1999
DOI: 10.2134/jpa1999.0244
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Varying Imazethapyr Application Rate and Timing on Yield of Seedling Grass-Alfalfa Mixtures

Abstract: Imazethapyr is registered for weed control in pure alfalfa and in established alfalfa‐grass mixtures. Orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) and timothy (Phleum pratense L.) tolerance to imazethapyr during establishment was examined in the greenhouse and in mixtures with alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) in the field. Imazethapyr was applied following grass emergence at rates ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 oz ai/acre at three different stages of forage grass growth. In the greenhouse, application of imazethapyr to seedling … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The imazethapyr dose-response was conducted to confirm whether fall panicum also had cross-resistance to ALS-inhibiting imidazolinones; however, given the low efficacy of imazethapyr to control fall panicum, as previously reported in the literature (Curran et al 1999), poor control (<70.0%) and biomass reduction levels (<55.0%) were observed even with the highest rate tested (560 g ha −1 ; data not shown) for both the resistant and susceptible accessions. Moreover, despite slight differences in visual control between the two accessions, with a lower response from the resistant accession, it did not translate into significant differences in ED 50 for control (P = 0.885) and biomass reduction (P = 0.192) (data not shown).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…The imazethapyr dose-response was conducted to confirm whether fall panicum also had cross-resistance to ALS-inhibiting imidazolinones; however, given the low efficacy of imazethapyr to control fall panicum, as previously reported in the literature (Curran et al 1999), poor control (<70.0%) and biomass reduction levels (<55.0%) were observed even with the highest rate tested (560 g ha −1 ; data not shown) for both the resistant and susceptible accessions. Moreover, despite slight differences in visual control between the two accessions, with a lower response from the resistant accession, it did not translate into significant differences in ED 50 for control (P = 0.885) and biomass reduction (P = 0.192) (data not shown).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Imazethapyr is registered for use in alfalfa and nongrazed Conservation Reserve Program lands containing legumes and forage grasses (Anonymous 2006b). Imazethapyr reduced growth of orchardgrass when applied at the seedling stage and at first cutting (Curran et al 1999), but studies were not found documenting imazethapyr safety on established orchardgrass when applied in early spring.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%