The effectiveness and the selectivity of herbicides in weed control on the potato plantation

Marek Gugała

marek.gugala@uph.edu.pl
Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny w Siedlcach (Poland)

Krystyna Zarzecka


Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny w Siedlcach (Poland)

Abstract

The presented results were obtained from field experiment conducted in years 2002–2004 in Agricultural Experimental Station in Zawady. We tested: I factor — two tillage systems (traditional and simplified), II factor — seven weed control methods. The aim of the study was to assess the effects of these two factors on effectiveness of destruction of the weed air-dry mass as well as on the phytotoxic activity of herbicides applied in the potato cultivation. Degree of destruction of the weed air-dry mass evaluated both in the beginning of vegetation and before the harvest of potato tubers was significantly influenced by experimental factors. Before potato row closing, the air reduction of weed dry mass was on average 66.1% more effective in plots with simplified tillage. The herbicide mixtures: Plateen 41.5 WG with Fusilade Forte 150 EC as well as Plateen 41.5 WG with Fusilade Forte 150 EC and an addition of the adjuvant Atpolan 80 EC were most effective in air destruction of the weed dry mass, both before row closing and before harvest of the potato tubers. Weed reduction reached 80.3 % and 61.9%, respectively. The weed control methods caused significant damage of potato plants (tab. 4). The largest damages were observed in object where the Barox 460 SL + Fusilade Forte 150 EC mixture of herbicides was applied. The average damages were scored as 4.2 according to 1–9 EWRC scale. Yet, the damages were transient, which indicates the selectivity of applied herbicides in regard to cultivated plant.


Keywords:

effectiveness, selectivity, tillage systems, weed control methods, potato

Bujak K., Frant M. 2006. Wpływ uproszczonej uprawy roli i nawożenia mineralnego na zachwaszczenie ziemniaka uprawianego na glebie lessowej. Acta Agrobot. 59 (2): 345 — 352.
Google Scholar

Deryło S., Szymankiewicz K. 2003. Plonowanie i zachwaszczenie ziemniaka w warunkach zróżnicowanego poziomu agrotechniki na glebie lekkiej. Annales UMCS, Sec. E, 58: 247 — 255.
Google Scholar

Dvořak J., Remešowă I. 2002. Assessment of metribuzin effects on potatoes using a method of very rapid fluorescence induction. Rast. Výr. 48 (3): 107 — 117.
Google Scholar

Eberlaina C. V., Petersom P. E., Guttieri M. J., Stark J. C. 1997. Efficacy and economics of cultivation wed control in potato. Weed Technology 11 (2): 257 — 264.
Google Scholar

Gawęda D., Szymankiewicz K. 2007. Zachwaszczenie ziemniaka w warunkach zróżnicowanej uprawy roli. Annales UMCS, Sec. E, 62: 85 — 91.
Google Scholar

Giebel J., Wnękowski S., Słomińska R., Dziedzic M. 1992. Effect of Sencor (metribuzin) on the inoculums activity of potato gangrene (Phoma exiqua var. foreata). Mat. 32. Sesji Nauk. Inst. Ochr. Roślin, Cz. II: 28 — 32.
Google Scholar

Gruczek T. 2004. Chemiczne i mechaniczne zwalczanie chwastów w ziemniakach oraz wpływ na jakość. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 44 (2): 715 — 717.
Google Scholar

Gugała M., Zarzecka K. 2009. Ocena skuteczności herbicydów w uprawie ziemniaka. Biul. IHAR 251: 225 — 234.
Google Scholar

Gugała M., Zarzecka K., Zadrożniak B. 2010. Wpływ adiuwantów na plonowanie i ograniczenie zachwaszczenia na plantacji ziemniaka. Biul. IHAR 255: 47 — 57.
Google Scholar

Kraska P., Pałys E. 2002. Wpływ systemu uprawy roli oraz nawożenia i ochrony roślin na zachwaszczenie ziemniaka uprawianego na glebie lekkiej. Annales UMCS, Sec. E, 57: 27 — 39.
Google Scholar

Sawicka B., Skalski J. 1996. Zachwaszczenie ziemniaka w warunkach stosowania herbicydu Sencor 70 WP. Cz. I. Skuteczność chwastobójcza herbicydu. Rocz. Nauk Rol. 112-A-1-2: 169 — 182.
Google Scholar

Sekutowski T., Badowski M. 2010. Wpływ zachwaszczenia, warunków meteorologicznych i ochrony herbicydowej na plon i poszczególne frakcje bulw ziemniaka. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin, 50 (3): 1390 — 1394.
Google Scholar

Trętowski J., Wójcik R. 1988. Metodyka doświadczeń rolniczych. Wyd. WSRP Siedlce: 1 — 500.
Google Scholar

Urbanowicz J. 2006. Reakcja nowych odmian ziemniaka na powschodowe stosowanie metrybuzyny. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 46 (2): 305 — 308.
Google Scholar

Urbanowicz J. 2007. Biologiczna ocena formy użytkowej SC i WG herbicydu Sencor w ziemniaku. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 47 (3): 285 — 288.
Google Scholar

Urbanowicz J. 2010. Wpływ powschodowego stosowania metrybuzyny na plon wybranych odmian ziemniaka. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 50 (2): 837 — 841.
Google Scholar

Wesołowski M. 2007. Stan i perspektywy badań nad systemami produkcji roślinnej w warunkach Lubelszczyzny. Acta Agroph. 10 (3): 739 — 749.
Google Scholar

Woźnica Z., Adamczewski K., Frank A., Manthey. 1996. Biotypy chwastów odpornych na herbicydy. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin 36 (1): 96 — 101.
Google Scholar

Zarzecka K. 2002. Ocena różnych sposobów odchwaszczania ziemniaka. Cz. I. Zachwaszczenie i plonowanie. Rocz. Nauk Rol. 116-A-1-4: 177 — 191.
Google Scholar


Published
2011-12-29

Cited by

Gugała, M. and Zarzecka, K. (2011) “The effectiveness and the selectivity of herbicides in weed control on the potato plantation”, Bulletin of Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute, (262), pp. 103–110. doi: 10.37317/biul-2011-0009.

Authors

Marek Gugała 
marek.gugala@uph.edu.pl
Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny w Siedlcach Poland

Authors

Krystyna Zarzecka 

Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny w Siedlcach Poland

Statistics

Abstract views: 34
PDF downloads: 37


License

Copyright (c) 2011 Marek Gugała, Krystyna Zarzecka

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Upon submitting the article, the Authors grant the Publisher a non-exclusive and free license to use the article for an indefinite period of time throughout the world in the following fields of use:

  1. Production and reproduction of copies of the article using a specific technique, including printing and digital technology.
  2. Placing on the market, lending or renting the original or copies of the article.
  3. Public performance, exhibition, display, reproduction, broadcasting and re-broadcasting, as well as making the article publicly available in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice.
  4. Including the article in a collective work.
  5. Uploading an article in electronic form to electronic platforms or otherwise introducing an article in electronic form to the Internet or other network.
  6. Dissemination of the article in electronic form on the Internet or other network, in collective work as well as independently.
  7. Making the article available in an electronic version in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice, in particular via the Internet.

Authors by sending a request for publication:

  1. They consent to the publication of the article in the journal,
  2. They agree to give the publication a DOI (Digital Object Identifier),
  3. They undertake to comply with the publishing house's code of ethics in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), (http://ihar.edu.pl/biblioteka_i_wydawnictwa.php),
  4. They consent to the articles being made available in electronic form under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, in open access,
  5. They agree to send article metadata to commercial and non-commercial journal indexing databases.