the Fate of Field Paspalum Control - The Paginator

continued • TURF TALK
27, June 11 and June 23); Certainty
(0.023 lb. ai/A) was applied twice on
(May 27 and June 11); and Fusilade
II (0.375 lb. ai/A) was applied once
(on May 27).
According to plant count data,
Dismiss and the high rate of Velocity
reduced the number of field paspalum
plants per plot compared to the control,
but the low rate of Velocity had
no effect (Table 2). The most effective
treatments were Fusilade II and Velocity
+ Dismiss, both of which reduced
the field paspalum population 84%
compared to the control. When plots
were evaluated by estimating field
paspalum cover rather than plant
counts, only Fusilade II had reduced
weed cover compared to the control.
The low rate of Velocity (0.033
lb./A) applied three times reduced tall
Photo 4. Field paspalum in unmown hard fescue.
Table 2. Tall fescue quality and injury, and field paspalum control as influenced by herbicides in College Park, MD, 2010.
Treatment
Rate
(lb. ai/A)
No.
Applic.*
June
10
June
23
Turf quality (0 – 10)
July
6
July
12
Aug.
5
Sept.
9
Injury
(0 – 5)
July
6
plants/
plot
Sept. 9
Paspalum
%
cover
Velocity 17.6SG
0.033 3 8.0 a** 7.6 a 5.6 c 6.0 ab 7.0 a 6.8 b 2.8 c 55.3 ab 14.0 ab
Velocity 17.6SG
0.066 3 7.0 bc 6.1 c 4.1 d 4.8 c 5.4 b 6.6 b 3.8 b 29.5 bcd 9.0 bc
Dismiss 4F
0.125 3 7.5 ab 7.3 a 6.9 ab 6.3 ab 7.0 a 7.1 b 1.1 de 27.8 cd 9.0 bc
Velocity + Dismiss
0.033 +
0.125
3 7.5 ab 7.2 ab 5.6 c 5.7 bc 7.0 a 7.0 b 2.8 c 11.3 d 4.3 bc
Certainty 75DG
0.023 2 6.4 c 4.6 d 1.0 e 1.3 d 1.5 c 2.0 c 4.9 a 57.2 abc 20.5 a
Fusilade II T&O 2L
0.375 1 5.6 d 6.3 bc 6.5 b 6.0 ab 7.3 a 8.0 a 2.0 cd 11.0 d 1.8 c
Untreated — — 8.0 a 8.0 a 7.5 a 6.8 a 6.9 a 6.7 b 0.8 e 68.5 a 12.0 ab
**Treatments were applied 3 times on May 27, June 11 and June 23; twice on May 27 and June 11; and once on May 27, 2010.
**Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Fisher’s LSD, P ≤ 0.05.
SUMMER 2011
11