Response of strawberry to soil fumigation: Microbial mechanisms and some alternatives to methyl bromide Annual Int. Res. Conf. Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions Abstract 6. Fennimore, S.A. Ajwa, H. Haar
Steven A. Fennimore, Milton J. Haar, Rachael E. Goodhue, and Christopher Q. Winterbottom
James P. Gilreath, Bielinski M. Santos, and Timothy N. Motis
strawberry provided by shank- and drip-applied methyl bromide alternative programs HortScience 38 55 61 Gilreath, J.P. Santos, B.M. Gilreath, P.R. Jones, J.P. Noling, J.W. 2004 Efficacy of 1,3-dichloropropene + chloropicrin application methods in combination
Grant R. Manning and Steven A. Fennimore
Methyl bromide has been the foundation of chemical weed control in strawberry (Fragaria ×ananassa) in California for over 40 years. The impending phaseout of methyl bromide may leave strawberry producers dependent on less efficacious alternative fumigants for weed control. The use of herbicides to supplement fumigants is a potential weed control strategy for strawberry. A 2-year field study was conducted in California to evaluate 10 herbicides as possible supplements for methyl bromide alternative fumigants. Herbicides were applied immediately after transplanting (immediate posttransplant), and 3 weeks after transplanting (delayed posttransplant). Napropamide applied immediate posttransplant was included as a commercial standard. Immediate posttransplant treatments that were safe in strawberry include carfentrazone at 0.075 and 0.15 lb/acre (0.084 and 0.168 kg·ha-1), flumioxazin at 0.063 lb/acre (0.071 kg·ha-1) and sulfentrazone at 0.175 and 0.25 lb/acre (0.196 and 0.28 kg·ha-1). Triflusulfuron at 0.016 lb/acre (0.017 kg·ha-1) was the only delayed posttransplant treatment with acceptable selectivity. Among the selective herbicides applied immediate posttransplant, flumioxazin and napropamide provided the most consistent control of bur clover (Medicago polymorpha) and shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris). Triflusulfuron applied delayed posttransplant did not significantly reduce bur clover densities, but did reduce shepherd's purse densities.
S.M. Schneider, B.D. Hanson, J.S. Gerik, A. Shrestha, T.J. Trout, and S. Gao
orchard replant field J. Environ. Qual. 37 369 377 Gerik, J.S. 2005 Drip-applied soil fumigation for freesia production HortTechnology 15 820 824 Gilreath, J. Santos, B. Motis, T. Noling, J. Mirusso, J. 2005 Methyl bromide alternatives for nematode and
José M. López-Aranda, Luis Miranda, Juan J. Medina, Carmen Soria, Berta de los Santos, Fernando Romero, Rosa M. Pérez-Jiménez, Miguel Talavera, Steve A. Fennimore, and Bielinski M. Santos
Modificaciones al método de extracción de nemátodos fitoparásitos por centrifugación en azúcar Plagas 9 183 189 Norton, J.A. 2004 IR-4 methyl bromide alternative (MBA) programs review Proc. Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. Methyl Bromide Alternatives Emissions Reductions
Olha Sydorovych, Charles D. Safley, Rob M. Welker, Lisa M. Ferguson, David W. Monks, Katie Jennings, Jim Driver, and Frank J. Louws
.G. 1990 Commercial production of staked tomatoes in North Carolina North Carolina Coop. Ext. Serv. Publ. AG-60 Louws, F.J. Ferguson, L.M. Ivors, K. Driver, J. Jennings, K. Milks, D. Shoemaker, P.B. Monks, D.W. 2004 Efficacy of methyl bromide alternatives
Sanjeev K. Bangarwa, Jason K. Norsworthy, Ronald L. Rainey, and Edward E. Gbur
) are gaining attention in recent years as a methyl bromide alternative as a result of their lethal activity on several pests, including weeds ( Baysal and Miller, 2009 ; Boydston and Hang, 1995 ; Buskov et al., 2002 ; Matthiessen and Shackleton, 2005
Christopher L. Ray, Sandra B. Wilson, Kathy H. Brock, Bruce A. Fortnum, and Dennis R. Decoteau
Pest management is of primary importance to the vegetable industry in our nation. In recent years producers have undergone much scrutiny concerning their pest control strategies, which often include the use of chemical pesticides. Due to the detrimental effects of many fumigants, growers are being forced to incorporate more environmentally sound agricultural practices while still producing a healthy, marketable commodity. The effects of three different fumigants and reflective mulches on plant growth and development were studied in field-grown, staked tomatoes. Methyl bromide, Telone II, or Telone C-17 were used in fumigation of plots. The establishment of mulch color was done via applications of exterior enamel paint, white or red in color, to the surface of black polyethylene mulch. With the exception of total marketable yields, no interactions existed between mulch color and fumigant. Red mulch and Telone II treatments resulted in the highest total marketable yield. Telone II application increased early marketable yield. White mulch color increased preharvest yield and black mulch color decreased early marketable yield. Low initial populations of nematodes may be the cause for lack of response due to fumigation.
