:689–695.

NALEWAJA, J.D., WOZNICA, Z., SZELEZNAK, E.F., RAMSDALE, B. (2007): Sequence of tank-mixing water conditioning adjuvants and herbicides. Proceedings of the 8th

Z. Pacanoski

78

International Symposium on Adjuvants for Agrochemicals (ISAA). International Society for Agrochemical Adjuvants (ISAA).

NAVEED, M., AHMAD, R., NADEEM, M.A., NADEEM, S.M., SHAHZAD, K., ANJUM, M.A. (2008): Effect of a new post emergence herbicide application in combination with urea on growth, yield and weeds control in maize, (Zea mays L.) J. Agric. Res., 46(2):157-170.

NELSON, E.A. and PENNER, D.(2006): Enhancing herbicide selectivity with water-repellent adjuvants. Weed Technol. 20:677–681.

NELSON, E.A. and PENNER, D.(2006): Reduction of isoxaflutole injury to corn (Zea mays L.) with herbicide safeners and water-repellent adjuvants. Weed Technol. 20:999–1003.

PANNACCI, E., MATHIASSEN, K.S., KUDSK, P. (2010): Effect of adjuvants on the rainfastness and performance of tribenuron-methyl on broad-leaved weeds. Weed Biol. and Manag. 10, 126–131.

PARR, J.F. (1982): Toxicology of adjuvants. In: Adjuvants for Herbicides, WSSA, Champaign, IL. Pgs. 93-114.

PENNER, D. and FAUSEY, J. C. (2001): Targeting preemergence activity with postemergence applications of flumioxazin. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 41: 172.

PRINGNITZ, B. (1998): Clearing up confusion on adjuvants and additives. Iowa State University Extension Agronomy. http://www.weeds/iastate.edu/mgmt/qtr98-2/cropoils.htm.

REDDY, K.N. and SINGH, M. (1992): Organosilicone adjuvant effects on glyphosate efficacy and rainfastness.Weed Technol. 6, 361–365.

REDDY, K.N. (1993): Effect of acrylic polymer adjuvants on leaching of bromacil, diuron, norfurazon and simazine in soil columns. Bulletin Environment Contamination Toxicology 50, 449-457.

RICHARDSON, R.J., WILSON, H.P., ARMEL, G.R., HINES, T.E. (2004):Influence of adjuvants on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) response to postemergence applications of CGA 362622. Weed Technol.18:9–151.

ROGGENBUCK, F. C., ROWE, L., PENNER, D., PETROFF, L., BUROW, R. (1990): Increasing postemergence herbicide efficacy and rainfastness with silicone adjuvants. Weed Technol. 4:576–580.

RUITER, H. D. AND MEINEN, E. (1998): Influence of water stress and surfactant on the efficacy, absorption, and translocation of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 46:289–296.

SPRAGUE, C. L., PENNER, D., KELLS, J.J. (1999): Protection of corn from early postemergence applications of isoxaflutole with metolachlor + benoxacor. Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. Abstr. 39:137–138...63

SINGH, D. and SINGH, M. (2008): Absorption and translocation of glyphosate with conventional and organosilicone adjuvants. Weed Biol. and Manag. 8, 104–111.

SMITH, B. E., LANGELAND , K. A., HANLON C. G. (1999): Influence of foliar exposure, adjuvants, and rain-free period on the efficacy of glyphosate for torpedograss control. J. Aquat. Plant Manage.37: 13-16.

STORRIE, A., LECKIE, C., MILNE, B. (2002): Using adjuvants, surfactants and oils with herbicides. NSW Agriculture, Weed control in winter crops.

SUN, J., FOY, C. L., WITT, H. L. (1996): Effect of organosilicone surfactants on the rainfastness of primisulfuron in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Technol. 10:263–267.

SWARCEWICZ, M. (1996): Influence of oil adjuvants on trifluralin persistence in light soil. Zeszyty Naukowe AR Szczecin, Rolnictwo 63, 211-217.


79

SWARCEWICZ, M., MULINSKI, Z., ZBIEC, I. (1998): Influence of spray adjuvants on the behavior of trifluralin in the soil. Bulletin Environment Contamination Toxicology 60, 569-576,.

TYLER, M.J. (1997): Environmentally friendly: A false sense of security? Species. Newsletter of the Species Survival Commission, IUCN, The World Conservation Union. 29:20-21.

TU, M. and RANDALL, J.M. (2003): Adjuvants. Weed control methods handbook, The Nature Conservancy. http://www.invasive.org/gist/products/handbook/ 21.Adjuvants.doc.

UNDERWOOD, A.L. (2000): Adjuvant trends for the new millennium. Weed Technol. 14, 765–772.

VARGAS, L., FLECK, N.G., DA CUNHA, M.M., VIDAL, R.A. (1997): Effect of adjuvants added to herbicide spray containing glyphosate. Planta Daninha, 15 (2):206-214.

WILLS, G. D. (1971): Effects of inorganic salts on the toxicity of dalapon and MSMA to purple nutsedge. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 11:84–85.

