• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Frontispiece
 Table of Contents
 Table of Contents
 Foreword
 Abbreviations used in this...
 List of common names of herbic...
 Weather data
 Description of methods
 Weed control in corn
 Weed control in cotton
 Weed control in grain sorghum
 Weed control in peanuts
 Weed control in soybeans
 Weed control in wheat
 Nutsedge screen - no crop
 Fencerow weed and brush contro...
 Weed control in permanent bahiagrass...














Group Title: WFREC research report
Title: Weed science annual research report
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00091345/00002
 Material Information
Title: Weed science annual research report
Series Title: WFREC research report
Physical Description: v. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Agricultural Research Center, Jay
Agricultural Research and Education Center, Jay
West Florida Research and Education Center
Publisher: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida,
Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1977
Copyright Date: 1976
Frequency: annual
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Weeds -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Weeds -- Control -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Herbicides -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: Began in 1976?
Issuing Body: Issued by the center as Agricultural Research Center, Jay (ARC, Jay) beginning in 1977; as Agricultural Research and Education Center, Jay (AREC, Jay) beginning in 1985, and as West Florida Research and Education Center (WFREC) beginning in 1995.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: 1998.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00091345
Volume ID: VID00002
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 61661582
lccn - 2005229256

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front cover
    Frontispiece
        Page 1
    Table of Contents
        Page 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 3
    Foreword
        Page 4
    Abbreviations used in this report
        Page 5
    List of common names of herbicides
        Page 6
    Weather data
        Page 7
        Page 8
    Description of methods
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
    Weed control in corn
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Weed control in cotton
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
    Weed control in grain sorghum
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
    Weed control in peanuts
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
    Weed control in soybeans
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
    Weed control in wheat
        Page 54
        Page 55
    Nutsedge screen - no crop
        Page 56
    Fencerow weed and brush control
        Page 57
    Weed control in permanent bahiagrass pasture
        Page 58
Full Text
lc'o
A6o36,"
wfz4


ARC, Jay Research Report 78-5

^?kc)-5


January 1978


Weed Sc


1977 Annual Research


Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville
F. A. Wood, Dean














ARC Jay Research Report 78-5


WEED SCIENCE

ANNUAL RESEARCH REPORT 1977










Barry J. Brecke
Agricultural Research Center
Jay, Florida

Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida






Page 1 of 2


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword 4

Abbreviations used in this report 5

List of common names of herbicides 6

Weather data 7

Description of methods 9

Weed Control in Corn

a. Preplant and Preemergence 13

b. Postemergence 16

c. No-till 19

Weed Control in Cotton

a. New Compounds 21

b. Herbicide Combinations 23

Weed Control in Grain Sorghum

a. Preemergence and Postemergence 25

b. Propachlor Study 27

Weed Control in Peanuts

a. New Compounds I 29

b. New Compounds II 31

c. Herbicide Programs A 33

d. Herbicide Programs B 36

e. Nutsedge Control 38

f. Comparison Between Balan and Treflan 39

g. Comparison Between Premerge and Dyanap 40

Weed Control in Soybeans

a. New Compounds I 41

b. New Compounds II and Herbicide Combinations I 43

c. Herbicide Combinations II 45

d. Herbicide Combinations III 47


-2-





Page 2 of 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

e. Butam and HOE Test-Preemergence 49

f. HOE Test Postemergence 51

g. No-till 52

h. Effect of Sicklepod Competition on Soybean Yield 53

Weed Control in Wheat

a. Preemergence and Postemergence 54

b. Postemergence 55

Nutsedge Screen No Crop 56

Fencerow Weed and Brush Control 57

Weed Control in Permanent Bahiagrass Pasture 58


- 3 -







WEED CONTROL RESEARCH


Agricultural Research Center
Jay, Florida

FOREWORD

Field investigations of herbicide efficacy in corn, cotton, grain sorghum,
peanuts, soybeans, wheat, and pastures reported herein were conducted at the
Agricultural Research Center near Jay, Florida during 1977. Single herbicide
treatments as well as herbicide combinations of both new and presently recommended
materials were evaluated and compared for crop tolerance and activity against
selected weed species.

The experiments reported herein were supported by state appropriation and
by grants-in-aid and gifts from the following commercial agencies:

American Cyanamid
SAmerican Hoechst Corporation
BASF Wyandotte Corporation
Chemagro Agricultural Division, Mobay Chemical Corporation
Chevron Chemical Company
CIBA-Geigy
Dow Chemical Company
Eli Lilly and Company
Gulf Oil Chemicals Company
Hercules, Incorporated
Mobile Chemical Company
NOR-AM Agricultural Products, Incorporated
Rohm and Haas Company
Sandoz, Incorporated
Shell Development Company
Stauffer Chemical Company
U. S. Borax Research Corporation

The support of the ARC, Jay Weed Science Program by these companies iq great-
ly appreciated. Acknowledgement is also made for the materials that were supplied
by various companies for inclusion in the field research program.

The report would not have been possible without the assistance of Mr. Vernon
Tedder, Agricultural Technician I, in conducting the experiments and tabulation
of the data. Appreciation is also expressed to Miss Sharon Hatfield, Student Assis-
tant, for assistance in data tabulation.

THIS REPORT SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS SINCE SEVERAL OF
THE MATERIALS OR COMBINATIONS OF MATERIALS USED IN THE TRIALS REPORTED HEREIN ARE
NOT REGISTEREDFOR USE ON THE CROP TO WHICH THEY WERE APPLIED.


Prepared by Dr. B. J. Brecke, Assistant Professor (Assistant Agronomist), Agricul-
tural Research Center, Jay, Florida 32565.


-4-








ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT


Abbreviation
BEG
BROOM
BS
CARP
CEP
CRAB
GOOSE
IM
PEP
PIG


Weed
Florida beggarweed
broomsedge
bristly starbur
carpetgrass
cutleaf evening primrose
large crabgrass
goosegrass
Ivyleaf morningglory
peppergrass
pigweed


Abbreviation
PUS
RED
RYG
SICK
SM
SMUT
TM
VASE
VPEA
YNUT


Weed
Florida pusley
redweed
ryegrass
sicklepod
smallflower morin
smutgrass
tall moringglory
vaseygrass
volunteer peanuts
yellow nutsedge


gglory


Abbreviation
BAHIA
COT
SORG
SOY
PEA
WH



Abbreviation
PPI
PRE
POST
EP
LP
DP
AC


Crop
bahiagrass
cotton
sorghum
soybean
peanut
wheat



How Applied (How App) Term
Preplant Incorporated
Preemergence
Postemergence Over the Top
Early Postemergence Over the Top
Late Postemergence Over the Top
Directed Postemergence
At Cracking


-5-










cade Name

itrex

3206784

nex

niben

Itor

ilan

invel

asagran

isalin

ixton

Ladex

jtam

leno 6

'A24705

iparol

)bex

)toran

*stun

,wco 295

tal

anap

,171


LIST OF HERBICIDE TRADE AND COMMON NAMES

.Cotmon Name Trade Name Common Name Trade Name

atrazine Embark mefluidide Ramrod

-- Eradicane EPTC RH2915 (GOAL)

butralin Evik ametryn RH3359

chloramben Herc26910 --- RH6201 (BLAZER)

HOE23408 dichlofop Ronstar

benefin HOE29152 metriflufen Roundup

dicamba Igran terbutryn Rydex

bentazon Karmex diuron SD50224

fluchloralin Lanex fluometuron Sencor

propachlor Lasso alachlor SN533

cyanazine Lexone metribuzin Sonalan

-- Lorox linuron Spike

MSMA + surfactant Milogard propazine Stam

metolachlor Modown bifenox Surflan

prometryn NA068 fluometuron Sutan

dinitramine Norex chloroxuron Tenoran

fluometuron Paraquat paraquat Treflan

perfluidone Premerge dinoseb Tolban

-- Princep simazine Velpar

metolachlor Probe methazole Vernam

naptalam + dinoseb Prowl pendimethalin 2,4-D

fluridone R12001/R25788 ---- 2,4-DB


- 6-


propachlor

oxyfluorfen



acifluorfen

oxadiazon

glyphosate






metribuzin



ethalfluralin

prosulfalin

propanil

oryazlin

butylate

chloroxuron

trifluralin

profluralin

---r

vernolate

2,4-D

2,4-DB





Page 1 of 2

TEMPERATURE AND RAINFALL DATA FOR ARC, JAY, FLORIDA 1977-1/

February March April May June July
Day Max. Min. Precip. Max. Min. Precip. Max. Min. Precip. Max. Min. Precip. Max. Min. Precip. Max. Min. Precip.
1 44 25 60 32 68 57 0.10 81 53 96 68 92 74
2 44 29 67 38 76 68 0.05 83 60 94 64 0.02 95 73
3 59 36 69 40 73 70 80 58 93 62 98 67 1.80
4 52 42 0.40 70 57 1.25 80 72 82 57 96 64 93 72
5 53 36 70 52 1.10 80 53 0.75 85 59 97 69 94 68 0.42
6 55 27 61 48 0.62 64 39 86 62 96 72 94 73
7 56 29 55 42 0.02 73 44 87 63 96 71. 94 75 0.10
8 57 29 63 36 79 55 89 68 88 58 96 76
9 61 40 69 37 84 58 91 61 0.45 87 58 82 76
10 66 31 70 50 0.14 84 51 84 53 94 65 85 69 0.34
11 69 36 65 55 0.06 83 49 83 58 97 71 89 71
12 71 48 71 63 85 54 84 61 100 73 90 69 0.86
13 73 52 72 46 1.00 85 53 85 56 96 72 92 73
14 68 36 79 45 83 51 88 58 92 71 95 75
15 71 42 84 55 86 53 87 57 96 69 97 71 0.02
16 61 28 78 62 81 57 90 59 98 69 95 74
17 49 29 83 53 86 51 91 61 96 70 0.57 94 68
18 62 38 77 63 85 56 88 60 90 70 0.10 94 70 0.01
19 69 52 80 67 86 56 89 62 93 73 83 72 1.49
20 69 34 0.10 82 60 84 60 91 60 92 73 0.01 78 71 0.16
21 58 28 77 57 82 63 92 63 95 73 0.01 87 71 0.13
22 67 36 77 50 1.15 82 67 87 64 98 74 92 70
23 71 47 61 39 80 63 1.65 85 65 0.69 96 74 0.25 94 72
24 72 50 0.73 70 46 80 55 90 63 0.01 94 72 0.15 93 75 0.15
25 73 47 70 48 0.03 76 53 88 63 94 72 0.80 89 72
26 73 54 0.01 76 50 77 45 84 65 0.08 95 75 90 72
27 78 45 0.53 76 56 73 45 84 64 94 73 91 72
28 58 33 76 63 78 48 90 68 0.45 94 74 92 73 0.64
29 75 63 1.64 80 52 82 67 0.01 91 75 91 73 0.57
30 76 70 0.08 80 51 90 70 94 70 90 72 1.20
31 80 65 2.04 96 68 89 70 0.95
Total monthly
precip. 1.77 9.13 2.55 1.69 1.91 8.84
25-year average 5.01 5.70 5.10 3.90 7.17 7.73

1/Temperature in OF and precipitation in inches.




r cte / 01 L


TEMPERATURE AND RAINFALL DATA FOR ARC, JAY, FLORIDA 1977 (Continued)


August
Day Max. Min. Precip.
1 -84 69 2.84
2 92 73
3 87 72 0.91
4 79 71 0.04
5 88 72 0.13
6 90 71 0.51
7 90 71 0.10
8 94 72
9 94 70
10 93 71
11 88 68 0.23
12 89 70
13 89 70 0.24
14 90 71
15 91 72 0.01
16 88 73 0.33
17 90 72
18 90 72 0.08
19 89 73 0.09
20 90 74 0.08
21 89 72 0.40
22 91 75
23 88 71
24 90 74 0.01
25 86 72
26 89 71 0.19
27 87 70 0.15
28 91 72 0.03
29 89 70 0.40
30 90 69 0.06
31 90 68 0.27
Total monthly precip. 7.10


25-year average


6.41


September
Max. Min. Precip.
90 69 0.05
91 69
90 72
80 73 0.01
88 71 0.90
86 71 0.24
84 75 1.30
89 71
90 71
91 69
90 70 0.11
90 69
91 70
89 71 0.24
88 72 0.11'
89 70 0.48
82 70 1.57
85 70
89 68 1.38
88 68 0.48
87 67
89 65
89 64
90 67
88 70
89 73
90 69
90 72
92 70
86 71 0.08


6.95
6.64


October
Max. Min. Precip.
92 73 0.40
88 74
88 54 0.18
73 47
77 50
79 58
83 55
82 64
86 68 0.72
77 46
78 54 0.04
64 53 0.74
66 39
65 42
71 40
76 48
71 37
71 40
76 45
81 48
76 43
78 51
80 55
77 63
76 65 0.27
75 62 1.54
77 53
74 54
78 62
81 65
80 60
3.89
3.41


-8-








METHODS USED IN 1977 WEED CONTROL TRIALS AT ARC, JAY, FLORIDA

Studies were conducted at the Agricultural Research Center near Jay, Florida

on Orangeburg-Faceville-Tifton-Dothan fine sandy loam soils with an organic matter

content of approximately 2% and a pH between 5.5 and 6.0. Further details on the

methods used in the trials are listed in Tables 1, 2, and 3 below.

The efficacy of herbicide treatments was evaluated by rating the treated area

for both crop injury and weed control. A scale of 0 to 10 was used with 0 indicat-

ing no reduction in stand or vigor and 10 equal to complete control. The ratings

were tabulated and averaged for each weed species having a sufficient density and

a uniform distribution in the experimental areas. A statistical analysis was made

for each species and a least significant difference value at the 5% level of

probability was calculated to aid in interpreting the data.

Corn and peanut yields were determined by harvesting the two center rows of

each plot and converting the yield per plot to bushels per acre and pounds per

acre, respectively. Grain sorghum and soybean yields were determined by harvesting

all four plot rows and converting the plot weights to bushels per acre. Cotton

yields were estimated by converting boll counts per 1 plot row to pounds of lint

per acre.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Discussion of the results of each experiment can be found with the data

tables.


-9-





Table 1. General experimental information for weed control trials at Agricultural Research Center, Jay 1977.

Experiment


Experimental
conditions Corn
Variety Pioneer


Date planted
Seeding rate
Planter type
Row width
Plot width
Plot length
Exp. design2
No. of reps
Date treated:
PPI
PRE
At Cracking
Early Post
Post
Late Post
Directed Post
Needle Stage


3369A
4-7
15,000/A
4RC
36"
4 rows
25'
RCB
4

4-7
4-8

4-15
4-27
5-9
5-13


No-Till Grain Nutsedge No-Till
corn Cotton sorghum Peanuts peanuts Soybeans soybeans
Pioneer Coker ORO-T Flo- Flo- Cen- Cobb


3369A
3-23
15,000/A
4RN
36"
4 rows
25'
RCB
4


3-23

4-6


5-10


310
4-29
20#/A
2RC
36"
4 rows
25'
RCB
4

4-28
4-29


5-31

5-31


4-8
10#/A
4RC
36"
4 rows
25'
RCB
4


4-11

4-27


5-10
4-14


runner
4-25
80#/A
2RC
36"
4 rows
25'
RCB
4

4-25
4-26
5-4
5-17
5-27


runner
5-27
80#/A
2RC
36"
2 rows
25'
RCB
3

5-27
5-31
6-2
6-15

6-27
--


tennial
5-13
60#/A
4RC
34"
4 rows
25'
RCB
4

5-11
5-16
5-18
6-1
6-8
6-8
6-15


6-17
60#/A
4RN
36"
4 rows
25'
SP
4


6-21




7-14


Nutsedge Fencerow Permanent
Wheat screen trial pasture
Holley -- Pensacola


11-16-76
60#/A
8FD
7"
6'
20'
RCB
4


11-23-76

2-25

3-8


bahiagrass

_-


6'
25'
RCB
3

5-27
5-31

6-15

6-27


--
4'
100'
RCB
5


2-17


6-6


--
12'
30'
RCB
4


2-24


6-7


14RC = 4 row conventional; 2 RC = 2 row conventional; 4RN = 4 row no-till; 8FD = 8-foot drill.
2RCB = randomized complete block, SP = split plot.


