Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T19:24:47.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Equipment for Evaluating Methods of Applying Preemergence Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

W. L. Barrentine  and
O. B. Wooten
W. L. Barrentine
Affiliation:
Delta Branch, Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station
O. B. Wooten
Affiliation:
Agricultural Engineering Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, at Stoneville, Mississippi
Get access

Abstract

Herbicide-application equipment was combined with a sled tool-carrier to plant a test crop and apply a herbicide simultaneously to single rows as surface, subsurface, incorporated, and injected sprays. Results obtained, using the methyl ester of 3-amino-2,5-dichlorobenzoic acid (amiben), indicated the equipment can facilitate the evaluation of the influence of method of application on the activity of herbicides applied to soil.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , October 1967 , pp. 366 - 368
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 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. Aldrich, R. J. 1951. A field technique for screening new herbicides. Proc. NEWCC 5:29–30.Google Scholar
2. Anderson, J. C. and Wolf, D. E. 1947. Pre-emergence control of weeds in corn with 2,4-D. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 39:341–342.Google Scholar
3. Ashton, F. M. and Dunster, Kenneth. 1961. The herbicidal effect of EPTC, CDEC, and CDAA on Echinochola crusgalli with various depths of soil incorporation. Weeds 9:312–317.Google Scholar
4. Barrentine, W. L., Wooten, O. B., and Holstun, J. T. Jr. Progress report on the evaluation of soil incorporators—Dye techniques. Mississippi Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 702. 6 p.Google Scholar
5. Colby, S. R. 1966. Fate of the amide and methyl ester of amiben in soybean plants and soil. Proc. NEWCC 20:619–626.Google Scholar
6. Dutton, W. C. 1950. Screening new herbicides. Proc. NCWCC 7:119–121.Google Scholar
7. Jordan, L. S., Day, B. E., and Clerx, W. A. 1963. The effect of incorporation and method of irrigation on preemergence herbicides. Weeds 11:157–159.Google Scholar
8. McWhorter, C. G., Wooten, O. B., and Baker, R. S. 1966. Preemergence herbicide injection for weed control. Mississippi Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 723. 7 p.Google Scholar
9. Shaw, W. C. and Swanson, C. R. 1952. Techniques and equipment used in evaluating chemicals for their herbicidal properties. Weeds 1:352–365.Google Scholar
10. Stahler, L. M. 1949. Screening of new selective herbicides. Proc. NCWCC 6:95–101.Google Scholar
11. Wooten, O. B. and McWhorter, C. G. 1961. A device for the subsurface application of herbicides. Weeds 9:36–41.Google Scholar
12. Wooten, O. B., Holstun, J. T. Jr., and Baker, R. S. 1966. Knife injector for the application of EPTC. Weeds 14:92–93.Google Scholar