1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) Spray/Seeding Plan Page 1 of 6 University of Georgia Weed and pepper response to a potentially new fumigant.

Transcription

1 1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) Spray/Seeding Plan Page 1 of 6 Weed and pepper response to a potentially new fumigant. Trial ID: Veg27 09 Location: Ponder Farm Study Dir.: Stanley Culpepper/William UpChurch Investigator: Stanley Culpepper Use 3 liters(s) per treatment mixture to spray 25 gal/ac Plots: 6 by 35 feet Trt Treatment Rate Grow ppl mt Product Plot No. By Rep No. Name Unit Stg Code to Measure Non treated preplant H&D 200 lb preplant H&D 300 lb preplant H&D 400 lb preplant H&D 500 lb preplant Sort Order: Treatment Trial Comments OBJECTIVE: Determine crop and weed response to a potentially new fumigant (SF). VISUL CROP RESPONSE: 1. Bell pepper were transplanted immediately following hole punching at 19 d after fumigating. 2. No injury was noted from any treatment. PURPLE NUTSEDGE RESPONSE: 1. Nearly complete control was noted at the time of transplanting, although a few nutsedge plants were penetrating the mulch in each system. 2. t 47 d after fumigating, control by 200 and 300 lb/ was less than 84%; control was greater with 500 lb/ (93%). 3. Just before harvest, control ranged from 70 to 88% with a general rate response noted. LIVID MRNTH: 1. Livid amaranth emerged from plant holes only. 2. By 47 d after fumigating, control ranged from 55 to 78% with a general rate response noted. 3. t harvest, control by all systems was poor and less than 45%. PEPPER GROWTH: 1. t 28, 46, and 61 d after fumigating, heights from 20 pepper plants per plot were measured. 2. No treatment impacted pepper growth. 3. Neither nutsedge nor pigweed had much impact on pepper growth because of the rapid initial growth of the pepper crop, conditions were perfect for rapid pepper growth. YIELD: 1. Jumbo pepper were harvested by a hired crew four times. 2. When totaling all four harvests, yield was similar with SF at 300, 400, and 500 lb/ and these yields were greater than the non treated control. 3. Yield response was likely a response to early season nutsedge control as the impact on pepper production and harvest from pigweed occurred with all systems. NOTE: lthough neither MB nor the UG 3 WY were included in this study, both of these treatments were included in another trial located in the same field with the same fumigation period. MB and the UG 3 WY in this sister study were more effective than SF primarily on pigweed but also on nutsedge.

2 1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) OV Means Table Page 2 of 6 Weed and pepper response to a potentially new fumigant. Trial ID: Veg27 09 Location: Ponder Farm Study Dir.: Stanley Culpepper/William UpChurch Investigator: Stanley Culpepper Weed Code CYPRO CYPRO CYPRO CYPRO MLI MLI Crop Code CPSN CPSN Rating Data Type INJURY INJURY CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL Rating Unit % % % % % % % % Rating Date 8/8/2009 8/17/2009 8/8/2009 8/17/2009 9/3/2009 9/22/2009 9/3/2009 9/22/2009 Crop Stage Trt Eval Interval 22 D 31 D 22 D 31 D 48 D 67 D 48 D 67 D RM ction Codes Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Unit Non treated 0.0 a 0.0 a 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 0.0 c 0.0 c 0.0 c 2 H&D 200 lb 0.0 a 0.0 a 93.3 a 88.7 a 79.0 c 73.3 b 55.0 b 30.0 b 3 H&D 300 lb 0.0 a 0.0 a 95.3 a 93.0 a 83.3 bc 80.0 ab 71.7 a 30.0 b 4 H&D 400 lb 0.0 a 0.0 a 95.3 a 92.7 a 88.0 ab 88.3 a 76.7 a 43.3 a 5 H&D 500 lb 0.0 a 0.0 a 96.7 a 94.3 a 93.3 a 88.3 a 78.3 a 43.3 a LSD (P=.05) Standard Deviation CV Bartlett's X P(Bartlett's X2) Replicate F Replicate Prob(F) Treatment F Treatment Prob(F) Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P=.05, LSD) Mean comparisons performed only when OV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