WILLS, G. D. 1973. Effects of inorganic salts on the toxicity of glyphosate to purple nutsedge. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 13:59.

WILLS, G. D. and MCWHORTER, C. G. (1985): Effect of inorganic salts on the toxicity and translocation of glyphosate and MSMA in purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus). Weed Sci. 33:755–761.

WSSA. (1982): Adjuvants for Herbicides. Weed Science Society of America, Champaign. 144 pgs.

YOUNG, B. G., HART, S. E., WAX, L. M. (1996): Interactions of sethoxydim and corn (Zea mays) postemergence broadleaf herbicides on three annual grasses.Weed Technol. 10:914–922.

YOUNG, B. G. and HART, S. E. (1998): Optimizing foliar activity of isoxaflutole on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) with various adjuvants. Weed Sci. 46:397–402.

ZAWIERUCHA, J. E. and PENNER, D. (2001): Adjuvant efficacy with quinclorac in canola (Brassica napus) and turf grass. Weed Technol. 15:220–223.

ZOLLINGER, R.K. (2005): Influence of adjuvants on weed control from tribenuron. J.ASTM Int. 2, 1–7.


WEED sci WEED SCIENCE SOCIETY OF BOSNIA AND HERZEG HERZEGOVINA 771000 Sarajevo, Zmaja od Bosne 8 (Poljoprivredno-prehrambeni fakultet) Tel. +387-33-225 727, fax: +387-33-667-429. E-mail: [email protected] 31 May, 2010

2nd Circular

will organize 3rd International Symposium on Weeds

Sarajevo, May 20- 21, 2011

The main topics: 1. Weed biology and ecology, 2. Invasive weed plants

3. Medicinal, edible, and toxic weeds 4. Weed control: preventive, mechanical, physical,

chemical, biological, and integral methods 5. New herbicides and aplication technics 6. Weeds, herbicides and the environment

Registration for the Symposium with paper or participation without paper (who has not done it before) should be submitted by e-mail on the address [email protected] or [email protected] by the end of November, 2010. Participants who would like to present a paper are requested to submit an abstract no longer than 300 words till the end of December 2010. After the revision of the submitted abstracts, the Scientific Committee will forward a notification on acceptance. Full papers will be printed in the Proceedings, as a separate issue of the Herbologia journal. Full papers no longer of 8 pages of B5 format, single space, would be sent till January 15, 2011. The papers should be written in English. Participation fee is 50 €. It covers the expenses of the Proceedings as well. Details on the accommodation of Symposium participants and other data will be forwarded in the next circular. Chairman of the Scientific Committee: Chairman of the Organizing Committee: Academician Taib Šarić Dr. Mirha ðikić, Ass. Prof.


3rd International Symposium on Weeds

Sarajevo, May 20- 21, 2011

Registration form

Name and family name, position

…………………………………....................................................................................... Institution

………………………………………………………………………………. Paper title..................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................

. or participation without paper......................... Date...............................

Registration for the Symposium should be submitted by e-mail on the address [email protected] or [email protected] by the end of November 2010.


Instruction to Authors in International Journal Herbologia

One copy of manuscript in English should be submitted by e-mail or

as a hard (paper) copy and a compact disc. Manuscripts should be computer typed in MS Word, single spaced,

on the page (paper) format of B5, font of Times New Roman, font size 12 (address of the autors, keywords and list of references with font size 10). The text lines should be justified. The length of the paper can be up to eight pages.

The paper should start with the title of the article, the names of each author, his/her institution, address and e-mail address.

Abstract would not exceed 300 words or 20 lines. Keywords, up to two lines long, should be listed below the abstract.

Main text includes intruduction, materials and methods, results and discussion. Footnotes should be avoided. SI units should be used. Reference list should be ordered alphabetically. Examples: AUTHOR, X.Y. & Z.Q. AUTHOR, 2001: Title of article, Journal title in Italics, 12, 78-84. Or: AUTHOR, A., B. AUTHOR, 1998: Book title (ed. GH Editor). Publisher, Place, Country.

Figures and tables should be numbered consecutively and should have an appropriate caption or legend.

Scientific names and latin words et al. should be in italic. When a plant name is repeated, it can be abbreviated, e.g. C. album. For crop plants, common English names are used, but the scientific name can be given in parentheses at the first mention in the main text, e.g. oats (Avena sativa). Both British and American forms of common names can be used (e.g. corn and maize, alfalfa and lucerne etc.), up to the choice of the author. For herbicides and other chemicals, in Materials and methods, one should state common approved names and trade names, e.g. glyphosate (Roundup 360 a.i. L-1, Monsanto), and thereafter only trade names. Dose of herbicides should be expressed in terms of active ingredient (e.g. a.i. ha-1).

Herb. 12,2, tekst - Akademija nauka i umjetnosti BiH

Documents

Transcript of Herb. 12,2, tekst - Akademija nauka i umjetnosti BiH