- 10 -








Table 2. Crop and weed stage of growth at time of postemergence applications
at Agricultural Research Center, Jay 1977


Type of
Crop application
Corn EP
POST
LP
DP
Cotton POST & DP
Grain sorghum EP
DP
Peanuts EP
POST
Nutsedge peanuts EP
LP
Soybeans EP
POST & LP
DP
No-Till soybeans DP
Wheat EP
LP
Nutsedge screen EP
LP


Crop
Number
Inches leaves
1 2
6 4
16-18 6-8
26-28 10-12
8-10 7-8
5 5
24-28 8-10
3-4 4
6 6
6 6
8 8
6-8 2nd tri.
8 3rd tri.
10-11 4th tri.
9-10 3rd tri.


4-6
10


4-6
full till.


Plant Stage of Growth


Grass Weeds
Number
Inches leaves
emerging


1
1-2
4-8
3-6
1
4-8
1-2
2-5
3-5
5-7
1
1-2
1-2
2-3


2
5
6-8
3-6

6-8
1-2
2-5
3-5
5-7
2-3
3-5
4-5
3-5


Broadleaf Weeds
Number
Inches leaves
emerging
1 2
2 3-6
3-6 6-8
1-4 2-6


1
4-8
1-2
2-5
--

1-2
2-3
2-4
3-6


-- -- 1
-- -- 1
3-5 3-5
5-7 5-7


--
6-8
2-4
3-6
--

cotyledon stage
2-3
2-5
3-5
2
2


- 11 -









Table 3. Spray equipment used' foi'weed control-trials In'!1977,


Sprayer type1

Nozzle type


Corn,
PPI
TMB


Nozzle spacing (in) 36


Pressure (psi)


Spray volume (gpa) 20


Crop
Cotton. Grain Sorghum. Peanuts
PRE POST
TMB TMB


8004LP

18

25

20


a-


8004LP

18

25

30


Soyvbeans
DP
TMS


Wheat & Pasture
PRE & POST
BP


9502

2/row

28

30


8004

20

30

30


1TMB = tractor mounted boom sprayer using air as propellent.
TMS tractor mounted sprayer with nozzles mounted on skids with C02 as propellent.
BP = CO2 back pack type sprayer.


- 12 -


- -----


a





Page 1 of 3


WEED CONTROL IN CORN
Preplant and Preemergence


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 R12001/
25788

2 RH6201
Lasso

3 Sencor
Lasso

4 Prowl

5 Prowl
Aatrex

6 AC206784
Aatrex

7 AC206784
Aatrex

8 AC206784
Aatrex

9 RH6201

10 R12001/
R25788
Aatrex

11 Sutan+
Aatrex

12 Dual
Aatrex


RATE HOW
FORM LBS/A APP


a.i.
6E 6


4E 1
4E 2

50W .5
4E 2

4E 1

4E 1
41 1

4E 3
4L 1

4E 2
4L 1

4E 4
4L 1

4E 1

6E 6

4L 1.5

6.7E 3
4L 1

8E 1.5
4L 1.2


PPI


PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

POST
POST

POST
POST

POST
POST

PRE

PPI

PPI

PPI
PPI

PPI
PPI


RATED 5-14-77
CORN CRAB TH

0.8 9.8 9.8


1.0


1.3


1.0

3.5


2.5


2.0


2.8


0.8

2.0



1.5


2.0


10.0


9.8


9.8

9.8


9.5


9.5


9.8


9.5

10.0



10.0


10.0


8.5


8.3


6.0

9.8


9.5


6.5


9.5


6.3

9.5



9.8


7.8


RATED 6-13-77
CORN CRAB GOOSE TM PIG


0.5 9.8 10.0 9.8


0.8


0.8


1.5

1.3


0.8


2.5


1.3


1.0

2.0



2.0


1.8


9.3


9.3


8.5

9.3


8.5


9.3


9.0


7.8

9.8



8.8


9.8


9.8


9.8


8.8

9.0


9.0


9.8


8.5


8.0

9.3



8.5


9.8


6.5


6.3


4.5

8.5


9.0


4.3


7.3


5.5

8.8



9.3


6.0


9.3


9.5


9.3


8.8

9.5


10.0


7.3


9.5


7.3

9.0



8.8


9.8


RATED 8-15-77
CORN CRAB TM

1.3 9.0 8.8


2.5


2.5


3.3

1.8


2.0


3.5


2.5


3.3

2.5



2.5


3.0


9.0


9.3


9.0

9.3


8.3


9.0


9.3


8.5

9.8



9.3


9.5


6.8


5.3


4.3

7.3


8.3


4.0


5.8


5.8

7.3



7.5


4.8


8E 1.5 PRE 2.3 10.0 8.5 1.8 9.5 9.5 7.0 10.0 1.8 9.5 5.8


Aatrex 4L 1.2 PRE


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-19-77


65.6


61.3


56.2


56.6

65.0


57.1


49.0


59.3


55.8

58.4



65.6


57.1


55.2


13 Dual


--




rage .:Or ,-


WEED CONTROL IN CORN Preplant and Preemergence (continued)


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

14 CGA24705
atrazine
(pkg. mix)

15 CGA24705
atrazine
(pkg. mix)

16 Dual
Bladex

17 Lasso
Aatrex

18 Aatrex

19 Lasso II
Aatrex

20 Lasso
Aatrex
(pkg. mix)

21 Lasso
Aatrex
(pkg. mix)

22 Aatrex
Bladex

23 Bladex

24 Check


FORM

4.5F
(1.5


RATE HOW RATED 5-14-77
LBS/A APP CORN CRAB TM
a.i.
2.7 PPI 2.5 10.0 9.5
+ 1.2)


4.5F 2.7
(1.5 + 1.2)


8E
80W

4E
4L

4L

15G
4L

4EC
(2 +


1.5
1.5

2
1.2

2

2
1

3.2
1.2)


15G 3.2
(2 + 1.2)


4L
80W


1
1


CORN

1.5


RATED 6-13-77


CRAB GOOSE TM PIG

9.5 9.5 6.0 9.8


RATED 8-15-77


RATED 8-15-77
CORN CRAB TM

1.8 9.8 7.0


PRE 2.5 10.0 9.3 2.0 9.0 9.8 7.0 9.3 2.0 9.0 8.3


PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE


1.8 9.5 8.0 1.3 9.0 8.8 3.5 9.8 2.8 8.5 4.5


1.5 8.5 9.8 1.3 4.8 7.8 9.0 9.8 2.5 7.0 7.8


2.8 9.8 9.0 1.8 9.0 8.8 8.3 9.8

0.8 9.8 8.0 0.8 9.0 8.8 6.8 10.0


2.3 9.3 7.5

1.8 9.5 6.8


1.3 10.0 8.5 1.3 9.5 9.8 6.3 10.0 2.0 9.5 6.2


PRE 0.8 10.0 8.5 0.3 9.8 9.8 7.3 10.0 2.0 9.5 6.0


PRE
PRE


1.5 9.3 9.3 1.3 7.5 5.3 7.0 9.8 3.8 9.0 5.8


80W 1.5 PRE 2.0 9.8 9.0 1.5

-- -.- --- 0.8 7.5 4.3 1.5


8.0

4.8


8.3

4.8


8.3 4.0

3.3 5.8


2.3

5.0


8.8 6.5

4.0 3.0


N.S. 1.2 3.0 N.S. 2.0 1.7 4.3 2.4 N.S. 3.4 3.7


- 14 -


LSD @ 5%


N.S.


6-13-77


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-19-77

54.5



56.2



48.8


59.2


57.6

64.3


58.3



64.4



49.4


56.2

37.7





Page 3 of 3


WEED CONTROL IN CORN Preplant and Preemergence (continued)

Summary. Due to the extremely low rainfall and very heavy insect pressure the
yields in all corn trials were low and the weed densities were variable. The
lack of moisture also resulted in less than optimum conditions for obtaining
maximum activity from several of the herbicide treatments.

In Preplant and Preemergence tests R12001/R25788 + Aatrex, Sutan+ plus Aatrex,
Prowl + Aatrex, and AC206784 + Aatrex provided good to excellent control of
those weed species present.


- 1 R -







TRT
NO.


CHEMICAL


1 Lasso
RH2915


RATE
FORM LBS/A
a.i.
4E 2


2E


2 Lasso
RH2915


3 Lasso
RH2915
2,4-D

4 Lasso
RH2915
Triton AG88

5 Lasso
RH2915
Triton AG88


.75


HOW
APP


PRE
DP


PRE
DP


2 PRE
.5 DP
.5 DP

2 PRE
.5 DP
.5% DP

2 PRE
.75 DP
.5% DP


WEED CONTROL IN CORN
PDn tBmTrgence


RATEDI 5-14-77 RATED 6-13-77
CORN CRAB GOOSE TM CORN CRAB GOOSE TM PIG

-----NOT RATED------ 1.8 10.0 10.0 8.3 10.0


-----NOT RATED------


-----NOT RATED------



-----NOT RATED------


-----NOT RATED -----


9.8 10.0 10.0 10.0


0.8 10.0 10.0



1.0 10.0 10.0


10.0 10.0



9.5 10.0


9.5 9.5 10.0 10.0


RATED 8-19-77
CORN CRAB TM

2.8 9.8 7.8


1.8 9.8 9.8


0.8 10.0 10.0



0.3 10.0 9.5


2.0 9.3 8.5


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-19-77

57.1


62.6


59.0



68.8


61.3


6 Stam

7 Starn
2,4-D


8 Aatrex
Basagran

9 Aatrex

10 Basagran

11 Basagran
Top Oil

12 Evik
Basagran
X77

Continued ---


4E 4 DP -----NOT RATED------


4 DP
.5 DP

1 POST
.75 POST


-----NOT RATED------


-----NOT RATED------


4L 1 POST -----NOT RATED------

4E .75 POST -----NOT RATED------


4E .75 POST
-- gpa POST

80W 1.5 DP
4E .75 DP
.25% DP


-----NOT RATED------


-----NOT RATED------


7.8 7.5 8.5 10.0


2.8 8.5 8.5


2.8 8.8 7.0


9.5 9.8 3.8 8.0 7.0


8.5 2.0 9.0 9.3 4.3 7.8 7.3


1.8

1.8

2.3

0.5


7.5 6.3 8.0 8.3

7.8 6.3 7.8 8.3


2.5 8.3 8.5

2.3 8.8 7.3


7.8 4.8 8.0 8.3 3.5 8.3 6.3


8.8 9.5 9.3 9.8


1.3 9.5 7.8


- 16 -


56.1

48.8


41.7


50.4

64.9

51.8

74.4




Page 2 of 3


WEED CONTROL IN CO


TRT
NO.


CHEMICAL


13 Lasso
Basagran

14 Lasso
Aatrex
Basagran

15 Lasso
Aatrex
Basagran

16 Paraquat
Aatrex
X77

17 Paraquat
Aatrex
X77

18 Dual
Aatrex

19 Dual
Aatrex

20 CGA24705
atrazine
(pkg. mix)

21 CGA24705
atrazine
(pkg. mix)

22 Lasso
Aatrex

23 Aatrex
Top Oil


RN Postemergence (continued)
RATE HOW RATED 5-14-77
FORM LBS/A APP CORN CRAB GOOSE TM


4E
4E


a.i.
2 PRE
.75 POST

2 PRE
.5 POST
.75 POST

2 PRE
1 POST
.75 POST

.25 DP
1 DP
.25% DP

.5 DP
1 DP
.25% DP

1.5 EP
1.2 EP

2 EP
1.6 EP


4.5F 2.7
(1.5 + 1.2)


4.5F 3.6
(2 + 1.6)


2 EP
1.5 EP


4L 2 EP
-- gpa EP


-----NOT RATED------


-----NOT RATED------



-----NOT RATED------



-----NOT RATED------


-----NOT RATED------


2.8 10.0 10.0


2.0 10.0 10.0


2.8 10.0 10.0


EP 2.8 10.0 10.0


1.0 10.0 10.0


2.0 10.0 10.0


RATED 6-13-77 RATED 8-19-77 YIELD @ 15%


RATED 6-13-77
CORN CRAB GOOSE TM PIG

0.8 10.0 9.5 7.5 9.8


1.5 10.0 10.0



1.8 9.8 8.8



1.5 8.8 7.8


9.5 10.0



10.0 9.5


RATED 8-19-77
CORN CRAB TM

1.8 9.8 7.5


2.3



2.3


9.8 8.0



9.8 9.5


9.8 8.8 2.5 9.3 8.3


8.8 9.3 9.8 9.8 2.5 9.3 7.8


9.5 2.0 10.0 10.0


9.5 0.3 10.0 10.0


9.8 1.8 9.8 9.8



10.0 1.8 10.0 10.0



8.8 0.8 10.0 10.0


10.0 1.5 9.3 9.3


8.8 10.0 2.0 9.5 7.5


8.8 10.0 1.0 10.0 7.8


7.8 10.0 3.3 9.8 4.8



9.3 10.0 2.0 9.8 7.3



8.5 10.0 1.8 9.8 7.3


9.0 10.0 3.0 9.0 7.8


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-19-77

71.1


59.4



60.4



62.1


65.7


61.1


66.2


49.9



59.2



64.3


56.0




L c J 01 3


WEED CONTROL IN CORN Postemergence


(continued)
rMr. flfl flflT flrmnn -C - -I
nrr ,-mn


NO.


CHEMICAL.


24 Evik
2,4-D
X77


RJL.Ja nuw
FORM LBS/A APP


80W
4E
m--


a.i.
1.5
.5
.25%


DP
DP
DP


RA IU )-14-//
CORN CRAB GOOSE TM


RATED 6-13-77
CORN CRAB GOOSE TM PIG


-----NOT RATED------ 2.0 7.3 8.8 10.0 10.0


RATED 8-19-77
CORN CRAB TM

3.5 8.3 7.5


YIELD @ 15X
BU/A 8-19-77

53.8


25 Lorox
2,4-D
X77

26 Lasso
Evik
X77

27 Check

28 Check


50W 1.5
4E .5
-.25%

4E 2
80W 1.5
-.25%


-----NOT RATED----- 0


PRE
DP
DP


10.0 9.8 9.5 10.0


-----NOT RATED------ 0.8 10.0 10.0 9.5 10.0


-- -- -----NOT RATED------


2.3 3.5 4.8 6.5 4.3


- 1.0 3.0 6.3 5.5 1.5 2.8 5.3 6.3 3.8

N.S. 2.0 1.0 1.5 N.S. 2.5 2.8 2.3 1.6


LSD @ 5%


0.3 10.0 8.8


0.8 10.0 9.0



2.5 8.0 5.8

2.8 5.5 7.0

N.S. 2.0 1.1


iThe


directed postemergence treatments were not rated since application was made within 1 day of rating.


Summary: Due to the extremely low rainfall and very heavy insect pressure the yields in all corn trials were variable,
The lack of moisture also resulted in less than optimum conditions for obtaining maximum activity from several of the
herbicide treatments.




In the Postemergence trial, Lasso Pre plus RH2915 + 2,4-D DP, Paraquat + Aatrex DP, Evik + 2,4-D DP, and Lorox + 2,4-1
DP resulted in good overall weed control. Aatrex + oil Post, Lasso Pre plus Aatrex + Basagran Post, Dual + Aatrex and
Lasso + Aatrex Early Post were also good treatments.


- 18 -


72.0


67.3



55.5

55.6

N.S.


(continued)




Page 1 of 2


TRT
NO.


