| |
| Web URL(s): | https://wssa.net/wp-content/uploads/2022-WSSA-CWSS-Proceedings-Final-April-4.pdf#page=27
Last checked: 06/20/2023
Requires: PDF Reader
Notes: Item is within a single large file |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Report |
|---|
| Content Type: | Abstract or summary only |
|---|
| Author(s): | Peppers, John M.;
Askew, Shawn |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA |
|---|
| Title: | Output characteristics and weed control efficacy from targeted application devices in ornamental turfgrass |
|---|
| Meeting Info.: | Virtual: February 22-24, 2022 |
|---|
| Source: | Abstracts of the Annual Meeting of the Weed Science Society of America. 2022, p. 27. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | [United States]: Weed Science Society of America |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 1 |
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "In intensively managed ornamental turf, such as golf course putting greens, few selective herbicides are labeled and most of these still carry substantial risk of turf injury. Broadcast application of selective herbicides in these management systems are often avoided in favor of targeted weed control techniques, such as hand cutting, dabbing, or spot spraying. Targeted-application devices (TAD), such as dabbers or spot sprayers, have been utilized in the turf and ornamentals industry for many years, but have never received scientific scrutiny. Turf managers desire to use TADs with selective herbicides to reduce collateral turf damage, use more effective herbicide rates on escaped weeds, and reduce chemical cost. These TADs, however, are marketed for use only with nonselective herbicides, and contain no reference to application volume or actual herbicide rate per unit area. In order to properly examine weed control efficacy of targeted applications, the output characteristics of TADs must be characterized. The objectives of this research were to evaluate annual bluegrass control when selective herbicides are applied with a dabbing TAD and characterize the amount and consistency of application volumes from several commercially available TADs. We hypothesized that herbicide output would be highly variable between devices, but consistent within a given device. We also hypothesized that herbicide applications would effectively control annual bluegrass when applied as a targeted application.A randomized complete block design (RCBD) study with four replications was established on a creeping bentgrass research green to evaluate four herbicides, a standard hand removal method, and a nontreated check for annual bluegrass control and creeping bentgrass response. Data were subjected to analysis of variance and means were separated with Fisher's Protected LSD test at P = 0.05. In an additional RCBD study, five targeted application devices were evaluated to examine differences in output volume and standard deviation of output from each device and replicated temporally 10 times. The targeted application devices examined included four dabbers and a handheld sprayer. The dabbers consisted of a small 1.7-cm-diameter bingo dabber, a Smucker Red Dabber®, a Weed Saber®, and a Weed Wand Magic foam dabber. The handheld sprayer utilized was a Jerry's Weed Stick®. The output of the dabbers was calculated by dabbing water onto a golf green and measuring fluid loss after each 10 dabs until the dabber was emptied. Per-area calculations were based on the size of the foam applicator for dabbers and the average area of visibly evident spray pattern from the sprayer. The handheld sprayer was sprayed 50 times per replication into a graduated cylinder and fluid output was measured directly after every 10 sprays.In the field study, glyphosate (2.24 kg ai ha-1), paclobutrazol (1.12 kg ai ha-1), amicarbazone (0.20 kg ai ha-1) and manual removal controlled annual bluegrass >87% and more than primisulfuron (0.08 kg ai ha-1). Glyphosate and manual removal injured the creeping bentgrass turf >30% and were considered unacceptable. All other treatments injured creeping bentgrass turf <10%. Favoring our hypothesis, TADs varied greatly in application volume between devices, but contrary to our hypothesis, many of these devices also delivered inconsistent output between dabs. The Weed Wand Magic® deposited an average of 7100 L ha-1 which was significantly higher than all other devices. Jerry's Weed Stick® and the bingo dabber deposited the least volume at 3204 and 3960 L ha-1, respectively. Statistical differences were also observed in the standard deviation of device output. The Weed Wand Magic® had a standard deviation of 4060 L ha-1 which was significantly higher than the deviation observed from all other devices. Dabbers had a higher standard error (SE) in application volume compared to the Jerry's Weed Stick sprayer SE of 6.1 L ha-1 . Application inconsistency among dabbers was found to be correlated to fluid level within the device. As fluid was depleted, fluid pressure likely decreased reducing the dabbing output. Output of all devices was 8 to 17 times greater than the industry standard (407 L ha-1 ) for broadcast applications on greens." |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 0 |
|---|
| Note: | This item is an abstract only! |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Peppers, J. M., and S. Askew. 2022. Output characteristics and weed control efficacy from targeted application devices in ornamental turfgrass. Abstr. Annu. Meet. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 27. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=329465 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 329465. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| Web URL(s):
https://wssa.net/wp-content/uploads/2022-WSSA-CWSS-Proceedings-Final-April-4.pdf#page=27
Last checked: 06/20/2023
Requires: PDF Reader
Notes: Item is within a single large file |
| 
MSU catalog number: b2180085 |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
