Effect of Sulfentrazone Application Method and Time, on Weed Control and Phytotoxicity in Flue-Cured Tobacco

Over a period of three years sulfentrazone, alone and in combination with other herbicides, was evaluated for weed control efficacy under various methods application. The trials were done in granite sandy soils after three years of Chloris gayana cv Katambora at Kutsaga Research Station, Zimbabwe. T...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Asian journal of agriculture and rural development 2013-01, Vol.3 (1), p.30-37
1. Verfasser: Mazarura, Upenyu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 37
container_issue 1
container_start_page 30
container_title Asian journal of agriculture and rural development
container_volume 3
creator Mazarura, Upenyu
description Over a period of three years sulfentrazone, alone and in combination with other herbicides, was evaluated for weed control efficacy under various methods application. The trials were done in granite sandy soils after three years of Chloris gayana cv Katambora at Kutsaga Research Station, Zimbabwe. The chemicals were sprayed using a knapsack or a tractor mounted boom. Incorporation after ridging was done with a gang tiller set for shallow incorporation while that before ridging was done using a disk also set for shallow incorporation. Comparisons were made between directed and broadcast sprays, incorporation and no incorporation, timing from before planting to 4 weeks after planting (WAP). Application before holing out (BHO) and after holing out (AHO) was also evaluated. In most cases sulfentrazone gave good to excellent control of all weeds and was comparable to Metolachlor in efficacy. In some cases grass control was somewhat variable but acceptable. With regard to time of application, Sulfentrazone gave better control of broadleaf and grass weeds when applied from 1 to 4 WAP. Yellow nutsedge control was excellent and unaffected by time of application. Weed dry matter was reduced significantly relative to the untreated control for the 1 to 4 WAP applications. There was no significant difference between incorporation and surface or between directed and broadcast applications. The over top (OT) and AHO consistently gave better control than BHO application.
doi_str_mv 10.22004/ag.econ.198029
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_umn_a</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_umn_agecon_oai_ageconsearch_umn_edu_198029</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3033854231</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1019-283fd4682259e1f79b98f71e873cecad1848486cc553dc5c2f7fa138059b75a43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotUE1LAzEQDaJgqT17DXh1az67ybEsrRUqClY8Lml20m7ZJnU3C9Zfb2o7c5jHvPeGmUHonpIxY4SIJ7MZgw1-TLUiTF-hAWNMZEJwfp0wJyKjQspbNOq6HUmhBeVKD1Azcw5sxMHhj75x4GNrfoMHPD0cmtqaWAePXyFuQ4WNr_Cq3sMjTr0vgAoXIelD88-8b48xxPBT2zoece3xvOkhK_o26VZhbawNd-jGmaaD0aUO0ed8tioW2fLt-aWYLrMNJVRnTHFXiYliTGqgLtdrrVxOQeXcgjUVVSLlxFopeWWlZS53Jp1DpF7n0gg-RPQ8t9_70mxOjymDqS-wA9PabXnioOrL88eS5-HsObThu4culrvQtz6tWVJBJ1TljBL-BywbbWs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1416187210</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of Sulfentrazone Application Method and Time, on Weed Control and Phytotoxicity in Flue-Cured Tobacco</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Mazarura, Upenyu</creator><creatorcontrib>Mazarura, Upenyu</creatorcontrib><description>Over a period of three years sulfentrazone, alone and in combination with other herbicides, was evaluated for weed control efficacy under various methods application. The trials were done in granite sandy soils after three years of Chloris gayana cv Katambora at Kutsaga Research Station, Zimbabwe. The chemicals were sprayed using a knapsack or a tractor mounted boom. Incorporation after ridging was done with a gang tiller set for shallow incorporation while that before ridging was done using a disk also set for shallow incorporation. Comparisons were made between directed and broadcast sprays, incorporation and no incorporation, timing from before planting to 4 weeks after planting (WAP). Application before holing out (BHO) and after holing out (AHO) was also evaluated. In most cases sulfentrazone gave good to excellent control of all weeds and was comparable to Metolachlor in efficacy. In some cases grass control was somewhat variable but acceptable. With regard to time of application, Sulfentrazone gave better control of broadleaf and grass weeds when applied from 1 to 4 WAP. Yellow nutsedge control was excellent and unaffected by time of application. Weed dry matter was reduced significantly relative to the untreated control for the 1 to 4 WAP applications. There was no significant difference between incorporation and surface or between directed and broadcast applications. The over top (OT) and AHO consistently gave better control than BHO application.</description><edition>393</edition><identifier>ISSN: 2304-1455</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2224-4433</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2224-4433</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.198029</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Karachi: Asian Economic and Social Society</publisher><subject>Agribusiness ; Broadleaf ; Farm Management ; Nutsedge ; Sulfentrazone</subject><ispartof>Asian journal of agriculture and rural development, 2013-01, Vol.3 (1), p.30-37</ispartof><rights>Copyright Asian Economic and Social Society 2013</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mazarura, Upenyu</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of Sulfentrazone Application Method and Time, on Weed Control and Phytotoxicity in Flue-Cured Tobacco</title><title>Asian journal of agriculture and rural development</title><description>Over a period of three years sulfentrazone, alone and in combination with other herbicides, was evaluated for weed control efficacy under various methods application. The trials were done in granite sandy soils after three years of Chloris gayana cv Katambora at Kutsaga Research Station, Zimbabwe. The chemicals were sprayed using a knapsack or a