Time of Application of S-Metolachlor Affects Growth, Marketable Yield and Quality of Carrot and Red Beet

Darren E. Robinson, Kristen E. McNaughton

Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Canada.

DOI: 10.4236/ajps.2012.34065                

Abstract

Tolerance of carrot and red beet to s-metolachlor at three application timings—pre-emergence to crop (PRE), early postemergence (crop at two to four leaf stage-EPOST), and late postemergence (crop at five to seven leaf stage-LPOST) —was determined from 2008 to 2010. LPOST applications of s-metolachlor reduced carrot above ground plant dry weight, marketable yield and grower payment, but did not affect carrot length. PRE and LPOST applications of s-metolachlor reduced red beet above ground plant dry weight, total marketable yield, yield of No. 2 and No. 3 red beet, and grower payment. Our findings indicate that while carrot may be tolerant to PRE applications of s-metolachlor, applications made after the 5 leaf stage reduced plant dry weight enough to impact marketable yield and grower payment. In red beet, the potential reduction in growth, yield and grade would not justify the utility of a PRE or LPOST applica- tion timing.

Keywords

S-Metolachlor; Yield; Quality; Tolerance; Application Timing; Red Beet; Carrot

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	S. Mailvaganam, “Area, Production and Farm Value of Specified Commercial Vegetable Crops, Ontario,” 2008. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/stats/hort/veg_m08.htm
[2]	Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), “Vegetable Production Recommendations 2010-2011—Publication 363,” Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Canada, 2010.
[3]	G. A. Mulligan and B. E. Junkins, “The Biology of Canadian Weeds. 17. Cyperus esculentus L.,” Canadian Journal of Plant Science, Vol. 56, No. 2, 1976, pp. 339-350. doi:10.4141/cjps76-052
[4]	Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), “Guide to Weed Control 2010-2011—Publication 75,” Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Canada, 2009.
[5]	O. Daugovish, S. A. Fennimore and R. F. Smith, “Herbicide Evaluation for Fresh Market Celery,” Weed Technology, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2007, pp. 719-723. doi:10.1614/WT-06-202.1
[6]	W. J. Grichar, A. E. Colburn and P. A. Baumann, “Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Control in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) as Influenced by Method of Metolachlor Application,” Weed Technology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1996, pp. 278-281.
[7]	E. W. Stoller and L. M. Wax, “Yellow Nutsedge Shoot Emergence and Tuber Longevity,” Weed Science, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1973, pp. 76-81.
[8]	Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers (OPVG), “OPVG 2009 Information Handbook,” Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers, London, Ontario, Canada, 2009.
[9]	SAS Institute Inc., “SAS 9.1.3 Help and Documentation,” SAS Institute Inc., Cary, 2003.
[10]	W. K. Vencill, “Herbicide Handbook,” 8th Edition, Weed Science Society of America, Champaign, 2002, pp. 299-300.
[11]	P. J. Steptoe, W. K. Vencill and T. L. Grey, “Influence of Moisture Stress on Herbicidal Control of an Invasive Weed, Benghal Dayflower (Commelina benghalensis),” Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection, Special Issue XX, 2006, pp. 907-914.
[12]	D. L. Jordan, J. F. Spears and J. W. Wilcut, “Tolerance of Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) to Herbicides Applied Postemergence,” Peanut Science, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2003, pp. 8-13. doi:10.3146/pnut.30.1.0001
[13]	D. E. Robinson and A. S. Hamill, “Effect of Timing and Rate on Tomato Tolerance to Postemergence Applications of s-Metolachlor,” In: R. Pitblado and J. Routledge, Eds., XI International Symposium on the Processing Tomato, Toronto, 8-11 June 2008, pp. 135-139.
[14]	S. L. Bollman, C. L. Sprague and D. Penner, “Physiological Basis for Tolerance of Sugarbeet Varieties to s-Metolachlor and Dimethenamid-p”, Weed Science, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2008, pp. 18-25. doi:10.1614/WS-07-100.1
[15]	R. R. Bellinder, D. Wilcox-Lee, A. Senesac and D. T. Warholic, “Response of Early-Maturing Cabbage to Metolachlor,” Weed Technology, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1989, pp. 463-466.