Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Control, Regrowth, and Tuber Production as Affected by Herbicides

Weed Science ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip A. Banks
Keyword(s):  
Glycine Max ◽  
Gossypium Hirsutum ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Treated Soil ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Tuber Production

Nine soil-applied herbicides were evaluated in the field in cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) and soybeans [Glycine max(L.) Merr.] and in the greenhouse without crops to determine their effects on the control, regrowth, and tuber production of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL.). Fluridone {1-methyl-3-phenyl-5-[3-(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]-4(1H)-pyridinone} and norflurazon [4-chloro-5-(methylamino)-2-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)-3(2H)-pyridazinone] provided the best (100%) control in the greenhouse. Tubers exposed to herbicide-treated soil in the greenhouse for 4 or 8 weeks produced fewer new tubers when transplanted into nontreated soil than nontreated tubers did. Yellow nutsedge shoot and tuber populations in the field were significantly reduced by all herbicides, except for alachlor [2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide], after 2 yr of treatment in cotton and soybeans.

Comparison of Six Cropping Systems for Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Control

Weed Science ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. E. Keeley ◽  
R. J. Thullen ◽  
J. H. Miller ◽  
C. H. Carter
Keyword(s):  
Solanum Tuberosum ◽  
Glycine Max ◽  
Hordeum Vulgare ◽  
Control Systems ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Similar Reduction ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Double Cropping

Six cropping/weed control systems were evaluated from 1978 to 1980 for the control of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL.). Supplementing cultivation of cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL. ‘Acala SJ-2′) with either preplant applications of fluridone {1 - methyl - 3 - phenyl - 5 - [3 - (trifluoromethyl)phenyl] -4(1H-pyridinone} or two hoeings for 2 yr preceding cotton treated with DSMA (disodium methanearsonate) and MSMA (monosodium methanearsonate) reduced populations of viable yellow nutsedge tubers 98 to 99% within 3 yr. Dry- or wet - fallowing plus tillage after barley (Hordeum vulgareL. ‘Kombyne’), and double cropping potatoes (Solanum tuberosumL. ‘White Rose’) treated with EPTC (S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate) with soybeans [Glycine max(L.) Merr. ‘Williams’] treated with alachlor [2-chloro - 2′, 6’ - diethyl -N- (methoxymethyl)acetanilide] for 2 yr preceding cotton, reduced populations of tubers 98 to 99% within 3 yr. A similar reduction of tubers (97%) was obtained by double cropping potatoes with milo [Sorghum bicolor(L.) Moench. ‘NK- 265′] for 2 yr preceding cotton.

Effect of Corn (Zea mays) Seeding Date on the Growth of Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus)

Weed Science ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zain Ghafar ◽  
Alan K. Watson
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Dry Weight ◽  
Tuber Size ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Above Ground Biomass ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Seeding Date ◽  
Tuber Production

Major differences in above- ground biomass and tuber production of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL. # CYPES) were not observed when corn (Zea maysL. “CO-OP S265”) was seeded on different dates (1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th week of May; and 1st week of June). The final seedbed was prepared just prior to each seeding date and this cultivation stimulated dormant tubers to sprout. As a result, a large population of yellow nutsedge emerged with the corn at all seeding dates. Because fertilizer was banded near the corn row, yellow nutsedge biomass, tuber dry weight and number of tubers were higher within corn rows than between rows. Tuber size was affected by seeding date and shifted toward smaller tubers within corn rows and larger tubers between the rows as the corn was sown late. The optimum seeding date of corn was in the 3rd week of May when the highest corn yield was obtained and yellow nutsedge growth was generally reduced.

Yellow Nutsedge and Cotton Response to Several Herbicides

Weed Science ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. E. Keeley ◽  
C. H. Carter ◽  
J. H. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Gossypium Hirsutum ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge

Seven herbicides were evaluated for the control of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL.) in cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL. ‘Acala SJ-1’) in three field experiments during 1970 and 1971. The herbicides, 2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl) acetanilide (alachlor); 2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(butoxymethyl) acetanilide (CP-53619); 2,4-bis(isopropylamino)-6-methylthio)-s-triazine (prometryne); 2-(α-naphthoxy)-N, N-diethylpropionamide (R-7465);S-isopropyl 5-ethyl-2-methylpiperidine-1-carbothioate (R-12001); 4-chloro-5-(dimethylamino)-2-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)-3-(2H)-pyridazinone (San-6706); and 2-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methyl-1,2,4-oxadiazolidine-3,5-dione (methazole), were applied broadcast and incorporated 10 cm deep into the soil before the preplanting irrigation. All herbicides controlled nutsedge for at least 1 month in two or more experiments. Cotton was most tolerant to applications of 2.24 and 4.48 kg/ha of CP-53619, 3.36 and 6.72 kg/ha of prometryne, 1.12 kg/ha of San-6706, and 2.24 kg/ha of methazole. Higher rates of San-6706 and methazole and all rates of alachlor, R-7465, and R-12001 reduced the yield of cotton in one or more experiments.