CHEMICAL


1 Paraquat*
Lasso
Aatrex

2 Paraquat*
Dual
Aatrex

3 Paraquat*
Aatrex**

4 Paraquat*
Dual
Aatrex

5 Paraquat*
Lasso
Aatrex

6 Paraquat*
Evik*
2,4-D

7 Paraquat*
RH2915

8 Paraquat*
RH2915
2,4-D

9 Paraquat*
Lasso
RH2915
2,4-D

10 Paraquat*
Aatrex
Bladex

11 Paraquat*
Lorox+
2,4-D

12 Paraquat*
Aatrex
Prowl

13 Roundup
Lasso
Aatrex


Continued ---


WEED
RATE HOW
FORM LBS/A APP


2E
4E
4L

2E
8E
4L


a.i.
.5 PRE
2 PRE
1.2 PRE

.5 PRE
1.5 PRE
1.2 PRE

.5 PRE
2.0 EP

.5 PRE
1.5 EP
1.2 EP

.5 PRE
2 EP
1.2 EP


2E .5 PRE
80W 1.5 DP
4E .5 DP


2E
4L
80W


.5 PRE
.75 DP

.5 PRE
.75 DP
.5 DP

.5 PRE
2 PRE
.5 DP
.5 DP

.5 PRE
1 PRE
1 PRE

.5 PRE
1.5 DP
.5 DP

.5 PRE
1 PRE
1 PRE

1.5 PRE
2 PRE
1.2 PRE


CONTROL IN NO-TILL CORN
AATED 5-2-77


CORN CRAB B.S.


SICK VPEA


1.0 8.8 10.0 7.3 6.5



0.5 8.3 9.8 7.3 7.3


RATED 6-10-77
CORN CRAB SICK B.S. VPEA

3.5 5.5 5.3 9.5 4.8



3.3 4.3 6.0 9.0 4.5


1.5 7.5 10.0 6.8 9.0 2.8 0.5 6.8 9.0 9.0


2.3 6.5 7.3 5.8 6.8 4.3 5.5 6.3 8.3 6.3



1.0 8.0 10.0 8.7 8.3 2.8 4.8 7.3 9.5 7.5



1.8 0.5 1.5 2.3 0.8 4.8 3.0 8.3 8.8 9.0


2.3 2.3 0


0 0


2.0 4.5 1.5 4.3 1.0


0.8 6.0 8.5 5.8 8.5


0.8 7.5 7.0 8.3 7.8


2.0 2.8 0.8 3.8 3.8


9.0 5.5 10.0 10.0 8.3


1.0 6.0 9.0 7.8 7.5


6.8 0.5 8.3 2.5 7.3


6.0 1.0 9.0 7.5 5.3


3.0 7.0 8.8 7.3 5.8


3.0 2.5 7.8 9.5 7.0


5.0 1.5 8.8 7.0 8.5


8.8 9.3 1.8 9.3 2.3


3.8 7.5 6.5 3.3 5.0


- 19 -


I! II i




Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN NO-TILL
rRT
40. CHEMICAL FORM


L4 Roundup
Aatrex
Princep

5 Check
(Paraquat*)


Plus X77 @ .25%
*Top Oil @ lgpa


4E
4L
80W


CORN
RATE
LBS/A
a.i.
.5
1
1


2E .5

LSD @ 5%


continued
HOW RATED 5-2-77 RATED 6-10-77
APP CORN CRAB B.S. SICK VPEA CORN CRAB SICK B.S. VPEA


PRE 0.8 6.5 9.3 10.0 6.8
PRE
PRE


--- 1.5 0.5 0
PRE


1.6 3.7 2.9 3.8 3.4


3.3 4.8 6.8 7.8 7.0


0 .5 7.5 0.8 6.8 1.5 1


1.8 3.3 3.1 2.4 3.6


m:mary: Yields were not recorded for the No-Till test because of the extremely heavy insect
ifestation and dry weather. It should be noted that at the time of the first rating, the
Lrected post applications had not yet been made. The treatments of Paraquat plus either
isso + Aatrex, Evik + 2,4-D, Aatrex + Bladex, or Lorox + 2,4-D provided good to excellent
:oadleaf control but were all weak on late season crabgrass control.


- 20 -





Page 1 of 2


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL


RATE HOW


RATED 6-2-77


WEED CONTROL IN COTTON
New Compounds
RATED 6-24-77


RATED 8-10-77


FORM LBS/A APP COTTON GOOSE SICK PUS PIG COTTON CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK PIG RED COTTON CRAB SICK PUS RED LB


S a.i. __
1 RH2915 2E .5 DP 0 2.3 6.8 5.0 4.0


Triton AG88

2 RH2915
Bueno 6

3 RH2915
Bueno 6

4 Treflan
RH2915
Triton AG88

5 RH6201

6 EL171

7 EL171

8 EL171

9 EL171

10 EL171

11 EL171

12 Treflan
EL171

13 Treflan
EL171


.5% DP

.25 DP
2 DP

.5 DP
2 DP

.5 PPI
.5 DP
.5% DP

2 PRE

.4 PPI

.6 PPI

.8 PPI

.4 PRE

.6 PRE

.8 PRE

.5 PPI
.4 PPI

.5 PPI
.4 PRE


_- ____ - 95 LINT)
1.0 4.3 4.8 9.5 7.3 7.5 9.5 1.5 6.5 9.0 9.3 9.0 498


0.3 3.3 7.0 3.5 4.3 0 7.0 7.8 9.3 9.5 8.0 9.0 1.3 8.8 9.3 8.5 8.5 525


0.3 5.3 5.3 3.5 3.5 1.0
N


9.3 9.8 9.8 9.8 8.8 9.8 1.0 9.5 9.3 9.5 9.3 500


1.3 9.3 8.0 8.8 10.0 0.8 9.5 10.0 9.8 8.0 9.3 10.0 1.0 9.8 9.5 9.8 9.8 522


1.8

0.5

0.5

1.8

1.0

2.3

0.5

2.3


7.8

8.0

8.5

9.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

10.0


6.8

9.3

7.3

8.8

7.3

6.8

5.3

7.8


9.3

7.8

6.3

8.3

5.3

4.0

8.0

8.5


10.0

10.0

10.0

10.0

8.8

9.5

9.8

10.0


1.8

0.3

0.8

1.5

1.0

2.3

0.3

0.5


9.0

8.5

9.5

8.8

9.3

9.8

9.8

10.0


8.3

7.5

8.8

9.3

7.5

9.8

9.8

10.0


1.8 9.5 9.3 8.8 10.0 0.8 9.3 9.5


9.0

5.0

3.8

7.3

2.8

5.3

7.3

8.0


8.8

8.0

7.5

8.3

5.5

8.3

6.5

8.5


5.8

8.3

8.0

8.8

6.5

8.8

8.3

8.8


9.0 8.0 9.0 8.3


9.0

9.5

9.3

9.5

9.3

8.8

9.3

9.3


6.3

8.5

8.0

9.3

6.8

6.5

6.8

8.5


9.0

8.8

8.5

9.0

9.0

4.8

8.8

9.0


7.3

8.8

8.5

9.3

8.5

5.3

9.0

9.0


1.8 9.0 8.8 8.8 9.3


498

479

344

446

466

390

557

484


445


Continued ---


- 21 -


YIELI




Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN COTTON New Compounds (continued)


NO. CHEMICAL

14 Treflan
Lanex

15 Treflan
Lanex

16 Treflan
Lanex
MSMA
(pkg. mix)

17 Treflan
NA068

18 Treflan
NA068

19 Mowdown

20 Treflan
Mowdown

21 Bladex

22 Treflan

23 Check


RATE HOW RATED 6-2-77 I
FORM LBS/A APP COTTON GOOSE SICK PUS PIG COTTON CRAB
a.i.
4E .5 PPI 0.8 9.0 7.5 7.8 9.5 0.8 9.3
80W 1 POST


4E
80W

4E
5.3L


4E
80W

4E
80W

80W

4E
80W

4WDS

4E


1


,5 PPI
DP


.5 PPI
1 DP
1.7 DP


.5 PPI
1 POST

.5 PPI
1 DP

1.6 PPI

.5 PPI
1.2 PPI

1 PRE

.5 PPI


0 9.8


1.8 9.3


0.8


0.3


8.5


9.5


2.0 5.8

1.6 10.0


0.5

1.0


--- 1.3

N.S.


LSD @ 5%


5.8

9.5

2.3

3.1


'Yield estimated from boll count. The number


7.5 7.8 9.5 0.5


RATED 6-24-77


RATED 8-10-77


YIELD


GOOSE PUS SICK PIG RED COTTON CRAB SICK PUS RED LBS
_LINT/i
9.0 7.5 6.5 8.3 7.3 1.3 9.8 8.3 9.0 8.5 461


9.5 9.3 7.5 7.0 8.5 6.3 1.3 9.0 7.8 8.8 8.5


624


7.8 7.8 9.5 0.8 9.8 10.0 9.8 8.8 9.0 8.5 0.5 9.5 9.0 9.3 9.3 422




7.3 7.8 8.8 0.8 9.0 9.3 8.8 6.3 7.8 3.3 1.3 9.5 7.5 9.0 7.3 384


3.8 8.8 9.5 1.5 9.5 9.5 8.3 2.5 8.5 7.3 2.3 9.0 7.3 8.3 7.8 463


8.3 2.5 7.3 3.2

8.0 7.5 9.8 0.5


7.3 6.3

6.8 7.3

7.8 0

3.4 2.7

of bolls


6.0

9.8

1.0

2.8


1.8

2.3

3.8

1.3


per 1-row


4.0 4.2 2.0 7.3 6.0 5.0 6.0 4.3 6.8 2.0 4.0 375

9.6 8.8 7.3 6.5 6.0 4.8 3.3 7.5 8.5 6.5 5.5 463


5.8

9.2

3.8

2.5

of each


5.0

9.5

2.0

2.9


2.3

7.8

0

3.4


7.0

5.5

5.8

4.2


1.5

7.8

0

2.8


5.5

3.5

2.3

3.5


3.5

4.3

6.5

2.0


6.5

8.0

2.0

2.0


8.0

6.3

8.3

2.9


5.5

3.5

0

3.0


5.3

0.5

0.5

2.6


384

363

207

186


plot was converted to pounds of lint per acre.


Summary: RH2915 plus Bueno 6 applied DP gave excellent broad spectrum full season weed control. EL171 at 0.8 Ibs/A applied PPI
provided good to excellent weed control and gave better results than did the preemergence treatments of this compound. Treflan
PPI plus Lanex either Post or DP also provided good weed control.


- 22 -





Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN COTTON
Herbicide Combinations
TRT RATE HOW RATED 6-2-77 RATED 6-24-77 RATED 8-10-77 YII
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP COTTON GOOSE TM PUS PIG COTTON CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK TM PIG COTTON CRAB TM SICK PUS RED I
a.i. LIL
1 Prowl 4E .75 PPI 0.5 10.0 5.8 8.0 9.5 1.5 9.3 9.3 8.5 1.3 5.0 8.8 4.0 9.0 4.0 3.8 6.5 5.0 I


2 Prowl
Karmex

3 Prowl
Cotoran

4 Karmex

5 Cotoran

6 Caparol

7 Caparol
Bueno 6

8 Cotoran
Bueno 6

9 Probe

10 Probe
Bueno 6.

11 Tolban
Cotoran

12 Tolban
Cotoran


4E
80W

4E
80W

80W

80W

80W

80W
6E

80W
6E

75W

75W
6E

4E
4L

4E
80W


.75 PPI
1 PRE

.75 PPI
1.5 PRE

1 PRE

1.5 PRE

1.5 PRE

1.5 DP
2 DP

1.5 DP
2 DP

1 DP

1 DP
2 DP

.75 PPI
1.5 PRE

.75 PPI
1.5 PRE


0.8


0.5


1.0

0.5

0

0


9.8 6.0 9.3


9.8 1.3


9.5 6.8 9.5 10.0


2.3

2.5

4.0_

2.8


4.3

8.3

6.5

6.8


7.3

6.0

4.0

0.5


7.5

6.5

9.5

6.0


0.3 2.3 8.8 0.5 5.5


1.0


2.3

1.8

2.5

0


0.8


9.8 9.8 8.5 1.0 5.5 9.5 3.8 8.8 4.3 3.0 7.8 7.5


9.5 9.3 8.8 1.0 4.8 8.0 3.3 8.8 5.8 3.5 9.0 8.0


9.0

7.8

8.3

9.3


7.0

5.3

4.8

8.8


6.8

5.8

5.0

9.0


0.8

2.5

2.5

8.8


1.8

4.3

2.3

9.3


6.0

6.5

7.8

7.3


7.5 7.3 8.8 9.8 9.8 4.5 1.3


5.5

9.5

7.3

9.3


4.0

6.0

3.3

8.5


4.3

4.5

5.0

7.8


5.8,

5.3

1.8

8.5


6.0

4.8

7.3

9.3


8.5 7.8 9.3 8.3 8.3 21


0.5 5.3 9.3 0 1.8 0.5 6.0 7.8 8.0 8.3 8.8 3.8 3.3 7.5 5.5 7.8 7.8 7.8 17

0.5 1.0 7.8 1.5 1.5 0.8 8.8 9.0 9.3 9.0 9.3 5.3 0.8 8.5 8.8 8.3 8.8 8.8 261


0.3


1.0


9.8 5.0 8.8 10.0


9.5 6.8 9.5 10.0


0.5


1.0


9.8 9.8 8.3 4.0 4.8 8.8 2.5


9.3 9.3 8.3 3.0 4.0 8.3 3.5


9.0 4.3 6.0 8.5 6.8 10


9.3 1.5 4.3 8.0 9.0 7


Continued --


- 23 -





WEED CONTROL IN COTTON Herbicide Combinations (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP


RATED 6-2-77
COTTON GOOSE TM PUS PIG


RATED 6-2-77


COTTON CRAB GOOSE


RATED 8-10-77


PUS SICK TM PIG COTTON CRAB TM SICK PUS RED


a.i.
13 Tolban 4E .75 PPI 0.5 9.8 5.3 8.8 9.8
Cotoran 4L 1.5 POST


WK

14 Tolban
Cotoran
WK

15 Treflan
Cotoran

16 Lorox
Bueno 6

17 Cobex
Cotoran

18 Basalin
Cotoran

19 Destun

20 Surflan
Cotoran

21 Check


-- .5%

4E .75
80W 1.5
-- .5%

4E .5
80W 1. 5

50W 1
6E 2


2E
80W

4E
80W

4S

75W
80W


.5
1.5

.75
1.5

2

1
1.5


POST

PPI
POST
POST

PPI
PRE

DP
DP

PPI
PRE

PPI
PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE


LSD @ 5% N.S.
LSD @ 5% N.S.


0 7.5


0.3


1.3 8.3 9.8


9.3 5.3 9.3 9.8


0 5.3 5.5 3.3 7.0


1.3 7.5 7.0 8.8 9.0


0.5 9.8 7.0 8.8 9.8


.39.3


9.5 8.8 7.0


7.5 9.3 1.8 9.3 5.3 8.0 9.0 9.3


1.3 9.8 10.0 8.8 7.3 5.3 9.0 2.5 9.0 3.3 9.0 8.5 8.5



1.3 9.3 9.0 8.8 4.0 4.3 9.0 2.8 8.5 5.5 6.3 8.3 6.5


1.3 8.0 8.0 9.0 7.8 8.3 6.3 2.5 8.5 5.3 6.5 8.8 9.0


1.3 9.3 7.8 8.0 3.5 5.3 6.5 3.3 8.3 3.5 6.8 6.3 7.8 153


0.8 9.8 9.5 8.8 2.0 5.8 8.0 3.5 9.3 7.0 4.5 6.5 8.0 162


1.5 8.3 5.8 5.8 5.3 2.0 8.5 7.8 6.8 3.3 4.8 2.3

0.8 8.0 6.8 7.0 8.5 1.3 7.0 8.5 6.3 1.5 5.8 6.0


1.0 6.5 0

3.9 N.S.2.3


3.0 3.3 1.5 0 2.0

1.4 2.3 2.6 2.0 3.4


5.3 1.8

4.5 3.6


4.8

3.8


5.8

1.8


9.0 3.5 5.5 4.0 6.3

8.8 5.3 3.5 7.0 7.5


6.8

1.7


5.5

3.6


0

3.0


1Yield estimated from boll counts. The number of bolls per 1-row of each plot was converted to pounds of lint per acre.

