Perennial crop nurseries treated with methyl bromide and alternative fumigants: Effects on weed seed viability, weed densities, and time required for hand weeding

Weed Technology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 267-274

  Shrestha, Anil ^a   Browne, Greg T ^b   Lampinen, Bruce D ^b   Schneider, Sally M ^c   Simon, Leo ^d   Trout, Thomas J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Herbicide; Montreal protocol; Mulch films; Seed viability; Stratospheric ozone

Indexed keywords

EMERGENCE; FUMIGANT; INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT; MECHANICAL CONTROL; METHYL BROMIDE; MULCH; OZONE; POPULATION DENSITY; SEED; STRATOSPHERE; VIABILITY; WEED CONTROL;

CALIFORNIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

CONVOLVULUS; IPOMOEA PURPUREA; PORTULACA OLERACEA; SORGHUM HALEPENSE;

EID: 46049088876     PISSN: 0890037X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1614/WT-07-122.1     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Agamalian, H. S., C. L. Elmore, and B. B. Fischer. 1994. Weeds. Pages 99-113 in M. L. Flint, ed. Integrated Pest Management for Strawberries. Oakland, CA: University of California IPM Publication No. 3351.
2. [CDFA] California Department of Food and Agriculture. 2001. Nursery Inspection Procedures Manual. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/pe/NIPM.htm. Accessed: August 10, 2007.
3. Chakrabarti, B. and C. H. Bell. 1993. The methyl bromide issue. Chem. Ind. 24:992-995.
4. Chase, C. A., W. M. Stall, E. H. Simonne, R. C. Hochmuth, M. D. Dukes, and A. W. Weiss. 2006. Nutsedge control with drip-applied 1,3-dichloropropene plus chloropicrin in a sandy soil. HortTechnology 16:641-648.
5. Chellemi, D. O., S. M. Olson, D. J. Mitchell, I. Seeker, and R. M. McSorley. 1997. Adaptation of soil solarization to the integrated management of soilborne pests of tomato under humid conditions. Phytopathology 87:250-258.
6. Csinos, A. S., D. R. Summer, W. C. Johnson, A. W. Johnson, R. M. McPherson, and C. C. Dowler. 2000. Methyl bromide alternatives in tobacco, tomato and pepper transplant production. Crop Prot. 19:39-49.
7. Egley, G. H. 1986. Stimulation of weed seed germination in soil. Rev. Weed Sci. 2:67-89.
8. Fennimore, S. A. and M. J. Haar. 2003. Weed control in strawberry provided by shank- and drip-applied methyl bromide alternative fumigants. Hortscience 38:55-61.
9. Gilreath, J. P., J. W. Noling, and B. M. Santos. 2004. Methyl bromide alternatives for bell pepper (Capsicum annuum) and cucumber (Cucumis sativus) rotations. Crop Prot. 23:347-351.
10. Gilreath, J. P. and B. M. Santos. 2004. Efficacy of methyl bromide alternatives on purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control in tomato and pepper. Weed Technol. 18:341-345.
11. Gilreath, J. P., B. M. Santos, J. D. Busacca, J. E. Eger, Jr., J. M. Mirusso, and P. R. Gilreath. 2005. Validating broadcast application of Telone C-35 complemented with chloropicrin and herbicides in commercial tomato farms. Crop Prot. 25:79-82.
12. Goodhue, R. E., S. A. Fennimore, and H. A. Ajwa. 2005. The economic importance of methyl bromide: does the California strawberry industry qualify for a critical use exemption from the methyl bromide ban? Rev. Agric. Econ. 27:198-211.
13. Grabe, D. F. 1970. Tetrazolium Testing Handbook. Contribution No. 29 to the Handbook on Seed Testing. Stillwater, OK: Association of Official Seed Analysts. 62 p.
14. Guerrero, M. M., M. A. Martínez, M. C. Martínez, N. Barceló, A. Lacasa, C. Ros, P. Guirao, A. Bello, and J. A. López. 2005. Biofumigation plus solarization efficacy for soil disinfestation in sweet pepper greenhouses in the southeast of Spain. Acta Hortic. 698:293-298.
15. Haar, M. J., S. A. Fennimore, H. A. Ajwa, and C. Q. Winterbottom. 2003. Chloropicrin effect on weed seed viability. Crop Prot. 22:109-115.
