| |
| Publication Type:
| Report |
|---|
| Content Type: | Abstract or Summary only |
|---|
| Author(s): | Mullahey, J. J. |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Immokalee, FL |
|---|
| Title: | Evaluating grazing management systems to control giant smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus var. pyramidalis) |
|---|
| Section: | Section II: Weed management in turf, pasture and rangeland
Other records with the "Section II: Weed management in turf, pasture and rangeland" Section
|
|---|
| Meeting Info.: | 53rd Annual Meeting, Tulsa, OK, January 24-26, 2000 |
|---|
| Source: | Southern Weed Science Society Proceedings. Vol. 53, 2000, p. 59-60. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society. |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 2 |
|---|
| Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Grazing; Weed control; Sporobolus indicus; Paspalum notatum; Pastures; Dalapon; Hexazinone; Percent living ground cover; Sporobolus; Encroachment
|
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "Smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus var. indicus) is an invasive non-native plant that has become a serious weed problem in pastures throughout Floridaand [Florida and] the southeastern United States (Mislevy et al. 1980). In bahiagrass pastures, smutgrass shades the bahiagrass, resulting in lower forage production and forage quality. Mowing (7.6 cm stubble height, 4 frequencies) did not eradicate smutgrass but did reduce the basal diameter of the plants (McCaleb et al. 1966). Cultivation of pastures heavily infested with smutgrass did not controlall [control all] the smutgrass plants, and new plants grew from seed in the soil. Applying 3.3 kg/ha of dalapon and fertilizing 5 weeks (and each year thereafter) after the dalapon treatments resulted in 80+% control of smutgrass for a 5-yr period (Mislevy and Currey, 1980). Heavy (0.5 metric tons residual DM/ha after each grazing period) grazing pressure has been successful in controlling smutgrass (Valle, 1977), though smutgrass can be unpalatable when growing on mineral soils of Florida and Georgia. Andrade (1979) reported a 73.8% reduction in smutgrass ground cover during the first year of grazing and concluded that grazing pressure is an effective tool to control smutgrass. Information is lacking on the use of grazing, in combination with herbicides, for controlling giant smutgrass. This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of two grazing systems (continuous and rotational) and the application of Velpar on the control of giant smutgrass and the recovery of bahiagrass. A rotationaland [rotational and] continuous grazing system was evaluated using two twenty-acre paddocks in 1999. Each treatment was replicated twice; the continuous paddocks were divided into two 10-acre paddocks, and the rotational paddocks were divided into eight 2.5-acre plots. Forty Brangus-type bred cows grazed at a stocking rate of 1 cow/acre for each grazing system. Paddocks were mowed in January, fertilized in February, and grazing started in early March 1999 and continued until early August. Field variables recorded included grass (smutgrass, bahiagrass) ground cover, smutgrass seedhead production, forage quality, and animal performance (body condition score). Herbicide trial (1998-99) was a randomized complete block design with four replications evaluating four rates (0, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 lb a.i./a) of Velpar herbicide applied at 30 gallons/a on July 28, 1998, and 1999. Smutgrass control was recorded in addition to bahiagrass ground cover. During the grazing period, smutgrass ground cover increased for the continuous (18-22%) treatment and decreased slightly for the rotational grazing treatments (14-11%). Bahiagrass ground cover increased with rotational grazing (83-88%) and remained constant with continuous grazing (77-75%). Forage quality (crude protein, energy) of the smutgrass and bahiagrass tended to be higher fromthe [from the] rotational grazed paddocks. Within each grazing system, the forage quality of the smutgrass was slightly higher than the bahiagrass. For both grazing treatments, cow body condition score increased (5 to 6) during the study period. This weight increase represents about 75-100 lb of gain, and the animals were in good condition for calving and rebreeding in the fall and winter months. Successful control (>90%) 1 with Velpar herbicide occurred when applying 1.0 lb ai/a. Extent of bahiagrass recovery after application was dependent upon the initial bahiagrass ground cover when the Velpar was applied. In 1998, initial bahiagrass ground cover was 25-30% and the bahiagrass ground cover approached 56-94% at 3 months after treatment (MAT). In 1999, initial ground cover was only 7-15% and bahiagrass ground cover was only 16-38% at 3 MAT. Therefore, to have adequate amounts of bahiagrass for grazing, pastures that are densely (70% or greater) populated with smutgrass should be mowed or grazed prior to treating with Velpar." |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 4 |
|---|
| Note: | This item is an abstract only! |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Mullahey, J. J. 2000. Evaluating grazing management systems to control giant smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus var. pyramidalis). South. Weed Sci. Soc. Proc. 53:p. 59-60. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=73974 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 73974. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| 
MSU catalog number: SB 611 .S6 v.52 |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
