Weed control continues to be one of the most expensive and time consuming aspects of landscape maintenance. Many homeowners are becoming more interested in nonchemical pest-management strategies due to increasing concern over the environmental impact of pesticide use. Nonchemical landscape weed control can be achieved using mechanical disruption (e.g., mowing, hand-pulling, hoeing, and tilling), physical barriers, or cultural control methods (e.g., mulching and plant selection). However, the best results are almost always achieved when employing a variety of methods (often involving chemical control methods). In adopting a weed control strategy, client expectations and weed tolerances must be addressed. While a virtually weed-free landscape is possible without the use of herbicides, this goal often requires a significant amount of time and money, and requires more planning to be successful. The goal of this manuscript is survey the literature pertaining to nonchemical weed control in landscape planting beds and determine: 1) the most effective strategies; 2) the advantages and disadvantages of common practices; and 3) highlight areas where research is needed or improvements could be made.
S. Christopher Marble, Andrew K. Koeser, and Gitta Hasing
S. Christopher Marble, Andrew K. Koeser, and Gitta Hasing
Use of preemergence and postemergence herbicides is the most effective and economical method of weed control in landscape planting beds. When used correctly, herbicides can provide satisfactory weed control, reduce labor costs, and cause little or no negative environmental impacts. Major factors in herbicide efficacy include choosing the correct herbicide for the weed species present, following proper calibration procedures, and applying herbicides at the correct timing. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the research pertaining to herbicide use in landscape planting beds and present 1) the advantages and disadvantages of common chemical weed control strategies, 2) the most effective preemergence and postemergence herbicides in various landscape scenarios, 3) potential environmental concerns pertaining to improper application of herbicides, and 4) highlight knowledge gaps where additional research is needed or improvements could be made.
S. Christopher Marble, Andrew K. Koeser, Gitta Hasing, Drew McClean, and Annette Chandler
Organic mulch is commonly used in landscape planting beds to improve plant growth and reduce competition from weed species. Although many different mulch materials have been evaluated in landscape, forestry, or agricultural settings, there have been no previous reports concerning the maintenance costs associated with different mulch materials from a weed control perspective. Trials were conducted at two locations in Florida to estimate the annual maintenance costs associated with pine bark nuggets (bark derived from pine species not specified) and pine straw mulch [mix of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) and slash pine (Pinus taeda) needles] with and without the use of a granular preemergence herbicide when maintained at similar depths in schilling’s holly (Ilex vomitoria ‘Schilling’s Dwarf’) shrub beds and asiatic jasmine (Trachelospermum asiaticum ‘Minima’) groundcover beds. Weed coverage and residual mulch depth were tracked over time, with maximum and minimum thresholds (20% and 2 inches, respectively) set as triggers for maintenance activities. Results showed that the addition of herbicide (trifluralin + isoxaben) had little to no impact on weeding frequency or time when plots were mulched, but did reduce hand weeding frequency and time compared with nontreated, nonmulched plots. Both mulch materials used alone reduced hand weeding frequency and time compared with herbicide-only treatments. Although results varied by bed type and location, pine bark generally provided greater weed control compared with pine straw and required fewer mulch additions and less mulch by volume. Results from this study suggests that using pine bark nuggets as mulch may result in lower maintenance costs and weed pressure compared with pine straw when both are applied and maintained at 2-inch depths.
Kimberly A. Moore, Amy L. Shober, Gitta S. Hasing, Christine L. Wiese, Geoffrey C. Denny, and Gary W. Knox
Recent research suggested that the nitrogen (N) fertilizer rates needed to maintain high-quality landscape plants was lower than rates needed to grow the largest size plants. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of N fertilizer rate on the aesthetic quality of various landscape-grown annual and perennials species. Nineteen cool-season annuals, 20 warm-season annuals, and 4 perennials were planted into raised beds containing subsoil fill material in a completely randomized design in west-central Florida (U.S. Department of Agriculture hardiness zone 9b). Plants were fertilized every 12 weeks with polymer coated, slow-release N (42N–0P–0K) fertilizer at annual N rate of 3, 5, or 7 lb/1000 ft2 (annuals) or 1, 3, or 5 lb/1000 ft2 (perennials). Plants were rated for aesthetic quality every 6 weeks for a period of 18 weeks (annuals) or 54 weeks (perennials). For most species, quality ratings of plants fertilized with 3 lb/1000 ft2 of N per year (annuals) or 1 lb/1000 ft2 of N per year (perennials) were not significantly lower than plants receiving higher rates of N annually. Previously reported N fertilizer recommendations for central Florida of 2 to 4 lb/1000 ft2 per year should be adequate for maintaining acceptable quality landscape-grown annual and herbaceous perennial plant species.
Amy L. Shober, Kimberly A. Moore, Gitta S. Hasing, Christine Wiese, Geoffrey C. Denny, and Gary W. Knox
Research supporting recommendations for fertilizer needs of landscape-grown vines and groundcovers is lacking. The objectives of our study were to (1) evaluate the quality response of selected vine and groundcover species to nitrogen (N) fertilization at five rates and (2) validate the recommended N fertilizer rates (from the initial evaluation) by monitoring quality of additional landscape-grown vine and groundcover species. Three vine species and two groundcover species were planted in west-central Florida into raised beds containing subsoil fill material in a completely randomized design. Plants were fertilized every 6 weeks with a controlled release fertilizer (20N–0P–0K–23S) at an annual N rate of 0, 2, 4, 6, or 12 lb/1000 ft2. Plant aesthetic quality (0–5 scale) was assessed every 6 weeks for 30 weeks after planting. Although quality of some species increased significantly as N rate increased, all plants supplied with at least 4 lb/1000 ft2 per year N fertilizer had acceptable quality ratings of 3 or better. Screening of three additional vines and four additional groundcovers fertilized with controlled release fertilizer (42N–0P–0K) at an annual N rate of 3, 5, or 7 lb/1000 ft2 confirmed that fertilization with 2 to 4 lb/1000 ft2 per year should be adequate to maintain acceptable vines and groundcovers grown in the landscape in west-central Florida.