Bielinski M. Santos, José Manuel López-Aranda, James P. Gilreath, Luis Miranda, Carmen Soria, and Juan J. Medina
Tunnel and open field trials were conducted in two locations in Huelva, Spain, and one in Florida to determine the effect of selected methyl bromide (MBr) alternatives on strawberry yield. In Spain, the tunnel treatments were: a) nontreated control, b) MBr + chloropicrin (Pic) 50:50 at a rate of 400 kg·ha–1; c) dazomet at 400 kg·ha–1, d) 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) + Pic 65:35 at 300 kg·ha–1; e) Pic at 300 kg/ha; f) dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) + Pic 50:50 at 250 + 250 kg·ha–1; and f) propylene oxide at 550 kg·ha–1. All treatments were covered with virtually impermeable film (VIF), except the nontreated control, which was covered with low-density polyethylene (LDPE) mulch. Dazomet was rototilled 10 cm deep, whereas the other fumigants were injected with four chisels per bed. In Florida, the open-field treatments were a) nontreated control, b) MBr + Pic 67:33 at a rate of 400 kg/ha with LDPE; c) MBr + Pic 67:33 at 310 kg·ha–1 with VIF; d) 1,3-D + Pic 65:35 at 300 kg·ha–1 with VIF; e) methyl iodide (MI) + Pic 50:50 at 230 kg·ha–1 with VIF; f) Pic at 300 kg·ha–1 with VIF; g) DMDS + Pic 50:50 at 250 + 250 kg·ha–1 with VIF; and g) propylene oxide at 500 kg·ha–1 with VIF. The fumigants were applied with three chisels per bed. In Spain, the results showed that 1,3-D + Pic, DMDS + Pic, and Pic consistently had similar marketable yields as MBr + Pic. Similar results were found in Florida, with the exception of propylene oxide, which also had equal marketable fruit weight as MBr + Pic.
S.A. Fennimore, M.J. Haar, and H.A. Ajwa
The loss of methyl bromide (MB) as a soil fumigant has created the need for new weed management systems for crops such as strawberry (Fragaria ×ananassa Duchesne). Potential alternative chemicals to replace methyl bromide fumigation include 1,3-D, chloropicrin (CP), and metam sodium. Application of emulsified formulations of these fumigants through the drip irrigation system is being tested as an alternative to the standard shank injection method of fumigant application in strawberry production. The goal of this research was to evaluate the weed control efficacy of alternative fumigants applied through the drip irrigation system and by shank injection. The fumigant 1,3-D in a mixture with CP was drip-applied as InLine (60% 1,3-D plus 32% CP) at 236 and 393 L·ha-1 or shank injected as Telone C35 (62% 1,3-D plus 35% CP) at 374 L·ha-1. Chloropicrin (CP EC, 95%) was drip-applied singly at 130 and 200 L·ha-1 or shank injected (CP, 99%) at 317 kg·ha-1. Vapam HL (metam sodium 42%) was drip-applied singly at 420 and 700 L·ha-1. InLine was drip-applied at 236 and 393 L·ha-1, and then 6 d later followed by (fb) drip-applied Vapam HL at 420 and 700 L·ha-1, respectively. CP EC was drip-applied simultaneously with Vapam HL at 130 plus 420 L·ha-1 and as a sequential application at 200 fb 420 L·ha-1, respectively. Results were compared to the commercial standard, MB : CP mixture (67:33) shank-applied at 425 kg·ha-1 and the untreated control. Chloropicrin EC at 200 L·ha-1 and InLine at 236 to 393 L·ha-1 each applied singly controlled weeds as well as MB : CP at 425 kg·ha-1. Application of these fumigants through the drip irrigation systems provided equal or better weed control than equivalent rates applied by shank injection. InLine and CP EC efficacy on little mallow (Malva parviflora L.) or prostrate knotweed (Polygonum aviculare L.) seed buried at the center of the bed did not differ from MB : CP. However, the percentage of weed seed survival at the edge of the bed was often higher in the drip-applied treatments than in the shank-applied treatments, possibly due to the close proximity of the shank-injected fumigant to the edge of the bed. Vapam HL was generally less effective than MB : CP on the native weed population or on weed seed. The use of Vapam HL in combination with InLine or CP EC did not provide additional weed control benefit. Chemical names used: 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D); sodium N-methyldithiocarbamate (metam sodium); methyl bromide; trichloro-nitromethane (chloropicrin).