Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-jswmv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T20:19:15.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrating arthropod herbivory and reduced herbicide use for weed management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Martin M. Williams II,
Douglas B. Walsh and
Rick A. Boydston
Douglas B. Walsh
Affiliation:
Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, 24106 North Bunn Road, Prosser, WA 99350-9687
Rick A. Boydston
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, 24106 North Bunn Road, Prosser, WA 99350-9687
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Few studies have examined the combined effect of herbicide-induced stress and arthropod herbivory to reduce weed fitness. The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of arthropod herbivory on the herbicide dose–response of a perennial weed. Fluroxypyr dose–response bioassays using volunteer potato were conducted in the presence and absence of Colorado potato beetle (CPB) herbivory. Logistic model parameter estimates for leaf area, shoot biomass, tuber number, and tuber biomass were often lower with herbivory, compared with no herbivory. Greater variance of parameter estimates within herbivory plots was attributed largely to differential feeding because CPB density was not manipulated in the field. Results from short-season field studies (1,000 growing degree days [GDD] after postemergence [POST] herbicide application) indicated that herbivory had the most effect on potato during a period that coincided with high CPB density and optimal temperatures for CPB development. Season-long bioassays (> 3,100 GDD after POST) revealed that addition of herbivory reduced herbicide use 65 to > 85%, compared with the dose needed to achieve the same reduction in tuber production in the absence of herbivory. Integrated weed management systems targeting volunteer potato are more effective when fluroxypyr applications are made before periods of high herbivory. Moreover, this article describes an experimental approach contributing to optimization of combined effects of arthropod herbivory and reduced herbicide doses.

Keywords

Fluroxypyrvolunteer potato, Solanum tuberosum L.Biological weed controlbiologically effective dosedose–responseintegrated weed managementlogistic modelreduced herbicide dose