Summary: In general the yields were substantially lower than in the New Compounds test due to a heavier weed infestation.
Directed Post applications of Caparol + Bueno 6, Cotoran + Bueno 6, or Probe + Bueno 6 provided the best weed control.
The other treatments in this experiment provided less than acceptable control.


- 24 -


YIELD
LBS
LINT/,
127



59



100


125





Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN GRAIN SORGHUM
Preemergence and Postemergence


TRT RATE HOW RATED' 5-14-77
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP SORG CRAB GOOSE TM


a.i.
1 Aatrex 4L 2


2 Aatrex
Top Oil

3 Ramrod

4 Ramrod

5 Aatrex
Ramrod

6 Milogard

7 Igran

8 Igran
Milogard

9 Igran
Aatrex

10 Prowl

11 Aatrex
Prowl

12 Probe

13 Probe
Ramrod

14 Probe2

Continued --


4L 1.5
1 gpa

65W 4

20G 4

4L 1.5
65W 4

80W 1

80W 1

80W 1
80W 1

80W 1
4L 1

4E 1

4L 1
4E 1

75W 2

75W 1.5
65W 4


RATED 6-10-77
SORG CRAB GOOSE TM


RATED 7-28-77
SORG TM


P-RE 1.0 9.5 9.5 9.0 0.5 7.3 10.0 8.3 0.3

EP 2.8 9.3 10.0 9.3 1.3 8.5 10.0 8.0 0.8


EP

PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE


0.3

0.3

0.5


1.3

1.3

0.3


1.0


1.5

2.3


1.5

1.8


10.0

9.8

10.0


8.8

2.8

0.3


10.0

9.5

9.8


9.5

9.0

8.8


6.3

6.8

8.5


7.5

5.8

8.8


0.5

0.3

0.8


1.3

1.0

1.3


9.8

9.3

9.8


6.5

8.5

8.3


9.8

10.0

10.0


9.3

9.5

9.8


5.8

6.0

8.3


6.5

5.0

7.8


1.3

0.8

0.3


1.3

1.8

0.8


9.5 9.5 9.3 0.3 8.5 9.5 8.8 0.3


9.5 9.8

9.3 10.0


8.0 1.0 9.5 10.0

9.3 1.8 9.8 10.0


9.3 9.5 8.0 1.3 8.5 10.0

9.8 9.8 6.0 1.5 9.8 9.8


75W 1 DP -----NOT RATED----


7.5 0.3

8.5 1.0


7.3

4.5


0.3

1.3


0.3 8.8 9.8 8.3 0.3


8.5

8.5


5.3

7.3

8.5


7.0

4.8

7.3


8.8


8.8

8.5


7.0

5.5


8.0


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-9-77

97.7

98.2


79.5

100.6

106.3


88.6

78.4

102.0


109.8


105.7

98.2


102.3

87.3


97.9


- 25 -




Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN GRAIN SORGHUM Preemergence and Postemergence (continued)


NO. CHEMICAL

15 Paraquat
Aatrex

16 Paraquat2
Aatrex

17 Lorox2
2,4-D

18 Bladex2
2,4-D

19 Aatrex
HOE23408

20 Premerge

21 Lexone

22 Lexone

23 Evik2
2,4-D

24 Check


FORM

2E
4L

2E
4L

50W
4E

80W
4E

4L
3E

3E

50W

50W

80W
4E


mrnT*


LSD @ 5%


RATE HOW
LBS/A APP
a.i.
.25 DP
1 DP

.5 DP
1 DP

1.5 DP
.5 DP

1.5 DP
.5 DP

1.5 PRE
1 PRE

3 NS3

.38 EP

.5 EP

1.5 DP
.5 DP


3.0 8.8

3.8 8.8

4.0 9.3

-----NOT


9.3 5.8

9.3 9.8

9.5 8.8

RATED-----


KAITED --IU-//
SORG CRAB GOOSE TM

0.0 9.8 10.0 9.5


IZ-nU 3-14-11
SORG CRAB GOOSE TM

-----NOT RATED-----


-----NOT RATED-----


-----NOT RATED-----


-----NOT RATED-----


0.5 9.5 10.0 7.8


1.0

1.0

1.5

0.3


8.5

8.3

7.8

9.5


8.5

9.5

9.3

10.0


RATED 7-28-7T


RATED 7-28-77
SORG TM

0.3 9.3


10.0 0.0


9.8 0.8


10.0 0.8


6.3 1.3


2.8

8.8

7.8

9.5


0.0 9.8 9.8


0.8 9.8 10.0


0.8 9.3 9.8


0.5 10.0 10.0


2.0

0.8

1.5

0.3


-- 0.8 7.8 7.8 5.0 0.5 4.5 6.3 1.3 1.8

1.2 1.3 0.9 3.7 1.1 2.1 2.2 4.0 1.2


-- nlmTm r Ir +-r -rl r is. --


Directed postemergence treatments not rated since application was made within 1 day of the rating.
plus X77 @ .25%
3S = needle stage

Summary; All Directed Post treatments provided good to excellent long season weed control. Other treatments that
exhibited good weed control were preemergence application of Aatrex + Ramrod, Aatrex + Prowl, and Igran + Aatrex.


- 26 -


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-9-77

104.5


107.4


113.0


97.4


104.9


91.9

105.4

105.4

105.7


77.9

16.6


9.5


9.5


9.5


5.3


4.0

9.3

7.0

8.5


2.5

3.3






Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN GRAIN SORGHUM
T Propachlor Study


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 Old Ramrod

2 Old Ramrod

3 New Ramrod

4 New Ramrod

5 Bexton

6 Bexton

7 Ramrod

8 Ramrod

9 Bexton

10 Bexton

11 Bexton

12 Bexton

13 Aatrex
Bexton

14 Aatrex
Bexton

15 Aatrex
Bexton


FORM

20G

20G

20G

20G

20G

20G

65W

65W

65W

65W

4L

4L

4L
65W

4L
4L

4L
20G


RATE HOW


LBS/A
a.i.
4

6

4

6

4

6

4

6

4

6

4

6

1
4

1
4

1
4


APP

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE


RATED 5-14-77


SORG CRAB GOOSE

2.0 10.0 10.0


2.5

0.5

0.5

1.0

1.3

1.0

1.3

1.0

0.5

0.5

1.0

0.3


10.0

9.5

10.0

9.8

10.0

9.8

9.8

9.5

10.0

9.5

10.0

10.0


10.0

9.3

10.0

9.8

10.0

9.8

9.8

9.8

10.0

9.8

10.0

10.0


1.0 9.8 9.8


0.5 8.5 8.0


TM

6.8

6.8

8.5

5.0

4.0

5.3

6.3

5.8

5.8

7.0

5.8

8.3

6.5


RATED 6-10-77
SORG CRAB GOOSE


1.0

1.0

0.8

0.3

1.0

1.3

1.0

0.5

1.3

0

0.3

0.8

0.8


9.8 9.8 5

9.0 10.0 6

9.3 9.8 7

10.0 10.0 4

9.3 9.8

9.8 10.0

9.5 9.5 5

9.0 9.8 5

9.5 9.8 5

9.8 9.8 7

9.5 10.0 5

9.0 10.0 8

9.5 10.0 5


RATED 7-28-77
TM SORG CRAB TM

.8 1.5 9.3 6.5

5.0 1.8 9.5 5.0

.5 1.0 9.0 8.3

i.3 0.8 9.8 5.8

3.8 1.0 9.3 6.3

3.8 0.8 9.3 8.3

.5 1.0 9.3 5.3

.5 0.8 9.3 5.8

.0 1.3 9.3 5.3

.0 0.5 9.3 7.8

.8 0.5 9.5 5.5

.3 0.5 9.5 7.3

.8 1.3 9.5 6.8


7.5 0.8 9.3 10.0 6.3 0.5 9.8 8.3


8.0 0.5


8.0 7.8 7.8 0.5 7.8 8.3


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 8-19-77

87.2

78.3

95.4

97.2

95.5

91.8

87.5

94.0

102.6

98.4

95.6

93.7

92.5


100.5


95.6


Continued --


- 27 -




Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN
TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

16 Milogard
Bexton

17 Bladex
Bexton

18 Aatrex
Ramrod
(pkg. mix)

19 Bladex


80W 1


20 Check

LSD @ 5%

Summary: Comparison of various
activities between the two co:


PRE 1.3 8.8 8.8 8.0 1.5 6.3 7.0 7.0

--- 1.0 6.0 4.5 4.5 2.0 3.1 4.3 3.0

N.S. 1.3 1.9 N.S. N.S. 2.1 2.3 N.S.

s formulations of Ramrod and Bexton (Propachlor)
pounds.


GRAIN SORGHUM Propachlor Study (continued)
RATE HOW RATED 5-14-77 RATED 6-10-77
FORM LBS/A APP SORG CRAB GOOSE TM SORG CRAB GOOSE TM
a.i.
80W 1 PRE 0.8 9.5 9.8 8.5 0.3 9.0 9.5 7.8
65W 4 PRE

80W 1 PRE 1.0 9.3 10.0 8.3 0.5 9.0 10.0 7.3
65W 4 PRE

4L 6 PRE 1.0 9.8 9.8 8.3 0.8 9.5 10.0 7.3
(1.5 + 4.5)


- 28 -


RATED 7-28-77 YIE
SORG CRAB TM BU/I

0.3 9.5 9.0


0.8 9.0 7.8


0.5 9.5 8.0



1.5 8.5 8.5

1.5 7.0 5.3

N.S. 1.4 N.S.

indicated no differences


LD @ 15%
k 8-19-77

98.4


94.8


94.0



85.4

80.8

N.S.

in





Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS
New Compounds I


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 RH6201

2 Rh6201

3 RH6201

4 Balan
RH6201

5 Balan
RH6201

6 Balan
RH6201

7 Balan
RH2915

8 Balan
RH2915

9 Balan
RH2915

10 Balan
RH2915

11 EL171

12 EL171

13 Balan
EL171


Continued ---


RATE


FORM

4E

2E

2E

1.5E
4E

1.5E
2E

1.5E
2E

1.5E
2E

1.5E
2E

1.5E
2E

1.5E
2E

4L

4L

1.5E
4L


HOW


RATED 5-27-77


PEA

0.8

0.5

0.5

0.8


CRAB GOOSE TM PUS

7.3 8.5 7.5 7.3

9.0 9.5 7.0 3.5

8.8 9.3 3.8 2.8

10.0 10.0 7.8 8.8


LBS/A APP
a.i.
2 PRE

.5 POST

1 POST

1.5 PPI
2 PRE

1.5 PPI
.5 POST

1.5 PPI
1 POST

1.5 PPI
.5 PPI

1.5 PPI
1 PPI

1.5 PPI
.25 PRE

1.5 PPI
.5 PRE

.3 PRE

.6 PRE

1.5 PPI
.3 AC


0.5

1.3

1.0


8.0

8.3

9.5


8.0

7.8

10.0


RATED 6-24-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS


1.5

1.0

0.5

0.3


4.0

7.8

8.5

9.8


BEG


7.8 6.8 5.8

8.5 5.0 8.8

9.5 6.3 9.0

10.0 9.0 6.3


7.5 9.3 0 10.0 10.0


7.8 9.0 0.3 9.8 10.0


8.8 9.3 0 10.0 10.0


8.5 8.3 0


8.5 9.5 0


9.0 7.8


9.0 9.3


8.3 8.8


RATED 8-16-77
PEA CRAB BEG


3.8

4.3

2.3

3.0


6.8

4.5

8.5

9.8


5.3

6.8

7.5

4.8


YIELD
LBS/A

1438

2091

2381

2258


3.0 8.8 5.5 2454


1.0 9.8 7.5 2926


1.8 8.5 6.0 2730


9.8 10.0 9.3 6.8 2.5 9.3 4.8 2294


.5 10.0 10.0


8.0 9.0 0.5 10.0 10.0


4.5

9.8

7.8


2.0

5.3

9.5


3.0

1.3

0


7.3

6.8

10.0


7.5

7.8

10.0


8.5 7.5


9.0 5.5


0.5

1.8

9.8


2.8 9.0 4.8 2164


3.5 9.8 2.5 1590


8.5

8.8

8.3


5.5

7.5

9.3


4.8

8.3

6.8


1561

2084

2614


- 29 -


1.3 10.0 10.0


1.3 10.0 10.0


1.0 10.0 10.0


1.0 10.0 10.0


1.3 10.0 10.0


3.0 10.0 10.0




rage or Z


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS New Compounds I (continued)


TRT RATE
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A
a.i.
14 SN533 2E .75

15 SN533 2E 1

16 SN533 2E .75

17 SN533 2E 1


HOW
APP


RATED 5-27-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE TM PUS


PRE 1.0 8.3 9.0 8.8 0.8

PRE 1.0 7.8 8.5 3.8 0.5

AC 0.8 8.0 8.8 7.5 4.8

AC 0.5 9.5 9.8 7.8 4.5


RATED 6-24-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS BEG

3.5 6.0 8.3 0.0 8.5


3.8 5.5 8.5

2.3 7.0 8.0

2.0 8.8 9.8


0.0 8.0

1.8 7.0


RATED 8-16-77
PEA CRAB BEG

5.3 2.5 6.3

4.0 5.3 5.3

5.5 1.8 3.8


3.3 7.5 4.0 6.0 4.0 1575


18 SN533 2E
Premerge 3E

19 SN533 2E
Dyanap 3E


20 Balan
Lasso
Dyanap
2,4-DB

21 Check


1.5E
4E
3E
2E


.75 AC
1.5 AC

.75 AC
4.5 AC


1.5
2
4.5
.25


PPI
AC
AC
POST


0.3 9.5 9.8


0.8 9.3 9.5


1.0 10.0 10.0


-- ---- ---- 0.8 8.8 9.0


LSD @ 5%


N.S. N.S. 1.3


8.3 9.0


8.3 9.0


9.3 10.0




7.3 4.0

3.3 2.7


0 6.8 8.8 7.5 8.0 5.0 2.8 5.5 1104


0 8.8 9.8 8.0 9.0 3.5 6.3 6.3 2991


0 10.0 10.0




3.0 7.0 5.5

0.9 2.9 2.0


10.0 9.5


0.8 10.0 8.5 3325


1.0 8.3 4.8 2.0 6.0 885


2.2 2.6


2.0 3.0 3.3


Summary: Balan PPI plus either RH6201 Post or EL171 A.C. exhibited excellent activity against the weed species
present except tall morningglory and late season beggarweed. These treatments provided better control than the
preemergence application of RH6201. Balan + RH2915 PPI also provided good to excellent control of most species
except beggarweed. However, none of the applications listed equalled the standard treatment of Balan PPI plus
Lasso + Dyanap AC plus 2,4-DB Post.


