Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T09:11:22.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Postemergence Application of Triallate for Wild Oat Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Stephen D. Miller and
John D. Nalewaja
Stephen D. Miller
Affiliation:
Agron. Dep., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND 58102
John D. Nalewaja
Affiliation:
Agron. Dep., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND 58102
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effectiveness of postemergence applications of triallate [S-(2,3,3-trichloroallyl)diisopropylthiocarbamate] for wild oat (Avena fatua L.) control in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ‘Waldron’) was evaluated in the field and greenhouse. The stage of the wild oat plants at the time of treatment did not appear to influence wild oat control with postemergence applications of triallate in the field; however, in the greenhouse, wild oat plants became more resistant with increased maturation. Granular triallate was more effective than the emulsifiable concentrate for postemergence wild oat control. Fair season-long postemergence wild oat control was obtained with the granular formulation of triallate at rates of 2.24 kg/ha or greater. However, some wheat injury was observed in the field with the 2.80 and 3.36 kg/ha rates of granular triallate. Moisture and temperature influenced postemergence wild oat control with triallate.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , March 1975, pp. 137 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Ahrens, J.F. 1972. Granular herbicides. Weeds Today 3(2): 12–13.Google Scholar
2. Banting, J.D. 1967. Factors affecting the activity of diallate and triallate. Weed Res. 7:302–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Evans, D.M. 1970. The performance of triallate in granular form for control of Avena spp. and Alopecurus myosuroides . Proc. Brit. Weed Contr. Conf. 10:842–848.Google Scholar
4. Holyroyd, J. 1964. Field investigations concerning the selective phytotoxicity of diallate to Avena spp. in wheat and barley. Weed Res. 4:142–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Holyroyd, J. 1968. Triallate granules for the postemergence control of Avena fatua in winter and spring cereals. Proc. Brit. Weed Contr. Conf. 9:68–73.Google Scholar
6. Holyroyd, J. and Bailey, J.A. 1970. Newer herbicides for the control of Avena fatua in cereals. Proc. Brit. Weed Contr. Conf. 10:864–872.Google Scholar
7. Molberg, E.S., Friesen, H.A., McCurdy, E.V., and Dryden, R.D. 1964. Placement of diallate and triallate for control of wild oat in wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 42:351–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Nalewaja, J.D. 1973. Wild oat infestation of field crops in 1973. North Dakota Farm Res. 31(2):3–5.Google Scholar
9. Parker, C. 1963. Factors affecting the selectivity of 2,3-dichloroallyldiisopropylthiocarbamate. Weed Res. 3:259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Smith, A.E. 1969. Factors affecting the loss of triallate from soils. Weed Res. 9:306–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Smith, A.E. 1970. Degradation, adsorption, and volatility of diallate and triallate in prairie soils. Weed Res. 10:331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar