The Effect of Vine Kill Method on Vine Kill, Tuber Skinning Injury, Tuber Yield and Size Distribution, and Tuber Nutrients and Phytonutrients in Two Potato Cultivars Grown for Early Potato Production

Boydston, Rick A.; Navarre, Duroy A.; Collins, Harold P.; Chaves-Córdoba, Bernardo

doi:10.1007/s12230-017-9614-0

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reports glufosinate, and pyraflufen-ethyl; however, sulfuric acid is a highly corrosive substance that requires specialized equipment and extreme precaution (Boydston et al, 2018;Haderlie et al, 1989). Before 1986, dinoseb, a dinitrophenol compound, accounted for 70% of the herbicides used for potato vine desiccation because of its effectiveness when applied in warm weather (Haderlie et al, 1989;Murphy, 1968;Mutch et al, 1984).…”

Section: Technology and Productmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Diquat, a member of the bypyridylium herbicide family, is a Weed Science Society of America group 22 photosystem I electron diverter that is used as a desiccant in potato, oilseeds, and legumes [Fabaceae (Syngenta, 2015)]. Diquat can result in incomplete stem and leaf desiccation, generally a result of incomplete spray coverage, which can result in tuber regrowth (Boydston et al, 2018;Misener and Everett, 1981;Pavlista, 2001). Diquat should never be applied to drought stressed potatoes, and if a second application is required, a 5-d waiting period between applications is recommended for improved vine coverage (Kuhar et al, 2018;Syngenta, 2015).…”

Section: Technology and Productmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…facilitate more efficient harvest due to reduced vegetation. Vine desiccation may be executed via mechanical destruction or chemical desiccation (Boydston et al, 2018;Murphy, 1968). However, chemical desiccation is the preferred method to regulate tuber size and skin strength (Kuhar et al, 2018;Murphy, 1968).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, chemical desiccation is the preferred method to regulate tuber size and skin strength (Kuhar et al, 2018;Murphy, 1968). Vine desiccation timing is based on tuber size at desiccation and desired potato grade at harvest (Boydston et al, 2018). Furthermore, effective vine desiccation depends on vine maturity: mature vines are easier to desiccate than immature vines (Haderlie et al, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Time between vine desiccation and harvest also influences skin set. In a Washington study, 'Bintje' and 'Ciklamen' potatoes harvested 2 weeks after vine desiccation incurred 55% skinning injury compared with 5.1% when harvest was delayed 4 weeks (Boydston et al, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Diquat, Glufosinate, and Saflufenacil for Desiccation of ‘Dark Red Norland’ Potato

Ferebee

Cahoon

Flessner

et al. 2019

hortte

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemical desiccants are commonly used to regulate tuber size, strengthen skin, and facilitate harvest for potato (Solanum tuberosum) production. Glufosinate is labeled for potato vine desiccation; however, limited data are available. Saflufenacil, a protoporphyrinogen oxidase–inhibiting herbicide, is an effective desiccant in other crops. Field research was conducted to evaluate glufosinate and saflufenacil as desiccants applied to ‘Dark Red Norland’ potato. Desiccants consisted of diquat, glufosinate, saflufenacil, glufosinate plus carfentrazone, and glufosinate plus saflufenacil applied at three timings, DESIC-1, DESIC-2, and DESIC-3, when size B potatoes averaged 43%, 31%, and 17% of total potato weight. Potato vine desiccation was more difficult at DESIC-1 and DESIC-2 because of immature vines. Diquat was the most effective desiccant 7 days after treatment (DAT), desiccating potato vines 88% at DESIC-1 7 DAT. Glufosinate alone desiccated potato vines 65% at the same timing; however, carfentrazone and saflufenacil added to glufosinate increased vine desiccation 8% and 16% compared with glufosinate alone, respectively. Vine desiccation by all treatments ranged 99% to 100% at 14 DAT. Desiccant and timing effects on skin set were determined using a torque meter before harvest. Skin set resulting from all desiccants and timings ranged between 1.88 and 2 lb-inch, and no significant differences were observed. No significant differences in yield were noted among desiccants. This research indicates that glufosinate and saflufenacil are suitable alternatives to diquat for potato vine desiccation; however, safety of saflufenacil applied to potatoes before harvest has not been determined.

show abstract