- 30 -


Yield
LBS/A

755

863

755


WF.En CONTROL IN PFAtPJTS New Compounds I (conri_-ued)





Page 1 of 2


LR.1


KA1'E UUW


NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
1 Paraquat* 2E .125 AC


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS
_ New Compounds II


RATED 6-4-/77
PEA CRAB GOOSE TM PUS

1.0 8.8 7.3 4.5 6.5


RATED 6-24-77


PEA CARB PUS

1.5 3.0 1.0


PIG TM RED


RATED 8-16-77
PEA CRAB BEG TM


1.8 2.3 2.0 4.8 3.3 7.8 5.8


2 Paraquat*

3 Paraquat*

4 Paraquat*

5 Paraquat*

6 Paraquat*

7 Cobex
Vernam

8 Cobex
Vernam

9 Rydex

10 Rydex

11 Cobex
Lasso
Dyanap

12 Cobex
Vernam
Lasso
Dyanap

13 Rydex
Lasso
Dyanap

Continued ---


2E

2E

2E

2E

2E

2E
7E

2E
7E

50W

50W

2E
4E
3E

2E
7E
4E
3E

50W
4E


.25 AC

.5 AC

.125 EP

.25 EP

.5 EP

.5 PPI
2 PPI

.75 PPI
2 PPI

.5 PPI

.75 PPI

.5 PPI
2 AC
4.5 AC

.33 PPI
2 PPI
2 AC
4.5 AC

.5 PPI
2 AC


3E 4.5 AC


2.0

0.5

1.0

2.5

4.5

1.0


7.5

7.8

8.5

8.3

8.5

9.8


8.5

9.0

9.5

9.5

9.8

10.0


5.3

4.8

7.3

8.5

9.0

8.8


4.3

3.5

5.0

6.3

7.3

9.0


2.5

1.8

2.0

2.3

3.0

0.3


4.3

5.8

7.5

5.0

5.5

9.5


0.8

1.0

1.3

5.8

1.8

9.5


3.8

2.8

3.8

2.5

1.3

9.3


2.8

4.3

4.5

7.0

7.8

7.8


1.3

4.3

3.0

6.0

4.8

6.5


6.0

5.5

4.8

5.5

5.3

0.8


0.5

2.8

2.8

1.8

1.5

9.8


5.3

5.5

7.5

6.0

7.3

9.0


8.0

8.5

7.5

8.5

7.8

9.5


2875

1525

1408

1212

1075

3078


2.3 9.3 10.0 9.3 9.3 0.3 9.5 9.8 9.5 8.8 8.0 0.8 9.0 9.3 9.3 3390


0.8

1.0

1.5


9.8

9.8

9.8


10.0

10.0

10.0


8.5

8.3

9.8


9.0

9.3

10.0


0.8

0.3

0


7.8

9.5

10.0


8.3

9.5

10.0


7.3

7.0

9.0


1.0 9.8 10.0 9.5 10.0 0.3 9.5 10.0 10.0 8.8


0.5 9.8 10.0 9.5 9.8 0.5 9.5


8.0

8.0

9.5


1.5

0.5

0.3


9.3

9.5

9.5


7.8

9.3

10.0


7.8

9.3

9.8


9.5 0.3 9.5 9.5 10.0


2759

2744

2969



3303


9.8 10.0 8.8 10.0 0.3 9.5 9.5 9.8 3058


- 31 -


YIELD
LBS/A

1278






WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS New Compounds II (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.


RATED 6-4-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE TM PUS


RATED 6-24-77 RATED 8-16-77
PEA CARB PUS PIG TM RED PEA CRAB BEG TM


4E 1.5


PRE 0.3 9.5 9.5 5.8 6.5 1.5 7.5 4.5 3.8 5.0 8.0


Dyanap 3E 4.5 PRE


3.0 6.5 9.8 8.0


15 Antor 4E
Dyanap 3E

16 Antor 4E
Premerge 3E


1.5 AC
4.5 AC

1.5 AC
1.5 AC


1.5 9.0 10.0 7.8 9.3 1.3 7.8 9.0 8.8 7.0 8.8


0.3 9.3 9.8 5.0 9.0 0 8.5 8.5 8.0 3.0 8.8


17 Ronstar 2E 1.5 PRE 0.8 7.0 6.0 5.8 7.3 1.8 6.8 5.8 5.8 2.8 7.5


18 Ronstar
Sonalan

19 Balan
Lasso
Dyanap


1.5 PRE
1 PRE


1.5 1.5 PPI
4E 2 AC
3E 4.5 AC


0.8 8.8 8.0 6.8 7.5 1.0 6.0 4.5 8.0 4.5 6.3


1.8 9.8 10.0 9.3 10.0 0.3 9.3 10.0 10.0 8.0 9.8


3.5 5.0 8.8 9.0 2751


2.8 6.8 8.0 6.5 2585


4.5 3.3 8.5 6.8 1503

3.5 5.5 8.3 6.8 1438


0.3 9.5 9.8 9.5 3086


-- -- 0.3 7.8 9.0 0 1.0 3.3 5.0 0.5 1.5 4.8 4.0


1.5 1.5 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.2 3.4 2.2 3.2 3.1 3.4


4.8 3.8 7.5 7.5 1336


1.5 2.8 2.6 1.7


*Plus X77 @ .06%

Summary: Combinations of dinitroaniline herbicides such as Cobex, Rydex, or Balan PPI with Lasso + Dyanap AC resulted in
excellent broad spectrum weed control and the highest yields. Combinations of Antor plus Dyanap Pre or A.C. and Antor
plus Premerge AC, while providing good control of most species, did not equal the applications involving a preplant mater


- 32 -


14 Antor


LBS/A


2222


20 Check


LSD @ 5%


m n o tr


----- --


rcr-" VI _


a.i.





Page 1 of 3


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS


TRT RATE
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A


1 Balan
Lasso
Dyanap

2 Balan
Lasso
Premerge


3 Balan
Lasso
Dyanap
2,4-DB


4 Balan
Lasso
Dyanap
Premerge*
(2 times)

5 Balan
Premerge
Premerge*
(4 times)


6 Balan
Amiben
Dyanap
2,4-DB

7 Balan
Dual
Dyanap
2,4-DB


a.i.
1.5E 1.5
4E 2
3E 4.5


1.5E
4E
3E

1.5E
4E
3E
2E

1.5E
4E
3E
3E


1.5E
3E
3E


1.5E
2E
3E
2E


1.5E
8E
3E
2E


1.5
2
1.5

1.5
2
4.5
.25

1.5
2
4.5
1


1.5
1.5
1.0


1.5
2
4.5
.25


1.5
2
4.5
.25


HOW RATED 5-Z/-/I
APP PEA CRAB GOOSE SICK TM PUS


PPI
AC
AC

PPI
AC
AC

PPI
AC
AC
POST

PPI
AC
AC
POST


PPI
AC
POST


PPI
AC
AC
POST

PPI
AC
AC
POST


1.3 10.0 10.0 9.0


1.0 9.8 10.0


1.3 10.0 10.0


Herbicide


Programs A


KAiED 0-14- 11
PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK TM


9.3 10.0 1.0 9.3 10.0 10.0 7.5 10.0


8.3 8.8 9.8


0.5 9.3 10.0


7.8 8.8 10.0 0.3 10.0 10.0


0 10.0 10.0 9.0 9.3 10.0 0.3 10.0 10.0


0.5 9.8 10.0


0.8 10.0 10.0


0.3 10.0 10.0


7.3 9.8 10.0


2.8 9.8 10.0


7.8 9.5 10.0 1.0 9.8 10.0


6.8 9.0 9.5


--~~~ ~ ~ 6.... '1 1 AI~~0 77 YIELD~


RAL i. O--u --
PEA CRAB SICK BEG LBS/A


0.8 9.0 8.0 8.5


9.8 6.3 9.5 2.5 9.5 6.5


10.0 8.3 9.8 1.0 9.5 8.3


4.3 2845


7.5 3616


10.0 8.5 10.0 0.8 9.0 8.5 9.8 3783


10.0 8.5 10.0 2.5 8.3 8.3


10.0 2222


10.0 7.3 10.0 2.5 8.3 6.3 10.0 3630


0.3 10.0 10.0 9.8 5.5


10.0 1.8 9.5 5.5


7.5 3035


Continued --


3043


- 33 -






WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS Herbicide Programs A (continued)


TRT
NO.


CHEMICAL FORM


8 Balan
Prowl
Dyanap

9 Amex
Amiben
Premerge

10 Amex
Amiben
Dyanap


1.5E
4E
3E


RATE HOW
LBS/A APP


a.i.
1.5
.75
4.5

2
2
1.5

2
2
4.5


PPI
AC
AC


PPI
AC
AC

PPI
AC
AC


RATED 5-27-77


PEA CRAB GOOSE

1.0 10.0 10.0



1.8 10.0 9.8



1.3 9.8 10.0


SICK TM PUS


RATED 6-24-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK TM


6.0 8.5 9.3 1.0 9.8 10.0


7.5 8.3 10.0 0.8 9.8 10.0 10.0 5.8



7.0 9.3 10.0 0.8 9.3 9.8 9.8 5.3


RATED 8-16-77 YIELD
PEA CRAB SICK BEG LBS/A


9.8 4.8 9.8 2.8 9.3 4.5 8.0 1837


8.8 2.3 9.3 5.5 10.0 2846


8.5 3.3 8.8 4.8


9.5 2730


11 Prowl 4E
Dyanap 3E

12 Prowl 4E
Premerge 3E


13 Prowl
Lasso
Dyanap

14 Prowl
Lasso
Dyanap
Basagran


15 Dual 8E
Dyanap 3E


16 Dual
Dyanap


.75 AC
4.5 AC

.75 AC
3 AC

.75 PPI
2 AC
4.5 AC

.75 PPI
2 AC
4.5 AC
.75 POST

2 AC
4.5 AC

3 AC
4.5 AC


1.3 9.3 9.5 6.8 7.8 9.3 1.5 8.0 7.8 9.8 5.8 8.0 3.3 5.3 5.3 9.5 2098


1.0 9.3 9.5


1.0 10.0 10.0


2.0 10.0 10.0


0.3 9.5 9.5


0.8 9.5 9.8


7.3 9.3 9.3 1.0 4.5 4.0


8.3 9.3 10.0 0.8 9.5 10.0 1


7.8 4.0 7.0 6.0 4.0 3.8 5.3 1946


.0.0 7.3 9.3 1.3 9.3 7.3 9.0 3158


8.5 9.5 10.0 1.5 9.3 9.8 9.8 7.0 10.0 2.3 8.3 6.8


6.5 7.8 9.5 0.8 8.8 9.8 9.0 4.3


8.3 3006


7.5 4.0 6.5 3.3 8,8 2352


6.3 7.0 10.0 1.0 8.5 9.3 9.5 7.3 6.3 4.3 7.3 3.3 6.5 2033


Continued ---


. . .. ...........


- 34 -




Page 3 of 3


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS Herbicide programs A (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP


17 Tolban
Vernam
Dual
Dyanap


a.i.
4E .75 PPI
7E 2 PPI
8E 2 AC
3E 4.5 AC


RATED 5-27-77 RATED 6-24-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE SICK TM PUS PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK TM


RATED -16-77 YIELD
PEA CRAB SICK BEG LBS/A


0.8 9.8 10.0 8.3 8.8 10.0 0.5 9.8 10.0 0.0 6.8 9.3 2.0 9.0 5.8 8.0 3035


18 Mowdown 80W 1.5
2,4-DB 2E .25


19 Balan
Bladex
2,4-DB


1.5E
4WDS
2E


1.5
.75
.25


20 Vernam 7E 2.5
Bladex 4WDS .75


PRE
POST

PPI
PRE
POST

PPI
PPI


21 Vernam 7E 2.5 PPI
Bladex 4WDS 1.5 PPI


22 Check


LSD @ 5%


3.5 3.0


3.3 3.5 8.5 6.8 3.0 2.8 1.8 8.8 1.5 8.5 7.0 0 4.3 7.0 675


1.3 9.8 9.5 4.3 8.0 8.5 1.0 9.5 9.0 9.3 1.8 9.5


1.0 9.0


5.3 7.0 2.5 5.5 1844


9.0 5.8 7.0 6.8 2.5 5.0 5.3 4.5 3.0 6.0 4.8 5.5 3.5 6.8 1554


2.5 9.3 9.5 7.0 8.3 7.5 1.8 7.5 8.0 4.8 3.8 6.8 4.0 6.5 4.3 8.8 1438


1.8 4.3 4.3 0 4.3 0 3.3 1.8 1.8 2.0 0.8 2.3 7.5 0 1.0 5.5 523

1.3 1.5 1.6 1.3 2.1 1.5 1.2 2.3 2.5 2.2 2.0 2.7 1.9 2.1 2.2 3.8 737


*Premerge treatments applied at approximately 2-week intervals after crop emergence.

Summary: Several treatments in this test exhibited good weed control with Balan PPI plus Lasso + Dyanap AC plus 2 Post
over-the-top applications of Premerge resulting in excellent full season control of all weed species present and the
highest yield. Other treatments that provided good control of most species included Balan + Lasso + Dyanap + 2,4-DB,
Balan + Amiben + Dyanap + 2,4-DB, Balan + Dual + Dyanap + 2,4-DB, Prowl + Lasso + Dyanap, and Tolban + Vernam + Dual
+ Dyanap.


- 35 -




rage L or z


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
____a.i.
1Balan 1.5E 1.5 PPI
Lasso 4E 2 AC
Dyanap 3E 4.5 AC


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS


Herbicide
RATED 6-4-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE SICK TM PUS


0.8 9.8 10.0


Programs B
RATED 6-24-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK TM


7.3 9.5 10.0 0.5 9.8 10.0


RATED 8-16-77
PEA CRAB SICK BEG


9.8 7.0 9.5 1.8 9.3 6.5


3E .75 PPI
4E 2 AC
3E 4.5 AC


/Sonalan 3E 1 AC
Dyanap 3E 4.5 AC


Balan
Sonalan
Dyanap

Balan
Sonalan
Dyanap


V& Balan
Sonalan
Dyanap

X Balan
Sonalan
Premerge

8 Balan
Sonalan
emerge

/ Balan
Sonalan
Premerge
10 Butam

11 Butam


1.5E 1.5
3E 1
3E 4.5

1.5E 1.5
3E 1.5
3E 4.5

1.5E 1.5
3E 2
3E 9

1.5E 1.5
3E 1
3E 3


1.5E
3E
3E


PPI
AC
AC

PPI
AC
AC

PPI
AC
AC

PPI
AC
AC


1.5 PPI
1.5 AC
3 AC


1.5E 1.5
3E 2
3E 6
6E 2


PPI
AC
AC


0.3 10.0 10.0



0.3 9.8 10.0


1.0 10.0 10.0



0.8 10.0 10.0


1.3 10.0 10.0



0 10.0 10.0



0.3 10.0 10.0



0.3 10.0 10.0


AC 0.3 10.0 10.0


6E 3 AC 0.5 9.3 9.8


6.8 9.8 10.0



4.2 9.8 9.0


6.5 9.0 9.5



6.3 10.0 9.8


6.0



7.3



7.3



7.0


3.5

1.8


0.5 10.0 10.0



0.8 9.5 9.5


0.8 9.5 10.0



0.3 10.0 10.0


9.8 10.0 0.5 10.0 10.0



7.3 10.0 0.3 9.8 10.0



8.8 9.5 0.3 10.0 10.0



9.8 10.0 0.5 10.0 10.0


7.8 0.5 2.8 10.0 10.0 0.5


8.8 0


4.3 9.5 9.8 0


10.0 6.3 10.0 1.3 10.0 6.8


8.5 2577


8.8 3.5 9.0 3.0 8.8 4.8 7.3 1998


10.0 5.3 9.0 2.5 9.8 5.8 7.3 2432



10.0 4.5 9.5 2.8 9.8 5.3 6.3 2614


10.0 6.8 10.0 1.3 9.8 7.0 7.8 3136



10.0 5.8 7.8 2.3 9.6 6.0 5.6 2381



10.0 6.0 9.0 3.0 9.8 6.0 5.6 1938


9.8 5.0 9.8 2.3 10.0 5.5


4.5 5.3 3.6 8.6 4.6

2.8 8.0 4.0 9.0 3.3


5.3 2788


6.0 1546

5.6 1474


Continued ---


Sonalan
Lasso
Dyanap


YIELD
LBS/A


7.5 2395


I


- 36 -






Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS Herbicide Programs B (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
12 Lasso 4E 2 AC


