Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T02:30:05.028Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Herbicides and Mowing on Catbriar (Smilax bona-nox) in Oklahoma Rangeland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Eddie Funderburg ,
James Locke  and
Jon Biermacher
Eddie Funderburg*
Affiliation:
Ag Research, Agricultural Division, Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation, 2510 Sam Noble Parkway, Ardmore, OK 73401
James Locke
Affiliation:
Ag Research, Agricultural Division, Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation, 2510 Sam Noble Parkway, Ardmore, OK 73401
Jon Biermacher
Affiliation:
Ag Research, Agricultural Division, Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation, 2510 Sam Noble Parkway, Ardmore, OK 73401
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: erfunderburg@noble.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Catbriar can be problematic to ranchers who graze rangeland. Five field studies of 2 yr duration were conducted during the 2007 to 2010 growing seasons to evaluate the effects of mowing and foliar-applied herbicides on the control of catbriar in Oklahoma rangeland. Without mowing, a formulated mixture of triclopyr and fluroxypyr (2.7 and 0.9 g ae L−1) and triclopyr alone (2.4 g ae L−1) applied at a volume of approximately 720 L ha−1 twice over 2 yr consecutively controlled catbriar 69 and 71% (visual rating), respectively. Relative to the untreated control, these two treatments reduced the number of live catbriar stems 53 and 64% at the final evaluation, respectively. Mowing without herbicide was equally as effective as any herbicide treatment in reducing the catbriar population. The effects of herbicide were independent of mowing (i.e., the two experimental variables were noninteractive). If infested areas can be mowed, adding herbicide is not necessary to reduce catbriar population.

La Smilax bona-nox puede ser una maleza problemática para los ganaderos que pastorean su ganado. Durante las estaciones de crecimiento de 2007–2010, se realizaron cinco estudios de campo de dos años de duración para evaluar los efectos del corte mecánico y de herbicidas de aplicación foliar, en el control de S. bona-nox en pastizales de Oklahoma. Sin el corte, una mezcla formulada de triclopyr y fluroxypyr (2.7 y 0.9 g ea L−1) y triclopyr solo (2.4 g ea L−1) aplicado a un volumen de aproximadamente 720 L ha−1, dos veces sobre dos años consecutivos, controlaron S. bona-nox en 69 y 71% (evaluación visual), respectivamente. Comparado con el testigo no tratado, estos dos tratamientos disminuyeron el número de tallos vivos de S. bona-nox 53 y 64% al fin de la evaluación, respectivamente. El corte sin herbicida fue igualmente efectivo como cualquier tratamiento con herbicida para reducir la población de S. bona-nox. Los efectos del herbicida fueron independientes del corte, i.e., las dos variables experimentales no fueron interactivas. Si las áreas infestadas pueden ser cortadas mecánicamente, la adición de herbicida no es necesaria para reducir la población de S. bona-nox.

Keywords

Fluroxypyrtriclopyrcatbriar, Smilax bona-nox L.rangelandGreenbriernot mowedmowedsuppressionpicloramdicamba2,4-D amine
Type
Weed Management—Other Crops/Areas
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 626 - 630
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Adams, D. E., Anderson, R. C., and Collins, S. L. 1982. Differential response of woody and herbaceous species to summer and winter burning in an Oklahoma grassland. Southwest. Nat. 27:55–61.Google Scholar
Anonymous, . 2008a. PastureGard herbicide product label. Dow AgroSciences, LLC Publication No. D02-193-003. Indianapolis, IN Dow AgroSciences. 9 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous, . 2008b. Weedmaster herbicide product label. Nufarm Inc. Publication No. 71368-34. Burr Ridge, IL Nufarm, Inc. 16 p.Google Scholar
Boyd, J. 2008. Pasture Weed and Brush Control. Little Rock, AR University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service FSA2080-PD-11-08RV. 8 p.Google Scholar
Cadenhead, J. F. III. 2009. How to Take the Green Out of Greenbriar. College Station, TX Texas AgriLife Extension Service L-5456. 3 p.Google Scholar
Diggs, G. M. Jr., Lipscombe, B. L., and O'Kennon, R. J. 2000. Title. Pages 1346. In Diggs, G. M. Jr., ed. 2000. Shinners and Mahler's Flora of North Central Texas. Fort Worth, TX Botanical Research Institute of Texas.Google Scholar
Gilliam, F. S. and Christensen, N. L. 1986. Herb-layer response to burning in pine flatwoods of the lower Coastal Plain of South Carolina. Bull Torrey Bot. Club. 113(1):42–45.Google Scholar
Hart, S. 2000. Goats for vegetation management. In Web-Based Training and Certification Program for Meat Goat Producers. Langston, OK Langston University.Google Scholar
Marshall, M. 2011. Clemson University Extension Pest Management Handbook. http://www.clemson.edu/extension/rowcrops/pest/files/2011pmhgrass_for_weedmgmt.pdf. Accessed June 20, 2011.Google Scholar
McPherson, G. R. and Bratton, S. P. 1991. Effects of fire on community boundary dynamics on Cumberland Island, Georgia. Pages 163–182 17th Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference; Tallahassee, FL, May 1989, Pp. 163–182.Google Scholar
Medlin, C. 2005. Weed control guidelines for Oklahoma. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service Publication E-978. Pp. 30–31.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. E. and Bovey, R. W. 1980. Hexazinone and other herbicides on Texas woody plants. Weed Sci. 28:358–362.Google Scholar
Meyer, R. E., Morton, H. L., Merkle, M. G., Bovey, R. W., and Davis, F. S. 1970. Brush control on forest-rangelands in east Texas. J. Range Manage. 23:129–132.Google Scholar
Mitchell, E. R. 1996. Brush Control with Goats. Poteau, OK The Kerr Center for Sustainable Agriculture. 4 p.Google Scholar
Murphy, T. R. 2011. Georgia Pest Management Handbook. http://www.ent.uga.edu/pmh/Com_Pasture_Hay_Forages.pdf. Accessed June 20, 2011.Google Scholar
Rice, C. K. and Medlin, C. 2008. Chemical Brush Control Methods Manual. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service Publication E-1001. 18 p.Google Scholar
Scifres, C. J., Stuth, J. W., and Bovey, R. W. 1981. Control of oaks and associated woody species on rangeland with tebuthiuron. Weed Sci. 29:270–275.Google Scholar
Stransky, J. J. and Halls, L. K. 1979. Effect of a winter fire on fruit yields of woody plants. J. Wildl. Manage. 43:1007–1010.Google Scholar
Stevens, R. L. and Coffee, C. R. 2008. Trees, Shrubs and Woody Vines: A Pictorial Guide. Ardmore, OK Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation Publication NF-WF-08-01. 138 p.Google Scholar
Sullivan, J. 1994. Smilax bona-nox. Missoula, MT Fire Effects Information System. USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory.Google Scholar
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Plants Database. 2011. PLANTS Profile for Smilax bona-nox (saw greenbrier). http://plants.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=SMBO2. Accessed June 21, 2011.Google Scholar
Vines, R. A. 1960. Trees, Shrubs and Woody Vines of the Southwest. Austin, TX University of Texas Press. Pp.74–75.Google Scholar