tractor mounted boom. Incorporation after ridging was done with a gang tiller set for shallow incorporation while that before ridging was done using a disk also set for shallow incorporation. Comparisons were made between directed and broadcast sprays, incorporation and no incorporation, timing from before planting to 4 weeks after planting (WAP). Application before holing out (BHO) and after holing out (AHO) was also evaluated. In most cases sulfentrazone gave good to excellent control of all weeds and was comparable to Metolachlor in efficacy. In some cases grass control was somewhat variable but acceptable. With regard to time of application, Sulfentrazone gave better control of broadleaf and grass weeds when applied from 1 to 4 WAP. Yellow nutsedge control was excellent and unaffected by time of application. Weed dry matter was reduced significantly relative to the untreated control for the 1 to 4 WAP applications. There was no significant difference between incorporation and surface or between directed and broadcast applications. The over top (OT) and AHO consistently gave better control than BHO application.</description><subject>Agribusiness</subject><subject>Broadleaf</subject><subject>Farm Management</subject><subject>Nutsedge</subject><subject>Sulfentrazone</subject><issn>2304-1455</issn><issn>2224-4433</issn><issn>2224-4433</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>JAG</sourceid><recordid>eNotUE1LAzEQDaJgqT17DXh1az67ybEsrRUqClY8Lml20m7ZJnU3C9Zfb2o7c5jHvPeGmUHonpIxY4SIJ7MZgw1-TLUiTF-hAWNMZEJwfp0wJyKjQspbNOq6HUmhBeVKD1Azcw5sxMHhj75x4GNrfoMHPD0cmtqaWAePXyFuQ4WNr_Cq3sMjTr0vgAoXIelD88-8b48xxPBT2zoece3xvOkhK_o26VZhbawNd-jGmaaD0aUO0ed8tioW2fLt-aWYLrMNJVRnTHFXiYliTGqgLtdrrVxOQeXcgjUVVSLlxFopeWWlZS53Jp1DpF7n0gg-RPQ8t9_70mxOjymDqS-wA9PabXnioOrL88eS5-HsObThu4culrvQtz6tWVJBJ1TljBL-BywbbWs</recordid><startdate>20130101</startdate><enddate>20130101</enddate><creator>Mazarura, Upenyu</creator><general>Asian Economic and Social Society</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>JAG</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130101</creationdate><title>Effect of Sulfentrazone Application Method and Time, on Weed Control and Phytotoxicity in Flue-Cured Tobacco</title><author>Mazarura, Upenyu</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1019-283fd4682259e1f79b98f71e873cecad1848486cc553dc5c2f7fa138059b75a43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Agribusiness</topic><topic>Broadleaf</topic><topic>Farm Management</topic><topic>Nutsedge</topic><topic>Sulfentrazone</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mazarura, Upenyu</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>AgEcon</collection><jtitle>Asian journal of agriculture and rural development</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mazarura, Upenyu</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of Sulfentrazone Application Method and Time, on Weed Control and Phytotoxicity in Flue-Cured Tobacco</atitle><jtitle>Asian journal of agriculture and rural development</jtitle><date>2013-01-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>3</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>30</spage><epage>37</epage><pages>30-37</pages><issn>2304-1455</issn><issn>2224-4433</issn><eissn>2224-4433</eissn><abstract>Over a period of three years sulfentrazone, alone and in combination with other herbicides, was evaluated for weed control efficacy under various methods application. The trials were done in granite sandy soils after three years of Chloris gayana cv Katambora at Kutsaga Research Station, Zimbabwe. The chemicals were sprayed using a knapsack or a tractor mounted boom. Incorporation after ridging was done with a gang tiller set for shallow incorporation while that before ridging was done using a disk also set for shallow incorporation. Comparisons were made between directed and broadcast sprays, incorporation and no incorporation, timing from before planting to 4 weeks after planting (WAP). Application before holing out (BHO) and after holing out (AHO) was also evaluated. In most cases sulfentrazone gave good to excellent control of all weeds and was comparable to Metolachlor in efficacy. In some cases grass control was somewhat variable but acceptable. With regard to time of application, Sulfentrazone gave better control of broadleaf and grass weeds when applied from 1 to 4 WAP. Yellow nutsedge control was excellent and unaffected by time of application. Weed dry matter was reduced significantly relative to the untreated control for the 1 to 4 WAP applications. There was no significant difference between incorporation and surface or between directed and broadcast applications. The over top (OT) and AHO consistently gave better control than BHO application.</abstract><cop>Karachi</cop><pub>Asian Economic and Social Society</pub><doi>10.22004/ag.econ.198029</doi><tpages>8</tpages><edition>393</edition><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2304-1455
ispartof Asian journal of agriculture and rural development, 2013-01, Vol.3 (1), p.30-37
issn 2304-1455
2224-4433
2224-4433
language eng
recordid cdi_umn_agecon_oai_ageconsearch_umn_edu_198029
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Agribusiness
Broadleaf
Farm Management
Nutsedge
Sulfentrazone
title Effect of Sulfentrazone Application Method and Time, on Weed Control and Phytotoxicity in Flue-Cured Tobacco
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T13%3A14%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_umn_a&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20Sulfentrazone%20Application%20Method%20and%20Time,%20on%20Weed%20Control%20and%20Phytotoxicity%20in%20Flue-Cured%20Tobacco&rft.jtitle=Asian%20journal%20of%20agriculture%20and%20rural%20development&rft.au=Mazarura,%20Upenyu&rft.date=2013-01-01&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=30&rft.epage=37&rft.pages=30-37&rft.issn=2304-1455&rft.eissn=2224-4433&rft_id=info:doi/10.22004/ag.econ.198029&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_umn_a%3E3033854231%3C/proquest_umn_a%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1416187210&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true