RATED 6-4-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE SICK TM PUS

1.0 9.3 9.8 4.5 7.0 9.3


RAE 6-4-7 ATD -1-7


RATED 6-24-77
PEA CRAB GOOSE PUS SICK TM

1.5 8.0 9.3 9.5 4.8 7.0


RATED 8-16-77
PEA CRAB SICK BEG

3.0 5.8 6.0 6.6


13 Butam
Dyanap

14 Butam
Dyanap

15 Lasso
Dyanap

16 Dyanap

17 Butam
Premerge

18 Butam
Premerge

19 Lasso
Premerge

20 Premerge

21 Basalin
Lasso
Dyanap

22 Check


LSD


Summary: Sonalan
Balan or Basalin


Lasso + Dyanap AC,


2
4.5

3
4.5

2
4.5

4.5

2
1.5

3
1.5

2
1.5

1.5

.75
2
4.5


AC
AC

AC
AC

AC
AC

AC

AC
AC

AC
AC

AC
AC

AC

PPI
AC
AC


0.3 8.8 9.8 6.3 8.8 9.0 0 9.0 10.0 9.8 5.8 8.8 3.0 6.0 5.6 7.8 2585


1.5 9.3 10.0


0.3 9.8 10.0


0.3

1.0


8.3

9.8


9.3

10.0


0.5 10.0 10.0


0.5 10.0 10.0


0.3 5.8 8.8

1.0 9.8 10.0


-- -- 0 7.0 8.8

@ 5% N.S. 1.5 0.6

+ Dyanap AC over Balan PPI
PPI plus Lasso + Dyanap AC,


5.6 8.6 8.8


8.0 8.8 9.8


6.0 9.5 7.8

4.8 7.8 8.0


7.0 8.0 8.8


6.8 7.8 9.0


6.0 7.0 7.3

8.0 8.8 10.0



3.6 3.5 0

2.2 2.7 0.9


0.8 9.8 10.0


0


0.8

0.3


9.0 4.0 7.3


3.0 9.3 4.8 5.8 2134


9.0 10.0 9.3 7.6 8.8 1.8 8.3 7.6 6.6 2759


6.0

10.0


9.5

10.0


0.5 10.0 10.0


0.5 9.3 9.8


2.0 3.5 5.8

0.3 9.8 10.0


7.3 4.8 9.6

7.0 3.6 9.6


8.6 6.0 6.5


9.0 5.3 6.5


6.6

10.0


3.3 4.8

6.8 7.8


4.3 3.8 5.6 7.3 1750

3.0 9.6 5.3 4.0 2091


2.6 9.8 5.3 6.6 2301


3.6 6.8 5.3 4.8 1960


5.5 3.0

1.5 9.5


3.3 3.5 7.3 2.5 3.0 3.5 5.5 1.3 5.3

1.2 2.4 2.0 1.9 2.7 3.9 1.6 2.4 1.7


4.8 3.8 879

6.8 7.0 2795


4.5

3.4


951

755


controlled all weed species present except sicklepod and was comparable to
Butam + Dyanap AC controlled most species but were weaker on sicklepod than


YIELD
LBS/A

1699








TRT
NO. CHEMICAL FORM

1 Basalin 4E
Basagran 4E

2 Basalin 4E
Lasso 4E
Dyanap 3E
Basagran 4E

3 Vernam 7E
Lasso 4E
Dyanap 3E

4 Basalin 4E
Lasso 4E
Dyanap 3E
Basagran 4E
Basagran 4E

5 Dowco 295 6E

6 Dowco 295 6E

7 Dowco 295 6E

8 HERC 26910 4E

9 HERC 26910 4E

10 Vernam 7E

11 Check


LSD


NUTSEDGE CONTROL IN PEANUTS
RATE HOW RATED 6-24-77
LBS/A APP PEA YNUT
a.i.
.75 PPI 1.0 2.0
.75 EP

.75 PPI 0 3.0
2 AC
4.5 AC
.75 EP

3 PPI 0 9.3
2 AC
4.5 AC

.75 PPI 1.0 3.7
2 AC
4.5 AC
.75 EP
.75 LP

2 PPI 0 8.7

3 PPI 0.3 9.0

4 PPI 1.0 9.0

3 PPI 0.3 6.7

6 PPI 0.7 8.7

3 PPI 1.3 9.0

--- 1.0 2.7

@ 5% N.S. 2.5


Summary: Dowco 295 and Here 26910 both provided adequate control of:the nutsedge,
Basagran activity may have been re4uced by the extremely dy conditions that prevailed
at the time of application.


- 38 -


YIELD
LBS/A

2370


2506




2971



2826





2129

2004

2129

2457

2585

2390

1103

600








WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS
Comparison Between Balan and Treflan

RATE HOW YIELD2 LBS/A
CHEMICAL1 FORM LBS/A APP R- 1 R 2 R 3 R- 4 MEAN3
a.i.
Balan i.5E 1.5 PPI 3543 3688 3775 4080 3772

Treflan 4E .5 PPI 3078 3325 3586 3862 3463

1Lasso + Dyanap (2 + 4.5 lbs/A) applied at cracking to both areas.
2yield was determined by harvesting 2 rows 50-feet long in 4 spots within
each area.
XMeans are significantly different at 5% level.

Summary: The Balan treated area yielded significantly more peanuts than
did the Treflan treated area. Treflan probably caused slightly more root
damage to the crop than Balan. In most years this increased root pruning
would have had no effect on the peanuts. But, because of the dry weather
during the early part of the growing season, this difference in root
growth was reflected in the subsequent peanut yields.


- 39 -










OTHER HERBICIDES
IN COMBINATION
Balan + Lasso
Amex + Amiben
Prowl
Balan + Sonalan
Balan + Sonalan
Balan + Sonalan
Butam
Butam
Lasso
(None)
SN533
Antor


WEED CONTROL IN PEANUTS
Comparison Between Premerge and Dyanap


WHEN APP RATE #/A


PPI + AC
PPI + AC
AC
PPI + AC
PPI + AC
PPI + AC
AC
AC
AC

AC
AC
AC


1.5 + 2
2+2
.75
1.5 + 1
1.5 + 1.5
1.5 + 2
2
3
2

.75
1.5


PREMERGE
RATE #IA YIELD (#/A)
1.5 2845
1.5 2846
3 1946
3 2381
3 1938
6 2788
1.5 2091
1.5 2301
1.5 1960
1.5 879
1.5 1104
1.5 2585


Mean:


DYANAP
RATE #/A YIELD (#/A)
4.5 3043
4.5 2730
4.5 2098
4.5 2432
4.5 2614
9 3136
4.5 2585
4.5 2134
4.5 2759
4.5 1750
4.5 2991
4.5 2751


2139


2585


Summary: The results of the comparison between At Cracking applications of
Premerge and Dyanap show that the Dyanap treatment consistently yielded more
peanuts than did the Premerge. In several instances, the increased yield of
Dyanap over Premerge was quite dramatic and more than covered the added cost
of the Dyanap.


- 40 -





Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
New Compounds I


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 RH6201

2 Treflan
RH6201

3 RH6201
HOE23408

4 RH6201
Triton AG88

5 Treflan
RH6201

6 RH2915

7 RH2915

8 RH2915
Triton AG88

9 RH2915
2,4-DB

10 Treflan
RH2915

11 RH2915

12 Surflan
RH2915

13 SN533

Continued ---


RATE HOW
FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
2E .5 EP


4E
2E

2E
3E

2E


4E
2E

2E

2E

2E


2E
2E

4E
2E

2E

75W
2E

2E


.5 PPI
.5 EP

.5 EP
1 EP

.5 EP
.5% EP

.5 PPI
2 PRE

.25 DP

.5 DP

.25 DP
.5% DP

.25 DP
.25 DP

.5 PPI
.5 PPI

.25 PRE

1 PRE
.25 PRE

.75 PPI


RATED 6-1-77
SOY CRAB SICK PUS RED TM

----- NOT RATED-------

-------NOT RATED-----


-------NOT RATED-------


-------NOT RATED----


2.0 9.8 4.3 9.5 6.5 9.0


-------NOT RATED-------

-------NOT RATED-------

-------NOT RATED------


------ NOT RATED-------


1.8 10.0 4.5 8.8 6.0 7.0


3.8 9.8 3.0

4.8 9.8 2.8


7.0 4.5 7.0

8.5 3.3 7.8


1.0 8.8 4.0 1.0 1.5 4.0


RATED 8-16-77


RATED 8-16b-77


SOY CRAB PUS SICK TM RED PIG SOY SICK

1.8 7.8 9.0 2.5 9.0 5.5 10.0 2.8 4.3

1.0 9.8 9.5 4.8 9.8 2.8 9.8 3.0 3.5


TM BEG RED

8.8 9.5 6.5

8.0 8.5 4.3


2.8 7.8 9.0 3.0 7.0 2.8 9.5 4.5 1.3 4.5 7.0 6.3


0.5 8.8 9.3 4.0 9.8 4.3 9.3 2.8 4.5 8.5 9.5 7.0


1.3 8.8 9.3 3.8 9.0 5.8 9.3 4.8 3.0 6.5 6.8 7.0


2.5

2.5

2.8


7.5

7.8

7.5


4.8

5.8

5.3


8.4

8.2

8.2


8.8

9.0

9.3


3.8

2.3

3.5


5.3

7.3

2.8


8.5

9.3

9.5


3.0 8.3 8.3 5.8 8.4 8.0 9.3 3.0 4.3 7.3 8.8 8.8


2.0 9.5 9.8 2.8 8.2 3.5 9.3 3.5 2.8 4.8 8.5 4.5


3.8 7.8 5.0 1.5 3.3 3.3 8.8 4.5 4.0 2.3 9.5 7.0

4.0 9.3 9.0 1.5 7.8 5.3 9.5 5.0 1.5 1.8 8.8 9.3


2.0 8.8 4.5 1.0 1.0 0 5.3 5.3 3.8 1.8 6.5 4.0


YIELD L 157
BU/A 10-21-77


19.4

19.6


15.7


21.5


17.2


16.2

20.6

17.4


17.2


16.9


10.6

11.9


12.6


- 41 -




rage z ot 2


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS New Compounds I (continued)


RATE HOW
FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.


RATED 6-1-77


SOY CRAB SICK PUS RED


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

14 SN533

15 SN533

16 SN533

17 SN533

18 SN533

19 SN533
Premerge

20 SN533
Dyanap


2.8

1.0

3.3

2.5

2.5

4.5


2.5

1.5

1.5

3.3

1.8

2.8


2E -1 PPL 1.3. 8.8

2E .75 PRE 3.8 4.3

2E 1 PRE 1.3 9.3

2E .75 AC 2.0 9.3

2E 1 AC 2.3 9,8

2E .75 AC 0.8 10.0


1.5

.75
4.5


AC

AC
AC


TM SOY CRAB


4.3

3.0

5.5

5.0

4.8

5.0


1.5

4.0

1.8

2.5

2.0

1.0


9.0

4.5

8.3

8.0

8.8

8.5


3.3

2.5

2.5

4.0

2.5

2.0


RATED 8-16-77


PUS SICK TM


RED PIG SOY


3.8 0.8 3.8 0 4.3

0 1.8 3.0 2.0 3.5

0.8 1.3 2.3 0 4.5

2.0 0.5 3.3 0.5 2.5

1.3 1.3 2.8 0.5 2.3

5.5 0 4.8 1.5 6.8


RATED 8-16-77


SICK TN BEG RED


4.0 5.8

4.8 5.5

4.0 6.5

4.5 6.0

4.3 5.5

4.3 4.0


2.0 7.0 5.8


2.5

3.3

2.3

4.0

1.5


7.8

6.3

5.3

5.5

9.3


6.5

4.0

6.8

6.8

8.0


0 10.0 4.8 9.8 9.5 7.8 0 9.0 9.3 2.5 7.8 9.3 10.0 3.3 4.8 2.3 9.5 9.8


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 10-21-7


2.0 6.5 1.3

2.1 1.0 N.S.


0.8 0.8 4.0

2.4 2.3 2.3


2.3 5.3

2.2 2.3


0 1.5

2.5 2.1


4.5 1.8 1.3

3.4 3.6 3.7


3.3 4.5 4.5 6.5 4.8

1.3 2.9 3.4 3.2 3.9


Summary: Most
some of these
RH2915 DP and


15.5

10.4

12.3

12.1

15.7

15.0


20.6


16.7

4.8


treatments in this test failed to provide adequate control of either sicklepod or redweed. The activity of
treatments may have been reduced by the lack of rainfall during the early part of the growing season.
RH6201 + surfactant EP controlled all species except sicklepod while SN533 + Dyanap was weak on sicklepod


and tall morningglory.


- 42 -


21 Check


LSD @ 5%





Page 1 of 2


RATE HOW


NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
1 SD50224 2E .75 LP


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
New Compounds II and Herbicide Combinations I


'RATED- 6-1-77
SOY CRAB SICK PUS RED TM

----NOT RATED-------


RATED 6-24-77
SOY PUS SICK TM RED

0.5 2.8 4.3 7.8 6.5


RATED 8-18-77
SOY SICK TM

3.0 3.8 5.5


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 10-21-77

18.1


2 SD50224

3 SD50224

4 Basagran

5 RH3359

6 Dyanap

7 Dyanap

8 Paraquat
Sencor

9 AC206784

10 AC206784

11 Antor
Dyanap

12 Antor
Dyanap

13 Antor
Premerge

14 Antor
Sencor


2E

2E

4E

.75E

3E

3E

2E
50W

4E

4E

4E
3E

4E
3E

4E
3E

4E
50W


1.5 LP

3 LP

.75 LP

.5 PRE

2.25 EP

4.5 DP

.25 DP
.5 DP


3

4

1.5
4.5

1.5
4.5

1.5
1.5

1.5
.5


PRE

PRE

PRE
PRE

AC
AC

AC
AC

PRE
PRE


--------NOT

--------NOT

------NOT

0.2 9.5 2.8

--------NOT

-------NOT

--------NOT


9.8 2.3

9.8 3.0

9.3 6.5


RATED-------

RATED------

RATED-------

5.0 2.3 7.0

RATED------

RATED------

RATED-----


6.8

8.0

9.0


6.8 6.3

7.0 6.3

9.3 7.3


1.5 8.3 4.8 9.8 9.8 7.0


1.0 9.3 3.8 9.3 8.3 6.3


0.5 10.0 4.5 9.0 9.0 6.5


1.5

1.0

1.3

0.5

0.3

1.5

0.3


1.3

3.5

1.3


5.0

6.0

5.8

5.8

9.3

8.8

9.3


5.0

7.3

8.3


7.8

8.0

7.3

5.8

9.0

7.0

8.8


6.8

4.0

7.5


1.8 8.8 3.8


1.3 8.3 2.8


0.5 8.8 2.5


4.3

6.3

8.0

0

9.5

8.8

9.3


6.3

7.0

9.0


4.0

2.5

2.8

4.0

3.0

3.8

1.8


4.5

5.0

3.5


3.8

5.0

4.0

3.5

3.3

3.8

8.3


3.3

4.0

5.8


5.0

6.0

6.3

.4.5

7.8

4.8

5.3


2.5

1.0

5.3


7.5 9.5 4.3 5.0 5.0


4.5 9.5 4.8 4.5 5.0


7.3 9.5 3.3 5.0 5.0


Continued --


TRT


17.9

21.3

18.9

16.7

21.6

15.2

18.4


13.2

10.5

18.4


15.9


15.4


18.9


- 43 -




Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS New Compounds II and Herbicide Combinations I (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
15 Antor 4E 1.5 PRE
Lorox 50W 1.5 PRE


16 Lasso 4E
Amiben 2E


17 Lasso
Amiben
Sencor


4E
2E
50W


PRE
PRE


PRE
PRE
.5 PRE


18 Lorox 50W 1.5 PRE
Amiben 2E 2 PRE

19 Lasso 4E 2 PRE
Lorox 50W 1.5 PRE


20 Lasso 4E
Sencor 50W


2 PRE
.5 PRE


21 Check


RATED 6-1-77 RATED 6-24-77
SOY CRAB SICK PUS RED TN SOY PUS SICK TM RED


1.5 9.8 4.0 8.5 8.3 6.8


1.8 8.3 4.8


0.3 10.0 4.8



0.8 7.5 3.0


1.3 10.0 4.5


0.5 10.0 5.8


-- --- 1.5 3.3 0


LSD @ 5%


N.S. 2.5 1.9


9.8 9.3 6.3


10.0 9.5 6.8



9.0 8.5 7.3


9.3 9.5 7.0


9.5 9.5 7.5


2.0 8.0 3.0


2.0 9.0 2.5


0.5 9.5 4.8



0.3 9.3 1.3


1.3 9.0 4.5


1.0 9.0 4.8


0 0 2.5 1.5 2.0 1.0


1.7 1.7 2.4


1.7 2.3 2.5


6.8 7.0


RATED 8-18-77 YIELD @ 15%
SOY SICK TM BU/A 10-21-77

4.0 4.3 -3.3 16.4


6.3 9.5 5.0 5.0 3.0


7.3 9.5 3.0 5.0 3.5



7.5 9.5 4.3 2.8 2.8


7.8 9.5 3.3 5.5 4.0


8.0 9.5 3.8 5.0 3.8


5.3 2.0 5.0 3.0 2.3

3.3 3.4 1.8 2.2 2.9


14.5


19.6



17.4


15.4


20.3


16.2

N.S.