Glyphosate Hinders Purple Nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) and Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Tuber Production

Weed Science ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 56 (5) ◽  
pp. 735-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore M. Webster ◽  
Timothy L. Grey ◽  
Jerry W. Davis ◽  
A Stanley Culpepper
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Shoots ◽  
Cyperus Rotundus ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Third Order ◽  
Purple Nutsedge ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Tuber Production ◽  
Primary Means ◽  
Phase Out

The phase-out of methyl bromide requires alternative nutsedge management options in vegetable systems. Options that target tuber production, the primary means of reproduction, will be most beneficial. A study was conducted to evaluate the response of purple nutsedge and yellow nutsedge foliar growth and tuber production to a range of glyphosate rates. Glyphosate was applied at six rates between 0.41 and 2.57 kg ae ha−1to 5-wk-old nutsedge plants with multiple shoots. The rate of glyphosate needed to reduce growth 50% (I50) was similar for purple nutsedge foliar growth (0.58 kg ha−1) and tuber biomass (0.55 kg ha−1). In contrast,I50for yellow nutsedge foliar growth was 0.73 kg ha−1, which was greater than theI50for tuber biomass (0.41 kg ha−1). First-order tubers, those directly attached to the initial tuber, had anI50of 0.70 and 0.44 kg ha−1of glyphosate for purple nutsedge and yellow nutsedge tuber biomass, respectively. For all higher-order tubers,I50values ranged from 0.29 to 0.60 and 0.14 to 0.30 kg ha−1of glyphosate for purple nutsedge and yellow nutsedge tuber biomass, respectively. Glyphosate at 0.74 kg ha−1prevented fourth-order purple nutsedge and third-order yellow nutsedge tuber production (terminal tubers for yellow nutsedge). Fifth- and sixth-order purple nutsedge tuber production was eliminated by the lowest tested rate of glyphosate (0.41 kg ha−1). Effective nutsedge management options will require consistent control between spring and autumn crops. Glyphosate is economical, poses no herbicide carryover issues to vegetables, and minimizes nutsedge tuber production; therefore, it is a suitable candidate to manage nutsedges.

Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Control with Herbicides

1987 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-139
Author(s):  
Paul E. Keeley ◽  
Charles H. Carter ◽  
Robert J. Thullen
Keyword(s):  
Gossypium Hirsutum ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge

The relatively new micro-encapsulated formulation of alachlor [2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide] and diethatyl [N-(chloroacetyl)-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)glycine] were soil-applied for yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL. #3CYPES) control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL. ‘Acala SF-2’). Both herbicides at rates of 1.68 to 3.36 kg ai/ha provided 60 to 80% control of yellow nutsedge for 6 weeks. Although control declined to 50 to 70% by cotton harvest, plots treated with herbicides usually yielded more seed cotton than cultivated control plots. Yields were similar from herbicide-treated and hand-weeded plots. Fewer tubers were counted in herbicide-treated than in cultivated-control plots in the fall. Based on yellow nutsedge control and seed cotton yields, alachlor and diethatyl could be helpful in controlling nutsedge and protecting cotton yields.

Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Competition with Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Weed Science ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. G. Patterson ◽  
G. A. Buchanan ◽  
J. E. Street ◽  
R. H. Crowley
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Gossypium Hirsutum ◽  
Main Stem ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Cotton Yield ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Stem Height ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Series Of Experiments ◽  
Relationship Of

Two series of experiments were conducted from 1976 through 1978 on Marvyn loamy sand in central Alabama to determine the competitive relationship of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL.) with cotton (Gossypium hirustumL. ‘Stoneville 213’). In the first series of experiments yellow nutsedge was left undisturbed or removed from plots to give periods of competition of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 25 weeks. Seed cotton yield was reduced 2 of 3 yr with full season (25 week) competition, but was unaffected by shorter periods of competition in all years. Main stem diameter of cotton was also reduced 2 of 3 yr when competing full season while main stem height was reduced in only 1 of 3 yr with full season competition. In the second series of experiments yellow nutsedge densities were monitored in 48 individual plots and regression analysis showed yields of seed cotton were consistently reduced with full-season competition. Yellow nutsedge shoot densities ranged from zero to 93 shoots/m2(measured 13 cm on either side of the drill) and approximately 18 kg/ha of seed cotton were lost for each additional yellow nutsedge plant per m2.

Yellow Nutsedge Control in Soybeans

Weed Science ◽  
1972 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. M. Wax ◽  
E. W. Stoller ◽  
F. W. Slife ◽  
R. N. Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Glycine Max ◽  
Soil Surface ◽  
Silty Clay ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Clay Loam ◽  
Silty Clay Loam ◽  
Late Planting ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Selective Control ◽  
Margin Of Safety

A system for controlling yellow nutsedge(Cyperus esculentusL.) in soybeans [Glycine max(L.) Merr.] which involved preplanting tillage, late planting, herbicides, and cultivation was evaluated in 1969 and 1970. In Illinois on a Drummer silty clay loam,S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate (EPTC) andS-ethyl diisobutylthiocarbamate (butylate), incorporated in the soil before planting, gave good and fair control of yellow nutsedge, respectively, but both injured soybeans initially.S-propyl dipropylthiocarbamate (vernolate), also incorporated before planting, controlled yellow nutsedge as well as EPTC did, and resulted in less injury to soybeans. Soybean yields were not reduced by any of the thiocarbamate treatments. Incorporation of 2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide (alachlor) or 2-chloro-N-isopropylacetanilide (propachlor), just before planting, controlled at least 90% of the yellow nutsedge in both years, whereas preemergence applications were only moderately successful and dependent on rainfall. In field microplots, alachlor and vernolate provided only fair control of yellow nutsedge when applied to the soil surface, but they both controlled 95% of the yellow nutsedge when incorporated 7.6 cm. In greenhouse studies on selective control of yellow nutsedge in soybeans, alachlor exhibited a wider margin of safety to soybeans than did vernolate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document