Information

Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 52 , Issue 6 , December 2004, pp. 1018 - 1025
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Ainsworth, N. 2003. Integration of herbicides with arthropod biocontrol agents for weed control. Biocontrol Sci. Technol 13:547–570.Google Scholar
Andres, L. A. 1982. Integrating weed biological control agents into a pest-management program. Weed Sci 30:(Suppl.). 25–30.Google Scholar
Boydston, R. A. 2001. Volunteer potato (Solanum tuberosum) control with herbicides and cultivation in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 15:461–466.Google Scholar
Boydston, R. A. and Seymour, M. D. 2002. Volunteer potato (Solanum tuberosum) control with herbicides and cultivation in onion (Allium cepa). Weed Technol 16:620–626.Google Scholar
Boydston, R. A. and Williams, M. M. II. 2004. Combined effects of Aceria malherbae and herbicides on field bindweed growth. Weed Sci 52:297–301.Google Scholar
Campbell, B. C. 1988. The effects of plant growth regulators and herbicides on host plant quality to insects. Pages 205–247 in Heinrichs, E. A. ed. Plant Stress-Insect Interactions. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
Charudattan, R. 1986. Integrated control of waterhyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) with a pathogen, insects, and herbicides. Weed Sci 34:(Suppl. 1). 26–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cranshaw, W. S. and Radcliffe, E. B. 1980. Effect of defoliation on yield of potatoes. J. Econ. Entomol 73:131–134.Google Scholar
Ellis, P. J. 1992. Weed hosts of beet western yellow virus and potato leafroll virus. Plant Dis 76:1137–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferro, D. N., Logan, J. A., Voss, R. H., and Elkinton, J. S. 1985. Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) temperature-dependent growth and feeding rates. Environ. Entomol 14:343–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, J. D. 1980. Impact of defoliation by the Colorado potato beetle on potato yields. J. Econ. Entomol 73:369–373.Google Scholar
Hsiao, T. H. and Fraenkel, G. 1968. Selection and specificity of the Colorado potato beetle for solanaceous and nonsolanaceous plants. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am 61:493–503.Google Scholar
Iritani, W. M., Thornton, R., Weller, L., and O'Leary, G. 1972. Relationships of seed size, spacing, stem numbers to yield of Russet Burbank potatoes. Am. Potato J 49:463–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, J. S., Sheley, R. L., and Story, J. M. 2000. Use of picloram to enhance establishment of Cyphocleonus achates (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Environ. Entomol 29:349–354.Google Scholar
Jansson, R. K. and Smilowitz, Z. 1986. Effects of Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) feeding and nitrogen nutrition on potato microclimate and weed biomass. Melsheimer Entomol. Ser 36:21–28.Google Scholar
Kjær, C. 1994. Sublethal effects of chlorsulfuron on black bindweed. Weed Res 34:453–459.Google Scholar
Kjær, C. and Elmegaard, N. 1996. Effect of herbicide treatment on host plant quality for a leaf-eating beetle. Pestic. Sci 47:319–325.Google Scholar
Lutman, P. J. W. 1977a. Investigations into some aspects of the biology of potatoes as weeds. Weed Res 17:123–132.Google Scholar
Lutman, P. J. W. 1977b. The effect of tuber size on the susceptibility of potatoes to metoxuron. Potato Res 20:331–335.Google Scholar
Lym, R. G. and Nelson, J. A. 2002. Integration of Aphthona spp. flea beetles and herbicides for leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) control. Weed Sci 50:812–819.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. A. and Lym, R. G. 2003. Interactive effects of Aphthona nigriscutis and picloram plus 2,4-D in leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Weed Sci 51:118–124.Google Scholar
Norris, R. F. and Kogan, M. 2000. Interactions between weeds, arthropod pests, and their natural enemies in managed ecosystems. Weed Sci 48:94–158.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr. and Rogers, B. S. 1989. Taxonomy, distribution, biology, and control of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States and Canada. Rev. Weed Sci 4:25–58.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr., Rogers, B. S., and Schilling, E. E. 1981. Characterization of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States. Weed Sci 29:27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olckers, T., Medal, J. C., and Gandolfo, D. E. 2002. Insect herbivores associated with species of Solanum (Solanaceae) in Northeastern Argentina and Southeastern Paraguay, with reference to biological control of weeds in South Africa and the United States of America. Fla. Entomol 85:254–260.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 2000. SAS User's Guide. Version 8. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose-response relationships. Weed Technol 9:218–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L. and Rinella, M. J. 2001. Incorporating biological control into ecologically based weed management. Pages 211–228 in Wajnberg, E., Scott, J. K., and Quimby, P. C. eds. Evaluating Indirect Ecological Effects of Biological Control. New York: CAB International.Google Scholar
Shields, E. J. and Wyman, J. A. 1984. Effect of defoliation at specific growth stages on potato yields. J. Econ. Entomol 77:1194–1199.Google Scholar
Speight, R. I. and Whittaker, J. B. 1987. Interactions between the chrysomelid beetle Gastrophysa viridula, the weed Rumex obtusifolius and the herbicide asulam. J. Appl. Ecol 24:119–129.Google Scholar
Streibig, J. C., Walker, A., and Blair, A. M. et al. 1995. Variability of bioassays with metsulfuron-methyl in soil. Weed Res 35:215–224.Google Scholar
Thomas, P. E. 1983. Sources and dissemination of potato viruses in the Columbia basin of northwestern United States. Plant Dis 67:744–747.Google Scholar
Wakankar, S. M. 1944. Influence of size and seed piece upon the yield of potatoes. J. Am. Soc. Agron 36:32–36.Google Scholar
Weber, D. C. and Ferro, D. N. 1994. Colorado potato beetle: diverse life history poses challenges to management. Pages 54–70 in Zehnder, G. W., Jansson, R. K., Powelson, M. L., and Raman, K. V., eds. Advances in Potato Pest Biology and Management. St. Paul, MN: American Phytopathological Society.Google Scholar
Williams, M. M. II and Boydston, R. A. 2002. Effect of shoot removal during tuberization on volunteer potato (Solanum tuberosum) tuber production. Weed Technol 16:617–619.Google Scholar
Williams, M. M. II., Ransom, C. V., and Thompson, W. M. 2004. Effect of volunteer potato density on bulb onion yield and quality. Weed Sci 52:754–758.Google Scholar
Xu, G. and Long, G. E. 1997. Host-plant phenology and Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) population trends in eastern Washington. Environ. Entomol 26:61–66.Google Scholar
Zehnder, G. W. and Evanylo, G. K. 1989. Influence of extent and timing of Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) defoliation on potato tuber production in eastern Virginia. J. Econ. Entomol 82:948–953.Google Scholar