JM Innovations



Nebraska Ag News Headlines
Update: Invasive Control Requires Repeated Hernicide Applications
By: Stevan Knezevic and O. Adewale Osipitan, UNL - 06/14/2018

It is well known that herbicides can manage perennial invasive weed species; however, a single application of most herbicides provides only short-term efficacy (one- or two-year suppression). These perennials are not easily managed with one application because they propagate by multiple means, including seeds and perennial roots (rhizomes, stolones and crowns). The secondary buds of these plants can sprout new shoots, even after initial herbicide damage.

To examine what's needed to achieve complete control, we conducted a 10-year herbicide efficacy study with a pilot species, purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.). Purple loosestrife is an invasive weed introduced from Eurasia to North America in the early 1880s. It has now become widespread in the United States, reducing the biodiversity of riparian areas across Nebraska and elsewhere in the US. In 2001 purple loosestrife was declared a noxious species in Nebraska as it poses a serious threat to the economic, social, and aesthetic well-being of the state's landscape.

We have evaluated the effectiveness of 14 herbicide treatments for purple loosestrife control over a 10-year period. Studies were conducted at four sites:

- Along the Missouri River near Newcastle in northeast Nebraska in a 10-year-old (according to the landowner);

- Buffalo site, established along the Platte River near Kearney in three-year-old stands;

- Brown site, established along the Niobrara River north of Johnstown in five-year-old stands; and

- Holt site, along a local private lake north of Atkinson in three-year-old stands.

Our research showed that age of the purple loosestrife stand was critical to effective control. The younger the stand, the faster the control was achieved. Delaying the start of treatment could extend the total time needed to achieve control from three to as many as nine years.

Our data showed that the age of purple loosestrife stand was critical for effective control. The younger the stand, the faster the control was achieved. For example, the three-year-old stands from Buffalo and Holt required two to three years of consecutive spraying to provide complete control of purple loosestrife. At the Holt site, the three-year-old stands were completely controlled by glyphosate, imazapyr, and metsulfuron after two consecutive years of spraying, while 2,4-D, triclopyr and fosamine required three years.

The five-year-old stands at the Brown site required two to five years of consecutive spraying to achieve 100% control, depending on the herbicide. For example, the earliest complete control was achieved with metsulfuron sprayed for two consecutive years. When spraying glyphosate, imazapyr, and a mix of 2,4-D dimethylamine plus triclopyr, three consecutive years of spraying were needed to provide complete control. When spraying 2,4-D dimethylamine, triclopyr, and fosamine, it took five consecutive annual applications to achieve complete control.

The 10-year-old stand at the Dixon site required three to nine years of spraying to achieve complete control, depending on the herbicides used. For example, imazapyr required three years of consecutive spraying while a mixture of 2,4-D, triclopyr and fosamine required nine years of annual sprayings.

As these results indicate, selecting the best herbicide for the job is critical for faster control.

All treatments at all fours sites were also rated and monitored for an extra three years after last spraying, and all ratings showed 100% control (data not shown in this article).

Our study showed that repeated applications of the tested herbicides could provide effective control of purple loosestrife over time, but it required persistence and a well-chosen herbicide. The most effective herbicides for purple loosestrife control were glyphosate, imazapyr and metsulfuron, as they provided the fastest control (e.g., within the first two to three years of spraying).

In addition, our assessment of the negative impacts on beneficial vegetation suggested that metsulfuron appears to be the most desirable choice, as it has no detrimental effects on grassy vegetation. Presence of grasses along the edges of waterways is promoted by land managers because grasses provide habitat and food for various bird species (including migratory birds) and feed for grazing animals (deer, livestock).

Send this article to a friend


Other Nebraska Headlines
Schuler Mfg
Agromatic
Copyright 2018 - USAgNet.com. All Rights Reserved.