Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T05:34:18.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Survival of Big Sagebush of Different Ages after Treatment with Selective Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. H. Robertson  and
H. P. Cords
J. H. Robertson
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Range Management, Max C. Fleischmann College of Agriculture, University of Nevada
H. P. Cords
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Range Management, Max C. Fleischmann College of Agriculture, University of Nevada
Get access

Extract

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata, Nutt.) is such an aggressive increaser that most of the formerly grassy ranges of the inter-mountain and northwest regions have long since acquired a sagebrush aspect. A suggestion as to the impact of this change upon grazing capacity is apparent from a three-year study in northern Nevada. An average reduction in yield by 20 native and exotic grasses and weeds of about 70 per cent was shown under limited competition with big sagebrush (12).

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 4 , Issue 4 , October 1956 , pp. 376 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © 1956 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. Bohmont, D. W. Chemical control of big sagebrush. Wyo. Agric. Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 39. 1954.Google Scholar
2. Cochran, William G., and Cox, Gertrude M. Experimental designs. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 91–92, 223–224. 1950.Google Scholar
3. Cornelius, Donald R., and Graham, Charles A. Selective herbicides for improving California forest ranges. Jour. Range Mgt. 4:95–100. 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Duncan, D. B. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11:1–45. 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Hull, A. C. Jr., Kissinger, N. A. Jr., and Vaughn, W. T. Chemical control of big sagebrush in Wyoming. Jour. Range Mgt. 5:398–402. 1952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hull, A. C. Jr., and Vaughn, W. T. Controlling big sagebrush with 2,4–D and other chemicals. Jour. Range Mgt. 4:158–164. 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Hyder, Donald N. Controlling big sagebrush with growth regulators. Jour. Range Mgt. 6:109–116. 1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hyder, Donald N., and Sneva, Forrest A. Effect of form and rate of active ingredient, spraying season, solution volume, and type of solvent on mortality of big sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata . Oregon Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 35. 1955.Google Scholar
9. Jensen, E. H., and Robocker, W. C. Propane-powered low-volume sprayer and weed burner. Jour. Range Mgt. 8:31. 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Pechanec, J. F., Stewart, George, Plummer, A. P., Robertson, J. H., and Hull, A. C. Jr. Controlling sagebrush on rangelands. U.S.D.A. Farmers' Bul. 2072. 1954.Google Scholar
11. Robertson, J. H. Seasonal root development of sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata, Nutt.) in relation to range reseeding. Ecology 24:125–126. 1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Robertson, J. H. Responses of range grasses to different intensities of competition with sagebrush (Artemisia tridendata, Nutt.) Ecology 28:1–16. 1947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Snedecor, George W. Statistical methods, 4th ed. The Iowa State College Press, Ames, Iowa, p. 448. 1946.Google ScholarPubMed