Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2003 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582003000400013 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/211254 |
Resumo: | This work was carried out at the Advanced Weed Research Nucleus - UNESP, Botucatu-SP, to evaluate the control of Myriophyllum aquaticum by applying different herbicides in post emergence. The herbicides and doses (g ha-1) tested were: diquat (Reward) at 204 g a.i. ha-1, diquat at 102 and 204 g a.i. ha-1 + agral at 0.1% v/v; 2,4-D (DMA 806 BR) at 1,340, 670, 335 and 167 g a.e. ha-1; glyphosate (Rodeo) at 3.360 g a.e. ha-1 + Aterbane at 0.5% v/v and imazapyr (Arsenal) at 250 g a.e. ha-1. Small tanks (60 x 60 x 45 cm) with about 120 L water capacity, plus 20 L of soil were used. The plants were counted (20 stems), and distributed in the plots. Plant phytotoxicity was evaluated at 2, 6, 9, 11, 13, 17, 20, 23, 26, 30 and 36 days after application (DAA). Herbicide spraying was performed with a backpack sprayer, using a 2.0 bar for CO2 pressure, consuming 180 l ha-1 volume and 110.02 VS fan type nozzles. The herbicide diquat showed the first symptoms of intoxication at 2 DAA, and regardless of the dose applied, provided overall control of Myriophyllum plants at 20 DAA, with plant regrowth being observed at 23 DAA. The 2,4 D herbicide provided 100% control at 23 DAA, for doses 1,340 and 670 g ha-1. However, for the other doses tested (335 and 167 g ha-1), the control was not effective. The herbicides glyphosate and imazapyr were not efficient in controlling this plant. |
id |
UNSP_3fbd79c8b5a217d87916f826cfe5d4b9 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/211254 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticumChemical Control of Myriophyllum aquaticumaquatic weed2,4 Ddiquatglyphosateimazapyrplanta aquática2,4-DdiquatglyphosateimazapyrThis work was carried out at the Advanced Weed Research Nucleus - UNESP, Botucatu-SP, to evaluate the control of Myriophyllum aquaticum by applying different herbicides in post emergence. The herbicides and doses (g ha-1) tested were: diquat (Reward) at 204 g a.i. ha-1, diquat at 102 and 204 g a.i. ha-1 + agral at 0.1% v/v; 2,4-D (DMA 806 BR) at 1,340, 670, 335 and 167 g a.e. ha-1; glyphosate (Rodeo) at 3.360 g a.e. ha-1 + Aterbane at 0.5% v/v and imazapyr (Arsenal) at 250 g a.e. ha-1. Small tanks (60 x 60 x 45 cm) with about 120 L water capacity, plus 20 L of soil were used. The plants were counted (20 stems), and distributed in the plots. Plant phytotoxicity was evaluated at 2, 6, 9, 11, 13, 17, 20, 23, 26, 30 and 36 days after application (DAA). Herbicide spraying was performed with a backpack sprayer, using a 2.0 bar for CO2 pressure, consuming 180 l ha-1 volume and 110.02 VS fan type nozzles. The herbicide diquat showed the first symptoms of intoxication at 2 DAA, and regardless of the dose applied, provided overall control of Myriophyllum plants at 20 DAA, with plant regrowth being observed at 23 DAA. The 2,4 D herbicide provided 100% control at 23 DAA, for doses 1,340 and 670 g ha-1. However, for the other doses tested (335 and 167 g ha-1), the control was not effective. The herbicides glyphosate and imazapyr were not efficient in controlling this plant.Este estudo teve a finalidade de avaliar, em condições de caixa d'água, o controle químico de Myriophyllum aquaticum (pinheiro-d'água), através de herbicidas aplicados em pós-emergência. Os herbicidas e respectivas doses (g ha-1) foram: diquat (Reward) a 204 g i.a. ha-1; diquat a 102 e 204 g i.a. ha-1 + Agral a 0,1%; 2,4-D (DMA 806 BR) a 167, 335, 670 e 1.340 g e.a. ha-1; glyphosate (Rodeo) a 3.360 g e.a. ha-1 + Aterbane a 0,5%; e imazapyr (Arsenal) a 250 g e.a. ha-1. As parcelas foram constituídas por caixas d'água de 0,60 x 0,60 x 0,45 m, com 120 litros de água + 20 litros de solo e 20 ramos por caixa. Utilizou-se um pulverizador costal a pressão constante de CO2 a 2 bar, pontas 110.02 VS, com um consumo de calda de 180 l ha-1. O controle foi avaliado visualmente aos 2, 6, 9,11, 13, 17, 20, 23, 26, 30 e 36 dias após a aplicação dos herbicidas (DAAH). Inicialmente, o herbicida diquat foi o composto que apresentou os sintomas mais severos de intoxicação nos ramos de pinheiro-d'água aos 2 DAAH, com 65% de controle em média, e aos 20 DAAH ele atingiu o controle máximo (99%), porém ocorreram rebrotas a partir dos 23 DAAH, independentemente da adição ou não de Agral e das doses testadas. O herbicida 2,4-D proporcionou 100% de controle dos ramos a partir dos 23 DAAH para as doses de 1.340 e 670 g ha-1, não ocorrendo rebrotas; já para as demais doses testadas (335 e 167 g ha-1) o controle não foi eficiente, pois ocorreram rebrotas. Os herbicidas glyphosate e imazapyr não foram eficientes no controle desta espécie.Universidade Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Ciências AgronômicasUniversidade Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Ciências AgronômicasSociedade Brasileira da Ciência das Plantas DaninhasUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Negrisoli, E. [UNESP]Tofoli, G.r. [UNESP]Velini, E.d. [UNESP]Martins, D. [UNESP]Cavenaghi, A.l. [UNESP]2021-07-14T10:21:38Z2021-07-14T10:21:38Z2003info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article89-92application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582003000400013Planta Daninha. Viçosa, MG, Brazil: Sociedade Brasileira da Ciência das Plantas Daninhas, v. 21, n. spe, p. 89-92, 2003.0100-83581806-9681http://hdl.handle.net/11449/21125410.1590/S0100-83582003000400013S0100-83582003000400013S0100-83582003000400013.pdfSciELOreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPporPlanta Daninhainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-10-13T06:06:58Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/211254Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T14:47:07.472603Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum Chemical Control of Myriophyllum aquaticum |
title |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum |
spellingShingle |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum Negrisoli, E. [UNESP] aquatic weed 2,4 D diquat glyphosate imazapyr planta aquática 2,4-D diquat glyphosate imazapyr |
title_short |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum |
title_full |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum |
title_fullStr |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum |
title_full_unstemmed |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum |
title_sort |
Uso de diferentes herbicidas no controle de Myriophyllum aquaticum |
author |
Negrisoli, E. [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Negrisoli, E. [UNESP] Tofoli, G.r. [UNESP] Velini, E.d. [UNESP] Martins, D. [UNESP] Cavenaghi, A.l. [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Tofoli, G.r. [UNESP] Velini, E.d. [UNESP] Martins, D. [UNESP] Cavenaghi, A.l. [UNESP] |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Negrisoli, E. [UNESP] Tofoli, G.r. [UNESP] Velini, E.d. [UNESP] Martins, D. [UNESP] Cavenaghi, A.l. [UNESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
aquatic weed 2,4 D diquat glyphosate imazapyr planta aquática 2,4-D diquat glyphosate imazapyr |
topic |
aquatic weed 2,4 D diquat glyphosate imazapyr planta aquática 2,4-D diquat glyphosate imazapyr |
description |
This work was carried out at the Advanced Weed Research Nucleus - UNESP, Botucatu-SP, to evaluate the control of Myriophyllum aquaticum by applying different herbicides in post emergence. The herbicides and doses (g ha-1) tested were: diquat (Reward) at 204 g a.i. ha-1, diquat at 102 and 204 g a.i. ha-1 + agral at 0.1% v/v; 2,4-D (DMA 806 BR) at 1,340, 670, 335 and 167 g a.e. ha-1; glyphosate (Rodeo) at 3.360 g a.e. ha-1 + Aterbane at 0.5% v/v and imazapyr (Arsenal) at 250 g a.e. ha-1. Small tanks (60 x 60 x 45 cm) with about 120 L water capacity, plus 20 L of soil were used. The plants were counted (20 stems), and distributed in the plots. Plant phytotoxicity was evaluated at 2, 6, 9, 11, 13, 17, 20, 23, 26, 30 and 36 days after application (DAA). Herbicide spraying was performed with a backpack sprayer, using a 2.0 bar for CO2 pressure, consuming 180 l ha-1 volume and 110.02 VS fan type nozzles. The herbicide diquat showed the first symptoms of intoxication at 2 DAA, and regardless of the dose applied, provided overall control of Myriophyllum plants at 20 DAA, with plant regrowth being observed at 23 DAA. The 2,4 D herbicide provided 100% control at 23 DAA, for doses 1,340 and 670 g ha-1. However, for the other doses tested (335 and 167 g ha-1), the control was not effective. The herbicides glyphosate and imazapyr were not efficient in controlling this plant. |
publishDate |
2003 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2003 2021-07-14T10:21:38Z 2021-07-14T10:21:38Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582003000400013 Planta Daninha. Viçosa, MG, Brazil: Sociedade Brasileira da Ciência das Plantas Daninhas, v. 21, n. spe, p. 89-92, 2003. 0100-8358 1806-9681 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/211254 10.1590/S0100-83582003000400013 S0100-83582003000400013 S0100-83582003000400013.pdf |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582003000400013 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/211254 |
identifier_str_mv |
Planta Daninha. Viçosa, MG, Brazil: Sociedade Brasileira da Ciência das Plantas Daninhas, v. 21, n. spe, p. 89-92, 2003. 0100-8358 1806-9681 10.1590/S0100-83582003000400013 S0100-83582003000400013 S0100-83582003000400013.pdf |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Planta Daninha |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
89-92 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira da Ciência das Plantas Daninhas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira da Ciência das Plantas Daninhas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808128416910671872 |