Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-xq9c7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-17T05:46:47.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris) to Sublethal Rates of 2,4-D

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

E. E. Schweizer
E. E. Schweizer*
Affiliation:
Sci. Ed. Admin. U.S. Dep. Agric., Crops Res. Lab., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The herbicide 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] was applied as sublethal rates to sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2’) in the field at different growth stages to determine its effect on growth and yield. The greatest reduction in top growth occurred when the highest rate of 2,4-D, 0.07 kg/ha, was applied to the oldest plants (12-leaf stage). All rates of 2,4-D reduced the components of sucrose yield (percentage sucrose, percentage purity, and root weight) to the extent that, together, the three components contributed to a significant reduction in recoverable sucrose. The yields of recoverable sucrose were reduced 6.8, 7.8, and 13.2% by the 0.017, 0.035, and 0.07 kg/ha rates, respectively.

Keywords

Herbicideplant growth regulatorspray drift
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 26 , Issue 6 , November 1978 , pp. 629 - 631
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Bruns, V. G., Carlile, B. L., and Kelley, A. D. 1973. Responses and residues in sugarbeets, soybeans, and corn irrigated with 2,4-D or silvex-treated water. U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1476, 31 pp.Google Scholar
2. Byford, W. J. and Prince, J. 1976. Experiments on the effect of hormone weedkillers on sugar beet. J. Agric. Sci. 86:135–139.Google Scholar
3. Grover, R., Maybank, J., and Yoshida, K. 1972. Droplet and vapor drift from butyl ester and dimethylamine salts of 2,4-D. Weed Sci. 20:320–324.Google Scholar
4. Grover, R. 1976. Relative volatilities of ester and amine forms of 2,4-D. Weed Sci. 24:26–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Holkesvig, O. A. 1950. Effects of 2,4-D on sugar beets. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Tech. Proc. 6:456–458.Google Scholar
6. Klingman, G. C., Ashton, F. M., and Noordhoff, L. J. 1975. Weed Science: Principles and Practices. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 431 pp.Google Scholar
7. Nolla, J. A. B. 1950. Injury to sugar cane from 2,4-D. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Tech. Proc. pp 178–189.Google Scholar
8. Nordby, A. and Skuterud, R. 1975. The effects of boom height, working pressure, and wind speed on spray drift. Weed Res. 14:385–395.Google Scholar
9. Slife, F. W. 1956. The effect of 2,4-D and several other herbicides on weeds and soybeans when applied as postemergence sprays. Weeds 4:61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Yates, W. E. and Akesson, N. B. 1973. Reducing pesticide chemical drift. Pages 275–341 in van Valkenburg, Wade, ed. Pesticide Formulations. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
11. Yates, W. E., Akesson, N. B., and Cowden, R. E. 1974. Criteria for minimizing drift residues on crops downwind from aerial applications. Trans. ASAE. 17:627–632.Google Scholar