16. Hanson, B. and A. Shrestha. 2006. Weed control with methyl bromide alternatives. CAB Rev. 1(063), http://www.cababstractsplus.org/cabreviews/ reviews.asp. Accessed: August 10, 2007.
17. Hutchinson, C. M., M. E. McGiffen, Jr., J. J. Sims, and J. O. Becker. 2003. Fumigant combinations for Cyperus esculentum L. control. Pest Manag. Sci. 60:369-374.
18. Klose, S., H. A. Ajwa, S. A. Fennimore, F. N. Martin, G. T. Browne, and K. V. Subbarao. 2007. Dose response of weed seeds and soil-borne pathogens to 1,3-D and chloropicrin. Crop Prot. 26:535-542.
19. Locascio, S. J., J. P. Gilreath, D. W. Dickson, T. A. Kucharek, J. P. Jones, and J. W. Noling. 1997. Fumigant alternatives to methyl bromide for polyethylene mulched tomato. Hortscience 32:1208-1211.
20. Majewski, M. S., M. M. McChesney, J. E. Woodrow, J. H. Prueger, and J. N. Seiber. 1995. Aerodynamic measurements of methyl bromide volatilization from tarped and nontarped fields. J. Environ. Qual. 24:742-752.
21. Makowski, R. and M. D. Morrison. 1989. The biology of Canadian weeds. 91. Malva pusilla Sm. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:861-879.
22. Noling, J. W., E. N. Rosskopf, and D. O. Chellemi. 2000. Impacts of alternative fumigants on soil pest control and tomato yield. Pages 30-1-30-7 in Proceedings of the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. Orlando, FL. Fresno, CA: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Outreach.
23. Porqueddu, C., A. Loi, and P. S. Cocks. 1996. Hardseededness and pattern of hard seed breakdown of Sardinian populations of Medicago polymorpha under field conditions. J. Agric. Sci. 126:161-168.
24. Rolston, M. P. 1978. Water-impermeable seed dormancy. Bot. Rev. 44:365-396.
25. Rosskopf, E. N., R. Charudattan, D. O. Chellemi, and S. Chandramohan. 2000. Alternatives to methyl bromide for weed control. Acta Hortic. 532:103-108.
26. Santos, B. M., J. P. Gilreath, T. N. Mods, J. W. Noling, J. P. Jones, and J. A. Norton. 2006. Comparing methyl bromide alternatives for soilborne disease, nematode and weed management in fresh market tomato. Crop Prot. 25:690-695.
27. SAS. 1998. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Release 7.00. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. 1028 p.
28. Schneider, S. M., E. N. Rosskopf, J. G. Leesch, D. O. Chellemi, C. T. Bull, and M. Mazzola. 2003. United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service research on alternatives to methyl bromide: pre-plant and post-harvest. Pest Manag. Sci. 59:814-826.
29. Stapleton, J. J., C. L. Elmore, and J. E. DeVay. 2000. Solarization and biofumigation help disinfest soil. Calif. Agric. 54:42-45.
30. Unruh, J. B., B. J. Brecke, J. A. Dusky, and J. S. Godbehere. 2002. Fumigant alternatives to methyl bromide prior to turfgrass establishment. Weed Technol. 16:379-387.
31. [UNEP] United Nations Environment Programme. 2000. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. http://www.unep.org/ozone/pdf/ Montreal-Protocol2000.pdf. Accessed: August 10, 2007.
32. [USDA] United States Department of Agriculture. 2000. Economic implications of the methyl bromide phaseout. Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 756. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture. 12 p.
33. [USEPA] United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Methyl Bromide: Questions and Answers. http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/qa.html. Accessed: August 10, 2007.
34. Wang, D. and S. R. Yates. 1998. Methyl bromide emission from fields partially covered with a high density polyethylene and virtually impermeable film. Environ. Sci. Technol. 32:2515-2518.
35. 3Br) from agricultural soil fumigations. Science 267: 5206.
36. Yates, S. R., J. Gan, and S. K. Papiernik. 2003. Environmental fate of methyl bromide as a soil fumigant. Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 117:45-122.