3 1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) OV Means Table Page 3 of 6 Weed Code CYPES VG20PL VG20PL VG20PL HRVEST1 HRVEST1 HRVEST2 HRVEST2 Crop Code CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN Rating Data Type #/PLOT HEIGHTS HEIGHTS HEIGHTS #/PLOT WT/LBS #/PLOT WT/LBS Rating Unit. CM CM CM.... Rating Date 8/13/2009 8/19/2009 9/2/2009 9/17/ /2/ /2/ /9/ /9/2009 Crop Stage VG20PL VG20PL VG20PL Trt Eval Interval 27 D 33 D 47 D 62 D 77 D 77 D 84 D 84 D RM ction Codes T1 T2 T3 Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Unit Non treated a a a a 16.0 a 8.87 a 28.7 c a 2 H&D 200 lb 18.3 b a a a 30.3 a a 36.3 bc a 3 H&D 300 lb 9.3 c a a a 15.7 a 9.17 a 46.0 ab a 4 H&D 400 lb 10.0 bc a a a 29.3 a a 45.0 ab a 5 H&D 500 lb 5.3 c a a a 22.0 a a 51.3 a a LSD (P=.05) Standard Deviation CV Bartlett's X P(Bartlett's X2) * * Replicate F Replicate Prob(F) Treatment F Treatment Prob(F) Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P=.05, LSD) Mean comparisons performed only when OV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

4 1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) OV Means Table Page 4 of 6 Weed Code HRVEST3 HRVEST3 HRVEST4 HRVEST4 HR1 4 HR1 4 Crop Code CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN CPSN Rating Data Type #/PLOT WT/LBS #/PLOT WT/LBS #/PLOT WT/LBS Rating Unit Rating Date 10/19/ /19/ /13/ /13/ /13/ /13/2009 Crop Stage Trt Eval Interval 94 D 94 D 119 D 119 D 119 D 119 D RM ction Codes T4 T5 Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Unit Non treated 13.7 a 5.20 a 63.7 a a a b 2 H&D 200 lb 13.3 a 6.80 a 80.0 a a a ab 3 H&D 300 lb 20.3 a a 86.0 a a a a 4 H&D 400 lb 26.3 a a 85.0 a a a a 5 H&D 500 lb 21.3 a a 83.3 a a a a LSD (P=.05) Standard Deviation CV Bartlett's X P(Bartlett's X2) * Replicate F Replicate Prob(F) Treatment F Treatment Prob(F) Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P=.05, LSD) Mean comparisons performed only when OV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

5 1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) Site Description Page 5 of 6 Weed and pepper response to a potentially new fumigant. Trial ID: Veg27 09 Location: Ponder Farm Study Dir.: Stanley Culpepper/William UpChurch Investigator: Stanley Culpepper GENERL TRIL INFORMTION Study Director: Stanley Culpepper/William UpChurch Title: Ext. Weed Science ffiliation: Univ. of Georgia Postal Code: Investigator: Stanley Culpepper Title: Ext. Weed Science ffiliation: Univ. of Georgia Postal Code: TRIL LOCTION City: Ty Ty Trial Status: completed State/Prov.: G Trial Reliability: good Postal Code: Initiation Date: 7/17/2009 Country: US Conducted Under GLP (Y/N): N Conducted Under GEP (Y/N): N CROP ND WEED DESCRIPTION Weed Code Common Name Scientific Name 1. CYPRO purple nutsedge 2. MLI Livid amaranth Crop 1: CPSN PEPPER Variety: ristotle Planting Date: 8/5/2009 Planting Method: TRNSPLNT Rate: 1 foot Depth: 2 in Row Spacing: 15 IN Spacing Within Row: 12 IN Seed Bed: raised, mulch Soil Temperature: 94 F Soil Moisture: MOIST SITE ND DESIGN Plot Width, Unit: 6 FT Plot Length, Unit: 35 FT Reps: 3 Site Type: Ponder research farm Tillage Type: conventional Study Design: RNDOMIZED COMPLETE BLOCK SOIL DESCRIPTION % Sand: 90 % OM: 1.0 Texture:. % Silt: 4 ph: 6.3 Soil Name: Tifton sandy loam % Clay: 6 Overall Moisture Conditions: wet Closest Weather Station: on site Distance: 200 Unit: yd PPLICTION DESCRIPTION pplication Date: 7/17/2009 Time of Day: 3:00 PM pplication Method: IN BED pplication Timing: PREPLNT pplic. Placement: 8"depth ir Temp., Unit: 90 F % Relative Humidity: 64 Wind Velocity, Unit: 10 MPH Dew Presence (Y/N): N Soil Temp., Unit: 89 F Soil Moisture: MOIST % Cloud Cover: 30 CROP STGE T ECH PPLICTION Crop 1 Code, Stage: CPSN. Stage Scale: preplant Height, Unit: 0 IN WEED STGE T ECH PPLICTION Weed 1 Code, Stage: CYPRO. Stage Scale: preplant Density, Unit: see comme Weed 2 Code, Stage: MLI. Stage Scale: preplant Density, Unit: see comme

6 1/17/2010 (Veg27 09) Site Description Page 6 of 6 PPLICTION EQUIPMENT ppl. Equipment: superbedd Nozzle Spacing, Unit: 11 in Nozzles/Row: 3 Band Width, Unit: 32 in