1Post treatments not rated since treatments not applied until after ratings were made.

Summary: As in the previous tests, none of the materials provided adequate broad spectrum weed
provided good control of most species except tall morningglory at the last rating.


control. Paraquat + Sencor I


- 44 -





Page 1 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
Herbicide Combinations II
- ---- -a.f n.lnl


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 Prowl

2 Prowl
Sencor

3 Prowl
Sencor

4 Prowl
Lorox

5 Vernam
Basalin

6 Vernam
Tolban

7 Vernam
Prowl

8 Vernam
Cobex

9 Mowdown

10 Mowdown

11 Treflan

12 Surflan

13 Treflan
Mowdown


RATE HOW
FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
4E .75 PPI


4E
50W

4E
50W

4E-
50W

7E
4E

7E
4E

7E
4E

7E
2E

80W

80W

4E

75W

4E
80W


.75 PPI
.5 PPI

.75 PPI
.5 PRE

.75 PPI
1 PRE

1.5 PPI
.38 PPI

1.5 PPI
.38 PPI

1.5 PPI
.38 PPI

1.5 PPI
.16 PPI

1.6 PPI

1.6 PRE

.5 PPI

1 PRE

.5 PPI
1.2 PPI


RATED 6-2-77


SOY CRAB PUS RED TM


1.0 9.5 9.8 7.5 9.3

1.3 9.0 9.3 9.8 9.3


1.3 9.5 9.0 9.3 9.5


0.3 9.5 9.0 7.8 7.0


1.5 9.8 8.3 8.3 8.3


1.5 9.5 6.8 7.3 9.3


1.8 10.0 8.8 8.8 7.8


1.5 8.8 7.3 8.5 8.8


1.8

6.8

1.2

1.0

1.3


8.8

8.5

9.2

8.8

10.0


2.3

1.5

8.4

8.8

9.2


5.3

8.8

9.3

8.5

9.3


RATED 6-24-77


SM SOY CRAB PUS TM RED SM BEG SOY CRAB SM BEG


6.8

9.5


0.8 9.8

0.5 9.3


9.3 9.5 4.8 6.0


9.3 2.8 10.0 5.0 7.5


8.8 9.5 9.5 9.0 10.0 1.3 9.8 7.8 9.8


9.0 0.5 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.8 8.5 9.8 1.0 9.0 8.0 9.8


7.3 0.3 9.5 9.5 8.5 7.3 4.8 9.3 2.0 9.3 6.0 7.5


5.8


5.3


7.0


7.3


8.6

7.0

6.0

7.8

7.8


1.3 9.8 7.5 8.8 8.5 5.8 6.8 4.0 9.8 3.5 6.0


1.3 9.0 6.8 8.8 6.3 5.0 8.0 2.8 10.0 6.0 5.5


1.3 9.5 8.8 9.0 7.5 8.0 6.8 3.8 8.8 3.5 4.0


1.0 9.5 8.0 8.5 9.5 9.0 8.3 2.0 9.3 7.3 6.0


1.2

7.5

1.3

2.3

0.8


8.2

9.0

9.3

8.8

9.8


2.3

5.5

9.0

8.0

9.3


4.8

9.3

9.3

9.5

9.6


8.8

9.0

7.5

9.2

7.0


8.5

7.3

6.3

7.6

8.5


8.5

8.5

6.8

10.0

8.8


7.3

6.0

9.8

8.5

10.0


7.3

5.0

5.0

8.0

6.5


11 JLLD 3/
RED BU/A 10-14-7T


5.0

9.3


8.8


6.3


6.8


4.3


6.0


6.8


8.3

5.3

3.5

5.8

7.3


23.2

35.3


33.9


29.0


21.1


22.0


21.3


26.6


20.8

13.3

22.0

24.4

27.1


Continued --


- 45 -


RATED 8-18-77




Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS Herbicide Combinations II (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
14 Surflan 75W 1 PRE
Mowdown 80W 1.5 PRE


RATED 6-2-77
SOY CRAB PUS RED TM SM


RATED 6-24-77 RATED 8-18-77 YIELD @ 152
SOY CRAB PUS TM RED SM BEG SOY CRAB SM BEG RED BU/A 10-14-


3.5 10.0 9.2 9.3 9.0 8.8 3.8 9.5 9.6 9.0 10.0 9.2 9.8 3.5 9.0 5.3 8.0 8.3 22.8


15 Treflan
Amiben
Sencor

16 Cobex1
Sencor

17 Cobexl
Lasso
Dyanap

18 Treflan
Lorox
2,4-DB
X77


4E
2E
50W


.5 PPI
2 PRE
.5 PRE


2E .5
50W .5


PPI
PRE


.5 PPI
2 AC
4.5 AC


4E
50W
2E


.5
.5
.25
.25%

.5
.38
1.5


19 Treflan 4E
Sencor 50W
Premerge 3E


20 Treflan
Lasso
Sencor

21 Check


LSD @ 5%


PPI
DP
DP
DP

PPI
DP
DP


.5 PPI
2 AC
.5 AC


0.5 9.8 9.5 10.0 9.3 9.5


3.0 9.8 8.0 9.8 9.5 9.8


5.0 8.8 9.0 9.8 9.0 8.8


---------NOT RATED-------




---------NOT RATED-------


0.8 9.8 9.0 9.8 9.5 10.0


-- -- -- 0.8 7.0 0


3.0 4.0 3.5


2.2 1.3 2.0 2.3 3.0 2.7


0.8 10.0 10.0 9.5 10.0 9.5 10.0 1.0 9.3


3.0 9.8 6.8 9.3 9.8 9.5 10.0 3.0 8.5


5.3 8.5 9.0 9.3 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.3


1.8 9.0 9.5 10.0 9.8 9.5 10.0 2.3 8.0


9.3 9.5 9.8 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.3 9.5


0.5 9.8 8.8 9.5 10.0 9.8 10.0 0.8 9.3


2.0 6.8 0


4.3 5.8 3.5 8.3 4.3 6.8


2.1 1.4 2.1 2.4 2.8 3.2 2.1 2.0 1.9


8.0 9.8 9.5



7.0 9.8 9.0


8.5 9.5 8.5


9.0 9.5 9.5




9.0 9.8 10.0


7.5 10.0 10.0


3.0 5.0 3.0

3.0 3.3 2.5


shallow incorporation 1 to 2"

Summary; Prowl + Sencor.PPL exhibited good to excellent control of the species-present-as did Treflan PPI plus Aniben + Sencor
Pre, Treflan PPI plus Lorox + 2,4-DB DP, Treflan PPI plus Sencor + Premerge DP, and Treflan PPI plus Lasso + Sencor AC. It
should be noted that sicklepod was not present in this test when comparing the results of this trial with the previous two
experiments.


- 46 -


35.3


25.7


13.8


33.6




36.5


34.6


16.5





Page 1 of 2


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP


1 Dual
Dyanap


a.i.
8- 1.5
39 4.5


2 Dual 8E
Dyanap 3E

3 Dual 8E
SSencor 501


AC
AC


2 AC
4.5 AC

1.5 PRE
W .38 PRE


4 Dual 8% 1.5 PRE
Sencor 50W .5 PRE


5 Tolban
Dual
Dyanap

6 Treflan
Lasso
Dyanap

7 Treflan
Lasso
Premerge


.75
1.5
4.5


4E
4E
3E

4E
4E
3E


8 Lasso 4E
Dyanap 3E

9 Lasso 4R
Premerge 3E

10 Sencor 50W

11 Treflan 4E
Sencor 50W

Continued --


PPI
AC
AC


.5 PPI
2 AC
4.5 AC

.5 PPI
2 AC
1.5 AC

2 AC
4.5 AC

2 AC
1.5 AC


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
Herbicide Combinations III


RATED 6-2-77
SOY CRAB PUS TM SM

1.5 9.0 10.0 8.5 9.5


1.3 9.3


1.5 9.3


0.3 9.3


0.3 9.3


0.8 8.8



1.3 8.5



1.3 9.3


9.8 9.0 9.5


8.3 6.0 8.5


9.5 6.0 9.8


9.5 9.5 9.8


9.5 9.5 10.0



9.3 8.5 5.0



9.8 8.8 9.5


1.3 8.5 9.8 5.8 5.8


.5 PRE 1.5 8.5 8.8 6.5 8.0


PPI
PPI


1.8 9.0


9.3 9.0 9.0


RATED 6-24-77
SOY CRAB PUS TM SM BEG


1.8 8.8


0.5 9.3


1.3 8.8


0.3 9.3


0 9.5


0 9.3



1.5 8.5



0.3 9.0


1.3 8.5


1.5 8.5

1.8 9.0


10.0 8.8 10.0 10.0


RATED 8-18-77
SOY SM BEG
BEG
1.5 6.8 9.0


9.5 9.0 9.8 10.0 1.8 7.5 8.3


8.3 6.8 9.0 8.5 3.0 3.5 8.0


9.3 6.3 9.5 10.0 2.0 3.0 9.5


9.5 7.3 9.8 10.0


0.5 9.3 9.0


9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 0.5 8.3 8.3



9.5 9.3 8.3 6.3 3.5 5.8 1.0



9.8 8.8 9.8 9.8 1.5 6.3 8.5


9.5 6.3 7.0 6.8 4.8 3.0 0.5


8.8 6.5 10.0 10.0

9.0 9.5 9.8 9.5


2.8 4.5 8.0

2.0 7.0 8.8


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 10-14-77

36.8


29.0


27.8


27.1


37.8


34.9



24.4



33.9


17.2


26.9

31.5


- 47 -




J. L. IJ L


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS Herbicide Combinations III (continued)


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
12 Treflan 4E .5 PPI
Sencor 50W .5 PRE


13 Treflan 4E
Sencor 50W

14 Treflan 4E
Sencor 50W


15 Treflan
Norex
X77


.75 PPI
.75 PPI

.75 PPI
.75 PRE


4E .5
50W 1.5
--- .5%


16 Embark 2S
Basagran 4E

17 Basalin 4E
Basagran 4E


18 Basalin
Sencor
Basagran


4E
50W
4E


19 Surflan 75W
Sencor 50W


PPI
EP
EP


1 LP
.75 LP

.75 PPI
.75 LP

.75 PPI
.5 PRE
.75 LP

1 PRE
.5 PRE


20 Surflan 75W 1 AC
Dyanap 3E 4.5 AC


21 Check


RATED 6-2-77 RATED 6-24-77 RATED 8-18-77 YIELD @ 15%
SOY CRAB PUS TM SM SOY CRAB PUS TM SM BEG SOY SM BEG BU/A 10-14-77


2.5 9.5 9.5 9.3 9.0


0.3 9.5 10.0 9.8 9.5


1.0 9.5 9.8 10.0 9.8


-------NOT RATED-----



-------NOT RATED------


-------NOT RATED------


-------NOT RATED------


0.3 9.0 9.8 9.5 8.8


1.3 8.0 9.8 9.3 9.3


-- --- -- 0.3 6.0 5.3 6.3 0.8


LSD @ 5%


N.S.1.1 0.9 2.4 1.9


1.8 9.3 9.0 9.8 9.0 9.5


0.3 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.8 10.0


0.5 10.0 9.8 9.8 10.0 10.0


0.3 9.5 10.0 9.8 9.5 9.0



2.0 6.0 6.5 8.8 9.5 4.8


1.3 9.3 8.8 10.0 9.3 6.5


1.0 9.3 9.3 9.8 10.0 10.0


0.3 8.8 9.8 8.5 9.8 10.0


0.8 8.3 10.0 9.5 9.5 9.8


1.3 6.3 1.0 6.3 3.8 2.0

N.S. 1.3 1.1 2.3 1.6 1.6


1.8 7.0 7.5


0.3 9.3 9.3


1.0 8.8 9.0


1.0 9.0 7.3



4.5 3.0 0.8


2.8 8.8 2.3


1.0 8.5 9.3


0.3 7.8 9.0


1.8 7.8 7.3


3.5 7.0 0

1.5 3.2 1.8


32.7


38.7


38.2


38.2



21.8


28.6


40.2


38.7


29.0


16.5

7.8


Sunmary: Several treatments. in this test provided good broad spectrum weed control. These included Tolban PPI plus Dual +
Dyanap AC, Treflan PPI plus Lasso + Dyanap AC, Treflan + Sencor either PPI + PPI or PPI + Pre, Treflan PPI + Norex EP,
Basalin PPI plus Sencor Pre plus Basagran LP, Surflan + Sencor Pre and Surflan + Dyanap AC. Again, it should be noted
that sicklepod was not present.


- 48 -





Page 1 of 2


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
_______a.i.
1 HOE23408 3E 1 PRE


2 HOE23408

3 HOE29152

4 Sencor

5 HOE23408
Sencor

6 HOE29152
Sencor

7 HOE29152
Sencor

8 Butam

9 Butam

10 Lasso

11 Butam
Lorox

12 Butam
Lorox

13 Lasso
Lorox


3E

3E

50W

3E
50W

3E
50W

3E
50W

4E

4E

4E

4E
50W

4E
50W

4E
50W


.25 PRE

.5 PRE

.5 PRE

1 PRE
.5 PRE

.25 PRE
.5 PRE

.5 PRE
.5 PRE

2 PRE

3 PRE

2 PRE

1.5 PRE
1 PRE

2.25 PRE
1 PRE

1.5 PRE
1 PRE


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
Butam and HOE Test Preemergence


RATED 6-3-77


RATED 6-3-77
SOY CRAB SICK PUS RED

0.3 10.0 4.5 3.0 2.8

0.5 10.0 3.0 0.8 0.8

0.3 10.0 6.3 0.8 1.8

0.3 9.5 6.8 8.8 9.8

0 9.8 3.0 5.8 6.3


0.5 10.0 6.5


0.3 10.0 6.0


0.8

0.8

0

0.5


9.8

10.0

10.0

10.0


3.5

2.8

3.3

5.3


0.3 10.0 4.5


0.5 10.0 6.3


RATED 6-24-77
SOY PUS SICK PIG RED CRAB


0.5 1.5

1.0 2.3

0.3 2.0

0.3 8.5

0 5.3


3.5 0.5 1.3 10.0


2.0

4.8

5.0

0.8


1.0

0

9.3

6.5


1.0

0

8.3

6.0


10.0

10.0

10.0

10.0


RATED 8-19-77 YIELD @ 15%


RATED 8-19-77
SOY SICK TM RED

2.5 7.0 6.8 3.5

2.3 6.8 7.0 0.3

1.3 7.0 9.0 2.0

1.0 7.0 8.3 9.3

2.3 5.0 6.8 7.5


9.0 9.3 0 8.0 4.8 9.5 8.8 10.0 1.5 7.8 7.5 8.5


8.5 9.3 1.0 8.8 5.3 9.3 9.0 10.0 1.0 5.8 7.0 6.0


6.0

6.0

9.5

7.5


7.5

6.8

9.5

9.0


0.8

0.5

0

0.8


4.3

7.0

8.8

5.0


1.5

1.3

1.8

5.3


8.5

8.5

9.3

8.8


7.8

6.8

9.0

8.8


10.0

10.0

10.0

10.0


1.3

3.3

2.3

1.3


6.8

3.3

7.0

7.8


6.3

4.0

8.3

8.3


8.8 9.5 0.3 8.3 2.8 9.3 9.0 10.0 2.5 6.3 5.0 9.0


10.0 10.0


1.0 9.3 5.5 10.0 10.0 9.8


1.8 7.5 6.8 9.3


- 49 -


Continued ---


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 10-13-77

31.2

29.5

32.2

35.3

30.7


35.6


38.5


34.1

28.3

36.3

34.9


32.4


36.8




Page 2 of 2


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS Butam and HOE Test Preemergence (continued)


NO. CHEMICAL

14 Lorox

15 Butam
Sencor

16 Butam
Sencor

17 Lasso
Sencor

18 Check

19 Check


Cultivated1
Check


1Rating on 6-3-7


iKATE UUW
FORM LBS/A APP


a.i.
50W 1

4E 2
50W .5

4E 3
50W .5

4E 2
50W .5


PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE

PRE
PRE


RATED 6-3-77
SOY CRAB SICK PUS RED

0 1.0 4.3 6.3 8.0


0.5 10.0 7.8


0.5 10.0 6.8


0.3 10.0 6.5


-- -- --- 0 0.5 3

-- -- --- 0.3 1.0 5

-- -- --- 0.8 1.8 3

LSD @ 5% N.S. 1.2 2

7 was prior to cultivation.


