Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T15:47:43.627Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control of Canada Thistle and Field Bindweed in Asparagus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

A. G. Ogg Jr.
A. G. Ogg Jr.*
Affiliation:
Agr. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agr., Irrigated Agr. Res. and Ext. Center, Prosser, WA 99350
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.] and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.) were controlled in asparagus (Asparagus officinalis L. ‘Mary Washington’) fields by repeated applications of dicamba (3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid) at 0.6 kg/ha or 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] + dicamba at 1.1 + 0.3 or 1.1 + 0.6 kg/ha. Applications of 2,4-D + dicamba at 1.1 + 0.6 kg/ha in early May and again in mid-June controlled 97% of the Canada thistle in asparagus fields. A third application about August 1 was required to give similar control of field bindweed. Rates of dicamba exceeding 0.6 kg/ha injured the asparagus.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 23 , Issue 6 , November 1975 , pp. 458 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 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.F. and Clore, W.J. 1956. Tolerance of asparagus to 2,4-D. Weeds 4:393–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Fechtig, A.D. and Furtick, W.R. 1964. Chemical control of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense Scop.). Res. Progr. Rept. Western Weed Control Conf. pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
3. Hodgson, J.M. 1968. Canada thistle and its control. U.S. Dep. Agr. Leaf. No. 523. 8 pp.Google Scholar
4. Hodgson, J.M. 1968. The nature, ecology, and control of Canada thistle. U.S. Dep. Agr. Tech. Bul. No. 1386. 32 pp.Google Scholar
5. Hodgson, J.M. 1970. The response of Canada thistle ecotypes to 2,4-D, amitrole, and intensive cultivation. Weed Sci. 18:253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Phillips, W.M. and Timmons, F.L. 1954. Bindweed–How to control it. Kans. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 366. 40 pp.Google Scholar
7. Schweizer, E.E. and Swink, J.F. 1971. Field bindweed control with dicamba and 2,4-D, and crop response to chemical residues. Weed Sci. 19:717–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Tamaki, G., Moffitt, H.R., and Turner, J.E. 1975. Influence of perennial weeds on the abundance of the redbacked cutworm on asparagus. Environmental Entomol. (In Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Whitworth, J.W. 1964. The reaction of strains of field bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 12:57–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Wiese, A.F. and Rea, H.E. 1962. Factors affecting the toxicity of phenoxy herbicides to field bindweed. Weeds 10:58–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar