Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T21:43:10.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Field-Scale Tebuthiuron Application on Brush-Infested Rangeland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert P. Gibbens ,
Carlton H. Herbel  and
James M. Lenz
Robert P. Gibbens
Affiliation:
Jornada Experimental Range, Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep., Agric, Box 30003–NMSU, Las Cruces, NM 88003-0003
Carlton H. Herbel
Affiliation:
Jornada Experimental Range, Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep., Agric, Box 30003–NMSU, Las Cruces, NM 88003-0003
James M. Lenz
Affiliation:
Jornada Experimental Range, Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep., Agric, Box 30003–NMSU, Las Cruces, NM 88003-0003
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of tebuthiuron {N-[5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)- 1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl]-N,N′-dimethylurea} to treat brush-infested arid rangeland under field-scale conditions. A 130-ha tract in southern New Mexico dominated by creosotebush [Larrea tridentata (Sesse & Moc. ex DC.) Coville #3 LARTR) was treated with pelleted tebuthiuron at 0.4 kg ai/ha. After the fourth season following treatment, control of creosotebush, honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa Torr. #PRCJG), and tarbush (Flourensia cernua DC. # FLOCE) was 87, 48, and 100%, respectively. Total shrub density was reduced from 4440 plants/ha to 570 plants/ha. Grass basal area increased from 1.1 to 3.4%. The treatment did not affect forbs greatly. Total herbaceous above-ground biomass production in the fourth season after treatment was 860 kg/ha compared to 140 kg/ha on an adjacent untreated area. Perennial grass production was nearly 11-fold greater on the treated area than on the untreated area.

Keywords

Flourensia cernuaLarrea tridentataProsopis glandulosagrass coverarid rangelandFLOCELARTRPRCJG

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , October 1987 , pp. 323 - 327
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 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. Britton, C. M., and Sneva, F. A. 1981. Effects of tebuthiuron on western juniper. J. Range Manage. 34:30–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Buffington, L. C., and Herbel, C. H. 1965. Vegetational changes on a semidesert grassland range from 1858 to 1963. Ecol. Monogr. 35:139–164.Google Scholar
3. Crowder, S. H., Cole, A. W., and Watson, V. H. 1983. Weed control and forage quality in tebuthiuron treated pastures. Weed Sci. 31:585–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Emmerich, W. E., Helmer, J. D., Renard, K. G., and Lane, L. J. 1984. Fate and effectiveness of tebuthiuron applied to a rangeland watershed. J. Environ. Qual. 13:382–386.Google Scholar
5. Fisher, C. E., Meadors, C. H., Behrens, R., Robison, E. D., Marion, P. J., and Morton, H. L. 1959. Control of mesquite on grazing lands. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 935.Google Scholar
6. Herbel, C. H., Morton, H. L., and Gibbens, R. P. 1985. Controlling shrubs in the arid Southwest with tebuthiuron. J. Range Manage. 38:391–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Jacoby, P. W., Ueckert, D. N., and Hartmann, F. S. 1982. Control of creosotebush (Larrea tridentata) with pelleted tebuthiuron. Weed Sci. 30:307–310.Google Scholar
8. Meyer, R. E., and Bovey, R. W. 1979. Control of honey mesquite (Prosopis juliflora var. glandulosa) and Macartney rose (Rosa bracteata) with soil-applied herbicides. Weed Sci. 27:280–284.Google Scholar
9. Meyer, R. E., and Bovey, R. W. 1980. Control of whitebrush (Aloysia lycioides) and associated species with soil-applied herbicides. Weed Sci. 28:204–212.Google Scholar
10. Morton, H. L., Smith, E. L., Oliveira, M., and Hull, H. M. 1978. Soil applied herbicides for brush control in southwestern United States and northern Brazil. Pages 647–650 in Hyder, D. (ed.). Proc. 1st Int. Rangeland Congr., Soc. Range Manage., Denver, CO.Google Scholar
11. Neher, R. E., and Bailey, O. F. 1976. Soil survey of White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. U.S. Dep. Agric., SCS, in cooperation with U.S. Dep. Army, White Sands Missile Range, and the N.M. Agric. Exp. Stn. Google Scholar
12. Platt, K. B. 1959. Plant control–some possibilities and limitations. I. The challenge to management. J. Range Manage. 12: 64–68.Google Scholar
13. Scifres, C. J. 1980. Brush Management. Principles and Practices for Texas and the Southwest. Texas A.&M. Univ. Press, College Station.Google Scholar
14. Scifres, C. J., Embry, D. L., and Mutz, J. L. 1981. Whitebrush response to tebuthiuron and picloram pellets. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1356.Google Scholar
15. Ueckert, D. N., Jacoby, P. W. Jr., and Hartmann, F. S. 1982. Tarbush and forage response to selected pelleted herbicides in the western Edwards Plateau. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1393.Google Scholar
16. Valentine, K. A., and Norris, J. J. 1960. Mesquite control with 2,4,5-T by ground spray application. N.M. State Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 451.Google Scholar
17. Welsh, R. G., and Beck, R. F. 1976. Some ecological relationships between creosotebush and bush muhly. J. Range Manage. 29:472–475.Google Scholar
18. Whitson, T. D., and Alley, H. P. 1984. Tebuthiuron effects on Artemisia spp. and associated grasses. Weed Sci. 32:180–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. York, J. C., and Dick-Peddie, W. A. 1969. Vegetation changes in southern New Mexico during the past hundred years. Pages 157-166 in McGinnies, W. G. and Goldman, B. J. (ed.). Arid Lands in Perspective. Univ. Ariz. Press, Tucson.Google Scholar