.5

.5

.0

.9


10.0 10.0


9.5 9.8


10.0 10.0


1.5

0

0

2.3


2.0

1.5

1.0

2.4


RAE 6-47 AED81-7 YIL 5


RATED 6-24-77 RATED 8-19-77
SOY PUS SICK PIG RED CRAB SOY SICK TM RED

0.3 6.3 3.3 9.0 8.0 0 1.8 4.8 7.0 7.8

0.5 9.0 7.5 10.0 9.8 10.0 0.5 8.3 8.0 9.5


0.3 8.8 5.5


9.8 9.5 10.0


0 9.5 5.5 10.0 10.0 10.0


0.5 0

0 0

0.3 8.8

N.S.2.5


1.0

3.3

9.0

3.4


0

0

8.8

1.7


0

0

9.3

2.0


0

0

10.0

2.3


0.8 7.3 9.0 8.5


1.3 7.3 7.3 9.5


1.8

1.8

1.0

1.1


6.8

8.0

8.3

N.S.


6.8

8.3

9.0

2.9


3.8

1.5

8.3

3.0


Summary: Butam + Sencor, Lasso + Sencor, and cultivation provided the best weed control in this test. The Lasso + Sencor
and Butam + Sencor combinations were somewhat ineffective against sicklepod. The combinations involving Lorox were weak
on both tall morningglory and sicklepod.


- 50 -


mr\m n rm rrrrrr


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 10-13-77

31.2

40.4


39.5


38.2


31.5

30.7

40.1

6.2










TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 HOE29152

2 HOE29.152

3 HOE29152'

4 Adj. A

5 Adj. B

6 Adj. C

7 HOE29152
Adj. A

8 HOE29152
Adj. A

9 HOE29152
Adj. A

10 HOE29152
Adj. B

11 HOE29152
Adj. B

12 HOE29152
Adj. B

13 HOE29152
Adj. C

14 HOE29152
Adj. C

15 HOE29152
Adj. C

16 HOE23408
RH6201

17 HOE29152
RH 6201

18 HOE23408

19 RH6201

20 Check


RATE HOW
FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
3E .125 POST


WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
HOE Test Postemergence


SOY

0.5

0

0

0.5

0.5

0.3

0.8


.25 POST

.5 POST

.5% POST

.5% POST

.5% POST

.125 POST
.5% POST

.25 POST
.5% POST

.5 POST
.5% POST

.125 POST
.5% POST

.25 POST'
.5% POST

.5 POST
.5% POST

.125 POST
.5% POST

.25 POST
.5% POST

.5 POST
.5% POST

1 POST
.5 POST

.5 POST
.5 POST

1 POST

.5 POST


RATED 6-24-77
PUS SICK PIG RED CRAB


5.3 3.5

6.3 2.0

6.3 1.8

1.3 1.5

1.5 1.0

5.5 1.3

6.3 3.8


0 8,5 0.5


0.5 5.5 3.3


0.3 4.8 3.8


0.8 3.8 3.0


0.8 8.8 2.5


0.5 5.5 1.8


0 6.3 2.5


0.8 5.3 2.0


2.0 9.0 3.8


0.3 8.8 3.0


1.8

0

0.3

0.4


LSD @ 5%


7.0

9.0

0

3.6


0.8

2.0

0

N.S.


3.5 3.8 6.3


3.5

4.3

0

1.3

2.5

2.5


3.8

2.5

0

0

1.8

3.8


7.8

7.0

3.0

1.8

5.5

4.7


5,5 5,5 8,3


3.8 4.0 7.8


3.3 4.0 8.5


2.3 0 4.3


8.3 7.0 9.3


2.0 3.8 8.8


4.3 7.3 9.3


3.8 2.8 9.0


8.3 5.8 7.8


7.5 1.5 8.3


7.3

7.0

0

4.1


8.3

8.3

2.5

3.5


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A

23.0

24.7

26.6

28.8

25.9

22.0

24.9


27.3


26.6


23.0


24.2


21.6


25.4


27.3


23.0


27.8


25.4


21.8

24.0

23.2

N.S.


No summary.


- 51 -







WEED CONTROL IN SOYBEANS
Herbicide Programs For No-Till Soybeans


TRT RATE HOW
NO. CHEMICAL1 FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
1 Paraquat 2E .5 PRE


Surflan
Sencor


2 Paraquat
Lasso
Sencor


1 PRE
.5 PRE

.5 PRE
2 PRE
.5 PRE


PREEMERGENCE TREATMENTS
RATED 7-27-77


SOY CRAB BS TM


VPEA


.3 6.7 8.1 8.7 7.2


3.1 7.8 8.3 8.3 7.8


(MAIN PLOTS)
RATED 10-5-77
SOY TM BS

4.1 8.3 6.7


3.4 8.2 7.9


3 Paraquat 2E .5
Sencor 50W .5


PRE
PRE


3.3 7.1 8.4 7.4 8.2


4.0 7.6 7.0


4 Check
(Paraquat) 2E


.5 PRE


3.4 6.1 6.8 7.7 7.0 4.6 7.2 6.9


N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.


N.S. N.S. N.S.


1 Lorox
2,4-DB

2 Sencor
2,4-DB

3 Sencor
Paraquat


50W .5 DP
2E .25 DP

50W .5 DP
2E .25 DP


50W .5
2E .5


POSTEMERGENCE TREATMENTS (SPLIT PLOTS)
3.0 6.8 7.4 8.9 7.7 3.4 8.1 7.8


3.5 6.8 8.3 9.5 8.0


3.9 8.2 7.5


3.9 8.6 9.0 9.5 8.4 4.8 8.6 6.6


2.5 5.4 6.9


4.2 6.1


0.9 1.5 1.1 1.4 1.7


4.0 6.4 6.6

N.S. 0.8 N.S.


1X77 at .5% was added to each treatment.


Summary: Yields were not determined due to the poor soybean stand that resulted from
dry weather. For the same reason no significant increases in weed control over the
check were observed from the preemergence herbicide applications. However, the Directed
Postemergence treatments did exhibit fair to good weed control indicating the value of
Post Directed treatments. Even if a preemergence application fails a Directed Post
treatment can be used to salvage the crop.


- 52 -


4 Check


LSD @ 5%


L








EFFECT OF SICKLE POD COMPETITION ON SOYBEAN YIELD


sicklepodl for 0 weeks


sicklepod foi
sicklepod foi
sicklepod foi
sicklepod foi
sicklepod foi
sicklepod foi
sicklepod for
sicklepod for
sicklepod for
sicklepod for
sicklepod for
sicklepod for


4 weeks
6 weeks
10 weeks
12 weeks
14 weeks
all season


and then
and then
and then
and then
and then
and then


leave
leave
leave
leave
leave
leave


Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Leave
Leave
Leave
Leave
Leave
Leave


10 weeks and then
12 weeks and then
14 weeks and then
all season


remove
remove
remove


YIELD2 @ 15% BU/A
22.6a,b,c,d,e
42.9f,g
39.9f,g
45.9g
42.9f,g
45.9g
48.3g
48.9g
41.1f,g
34.6f
18.5a,b,c
20.3a,b,c,d
14.3a


lSicklepod population = 5 plants/ft2/
2Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.

Summary: The results of the sicklepod competition study indicate that keeping soybeans
free of.sicklepod competition for the first 4-weeks after planting allows the crop to
effectively compete with this weed. On the other hand, in order to prevent a significant
yield reduction the sicklepod must be removed from the crop no later than 6-weeks after
planting.


- 53 -


4 weeks and then remove
6 weeks and then remove







WEED CONTROL IN WHEAT I
Preemergence and Postemergence


RATE HOW
CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
a.i.
Mowdown 80W 1.5 PRE


1.5

0.5

1.5


NO.



2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19


20

21

22


Karmex

Lorox

Premerge

Check

Igran

Lasso

Banvel

2,4-D

Paraquat

Check

Brominal

RH2915

RH6201

Check,

Check

Sencor

Sencor

Sencor
HOE23408

HOE23408

HOE23408

Check


80W

50W

3E



80W

15G

4E

4E

2E



2E

2E

4E


LSD @ 5%


RATED 4-4-77
WH CEP


PRE

PRE

POST1



POST2

PRE

POST3
POST3







POST2
PRE




POST3



POST3

POST3



POST3
POST3

POST3
POST3
POST3

POST3


0.5

0.8

0.5

2.5

0.3

2.0

0.3

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

0.8

4.0

5.8

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.0

2.0


0.0

0.0

0.0

1.5


10.0

9.5

9.0

9.5

8.3

10.0

8.3

9.8

10.0

8.5

8.3

9.3

9.8

8.8

7.5

7.5

10.0

10.0

10.0


8.5

8.3

8.8

1.3


1Wheat 5-inches
Wheat 4-inches
3Wheat fully tillered

Summary: Weed pressure was less than desired in this experiment, Most of the herbicides
controlled the primrose and did not cause injury to the wheat.


- 54 -


1.5

0.25

0.125

0.25

0.25



0.5

0.1

0.5


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A

38.7

29.8

39.7

28.8

39.9

32.4

35.0

36.6

38.4

41.2

38.6

36.6

28.8

2.6

33.9

34.2

37.9

33.2

30.6


39.2

40.7

42.5

7.4


50W

50W

50W
3E

3E

3E


0.25

0.38

0.38
0.5

0.38

0.5










TRT -- --


TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 2,4-D

2 Sencor

3 Sencor

4 Sencor
HOE23408

5 Sencor
HOE23408

6 HOE23408

7 Check


FORM

4E

50W

50W

50W
3E

50W
3E

3E


LSD @ 5%


RATE
LBS/A
a.i.
.25

.25

.38

.38
.38

.38
.5

.5


WEED

HOW
APP1

POST

POST

POST

POST
POST

POST
POST

POST


2.3 9.3 10.0 10.0


0.3

0

1.2


2.0

0

2.1


CONTROL IN WHEAT II
Postemergence

WH RYG CEP

0.0 5.3 9.3

1.0 7.7 9.7

1.7 8.7 9.7

2.7 9.0 9.7


2.0

0

2.0


1Post =wheat fully tillered.

Summary: The Sencor + HOE23408 treatment provided good control of the weed species
present. The Sencor provided control of the broadleaf weeds while the HOE23408
controlled the ryegrass.


- 55 -


PEP

9.3

10.0

10.0

10.0


YIELD @ 15%
BU/A 5-24-77
40.5

35.9

38.0

39.4


36.6


37.3

25.6

N.S.









TRT
NO. CHEMICAL

1 Basagran

2 Basagran
Basagran

3 RH6201

4 Sutan+
Aatrex
Top Oil

5 RH6201

6 Aatrex
Basagran

7 Aatrex
Basagran
Top Oil

8 Destun

9 Eradicane

10 Vernam

11 Sutan+

12 Sutan+
Aatrex

13 Check


FORM

4E

4E
4E

2E

6.7E
4L


2E

4L
4E

4L
4E


4S

7E

7E

6.7E

6.7E
4L


RATE
LBS/A
a.i.
.75

.75
.75

2

3
2
Igpa

4

1.5
1.5

1.5
1.5
Igpa

3

4

2

3

3
1


NUTSEDGE CONTROL SCREEN
(No Crop)
HOW
APP RATED 6-24-77
YNUT
EP 5.0

EP 5.0
LP

PPI 2.0

PPI 9.7
EP
EP

PPI 5.7

EP 6.0
EP

EP 5.7
EP
EP

PRE 2.7

PPI 5.7

PPI 9.3

PPI 7.3

PPI 10.0
PPI

--- 0.0


Summary: The treatments of Sutan+ PPI + Aatrex either PPI or EP provided excellent
nutsedge control as did Vernam. However, none of the other treatments provided adequate
control of this weed.


- 56 -








TRT RATE HOW1
NO. CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP
_____ a.i.
1 Spike 80W 2 PRE


2 Spike 80W 4






3 Spike 80W 6


FENCEROW WEED AND BRUSH CONTROL
RATED4 8-25-77
REP BAHIA VASE SG PRIVET HS PER BB YOPON


REMARKS3


1 0 0 0 0 0 -


PRE 1
2
3
4
5
Av.

PRE 1
2
3
4
5
Av.


4 Spike 80W 8 PRE 1
2
3
4
5
Av.


5. Velpar


80W 6


POST 1
2
3
4
5
Av.


6 Velpar 80W 8 POST 1
2
3
4
5
Av.


7 Check


---- 1
2
3
4
5
Av.


0
0
0

0.0

3
2
0
7
3
3.0

6
0
4
0

2.5

8
5
5

3
5.3

7
7
7


7.0

8
7
10
9.5
4
7.8

0
0
0


0.0


0
0
0

0.0

0
0
0

1
0.3

0
0
0
0

0.0


1

4


2.5


0
9


4.0

0
0
0

0
0.0


3
3.0


0
0
0
3
0
0.6

0
0
0
0

0.0


1
3
2


2.0


10

9.5
9.8





10
io


10.0

10



10
10.0


8
9


8
8.3


8
10


8
8.7



0

0
0.0


7
2

2
3.7


2


2


10


9
9.5


8
10
6
9
8.3


0



2
1





1
1.0





1
1.0


0

0

0.0


7




7.0




0
0
0.0


5
1
2
3
2.2

4
5
0

5
3.3

5
6
7
5
5
5.6

7
9
8
8
6
7.6

8
9
9
7
9
8.4

9
9
8
9.5
9.8
9.0

0
0
0
0
0
0.0


1 Pre = late winter 2-17-77
Post = late spring 6-6-77

2 indicates species not present.
SG = signalgrass, HS = honeysuckle, PER = persimmon, BB = blackberry


3 Observations made on only 1 plant


Live Oak = 10


Maple = 10
Wild Cherry = 25

Live Oak = 10




Wild Vaceinium =
Yucca = 2


Blueberry = 10

Slash Pine = 7

Wild Cherry = 10


--(Dogwood = 6
(Wild Cherry = 4
Dogwood = 3


--(Magnolia = 6
(Florida Oak = 7

--(Magnolia = 10
(Yucca = 3


--


- 57 -


No summary,







WEED CONTROL IN PERMANENT BARIAGRASS PASTURES


RATE HOW
CHEMICAL FORM LBS/A APP1
Spie 8W a.i.
Spike 80W 1 PRE


TRT
NO.

1

2

3

4


5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12


80W

80W

80W
M 80W

M 80W

M 80W

M 80W

8OW

8OW
80W

80W

80W


1.5

2

1
5

2

4

6

.75

1.5

3


% GROUND COVER 9-2-77
BAHIA SMUT CARP VASE BROOM

50 14 24 4 9


% GROUND COVER 11-8-77
BAHIA SMUT VASE BROOM BG

46 8 23 24 0


Check


1Pre = Early spring prior to smutgrass emergence.
Post = Late spring after smutgrass is actively growing.
2BG = bare ground.

Summary: Spike at 2 #/A provided some control of the smutgrass with no injury to the bahia, However, Dowpon caused
severe injury to the pasture grass and allowed broomsedge and vaseygrass to invade. Velpar controlled the weed
grasses with little injury to the pasture and was the best treatment.


- 58 -


Spike

Spike

Spike
Dowpon

Dowpon

Dowpon

Dowpon

Velpar

Velpar

Velpar

Check


PRE

PRE

PRE
POST

POST

POST

POST

POST

POST

POST




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs