Vol. 16—1962 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

95
Date planted: 915/61
Date treated: 9/7 & 8/61
Soil mOlsture: medium below, but dry on surface and in seed zone.
Soil type: sandy clay loam
Plot arrangement: Plots consisted of two 3% ft. beds 20 ft. long. One
row of each crop was planted per pl~t, with 3 crops per bed.
Experimental design: Random~zed block with 3 reps.
Herbicide treatments: Spray treatments were applied on 9/7/61 1n 30 gals/A
at 30 psi. Granular materials were appl~ed on 918161 using a small hand
duster. There was no cultlvation or hand weeding.
Rainfall data: Same as in trial No.1.
/~ea harvested: Hanover salad and turnip greens were harvested on 10/31/61
The yield data represent one row, 20 ft. long, of each crop per plot., The
other crops will probably be harvested in the .pring.
R!§~s
and Observations
The visual observations in Table 2 and yuld date in Table 3 general~y.agree
with the results reported for trial No.1.
The most promising material .from the standpoint of weed control and crop
tolerance in this trial was Triflural1n, although there was sign1ficant irljury
to spinach and cress at 2 IbslA of the 4 e.c. formulation. Later trials u~der
cool and moist conditions indicate that spinach may be 1njured even at 1 Ib/A of
either 4 e.c. or2 G formulations. Both Tr1fluralin and Diphenamid gave very
good weed control even at 1 IblAof either formulation. Diphenamid, however,
showed no crop selectivity except at 1 Ib/A on Hanover salad.
,
The .tandard treatments of Vegadex, CIPC and the.Vegadex + CIPC mixture
gave satisfactory weed control, especially at the hiah rates, with little or no
crop injury except from 2 IbslA of. 4 e.c. CIPC. Undltr the prolonged hot, dry
weather conditions, these and most other herbic1des conSistently gave slightly
better weed control from spray formulations compared ee the granules. The..
opposite was true, however, of R-1870, although even at the rate of 4 lbs/A it
did not give as good weed control as the standard treatments.
The use of Dacthal agaln resulted ln good weed control from the 50 WPformulation
while showing no signlficant crop injury except at 4 IbslA on spin.cb.
Lack of moisture prior to the germination of the first weed seeds probably
contributed to the lower degree of weed control from the Dacthal granules.
While Zytron and NIA 6370 gave good weed control even at 8 and 5 IbslA,
respectively, severe crop injury in many cases limits ~heir potential. ZytWon
appears to be safe only in the gra~lular form at 8 Ib.,,(A, appl1ed to spinach,'
Hanover salad and collard.. NIA 6370 seems to have greater selectivity on these
same crops, with no appreciable injury from 5 IbslA in either the 4 e.c. or 5 G
formulation, or from 10 lbslA in the 5 G formulation.