Advertisement

New Forests

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 83–92 | Cite as

Preventing establishment of exotic shrubs (Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link. and Cytisus striatus (Hill)) with soil active herbicides (hexazinone, sulfometuron, and metsulfuron)

  • J. Scott Ketchum
  • Robin Rose
Article

Abstract

A greenhouse study was conducted evaluating the potential for commonlyused forestry herbicides to control germination success of Scotch broom(Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link.) and Portuguese broom(Cytisus striatus (Hill). Three herbicides, hexazinone,sulfometuron and metsulfuron, were evaluated at six rates encompassing normalrates used for herbaceous weed control. The data suggest that these herbicidesapplied prior to establishment can strongly affect seedling establishment ofthese species even though they are ineffective on mature individuals.Hexazinonestrongly affected both the final weight of surviving seedlings and theprobability of seedlings from broom species to survive to week nine.Sulfometuron had no effect on survival probability of either species butreducedfinal dry weight and delayed true leaf development at increased rates.Metsulfuron reduced the survivorship potential of Scotch broom but notPortugesebroom. Final dry weight decreased and development of true leaves was delayedforboth species treated with metsulfuron. These results suggest that preemergencetreatments with hexazinone may provide an effective method of preventing broomestablishment. Sulfometuron and metsulfuron were not as effective at preventingsuccessful establishment as hexazinone.

Noxious weeds Pacific Northwest Release treatments Site preparation Weed control 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahrens W.H. (ed.) 1994. Herbicide Handbook of the Weed Science Society of America. 7th edn. Weed Science Society of America, Champaign, IL, 352 p.Google Scholar
  2. Boger P. and Sandmann G. 1989. Target Sites of Herbicide Action. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 295 p.Google Scholar
  3. Bossar and Rejmanek 1994. Herbivory, growth, seed production, and resprouting of an exotic invasir shrub Cytisus scoparius. Bio. Cons. 67: 193–200.Google Scholar
  4. Cole E.C., Newton M. and White D.E. 1988. Efficacy of imazapyr and metsulfuron methyl for site preparation and conifer release in the Oregon Coast Range. Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, Research Note 81. 7 p.Google Scholar
  5. Cole E.C., Newton M. and Gourley M. 1989. Herbaceous weed control in young conifer plantations. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 1989: 66–67.Google Scholar
  6. Conard S.G. and Emmingham W.H. 1984. Herbicides for forest brush control in southwestern Oregon. For. Res. Lab., Oregon State University, Corvallis, Special Publication 6. 8 p.Google Scholar
  7. Dennis L.J. 1980. Gilkey's weeds of the Pacific Northwest. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, 382 p.Google Scholar
  8. Figeuroa P.F. 1989. Scotch broom herbicide screening trial results testing clopyralid, imazapyr and metsulfuron. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 1989: 139–142.Google Scholar
  9. Figeuroa P.F., Heald R.C. and Radosevich S.R. 1990. Sensitivity of actively growing Douglas-fir to selected herbicide formulations. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 43: 45–53.Google Scholar
  10. Franklin J.F. and Dyrness C.T. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8.Google Scholar
  11. Gill J.D. and Pogge F.L. 1974. Cytisus scoparius, Scotch broom. In: Schopmeyer C.S. (ed.), Seeds of Woody Plants in the United States. USDA Agricultural Handbook Vol. 450., pp. 370–371.Google Scholar
  12. Hoshovsky M. 1991. Elemental Stewardship Abstract for Cytisus scoparius. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 22 p.Google Scholar
  13. Mobley L. 1954. Scotch broom, a menace to forest, range and agricultural land. Proc. Ann. Calif. Weed Conf. 6: 39–42.Google Scholar
  14. Newton M. and Cole E.C. 1989. Where does sulfometuron fit in Pacific Northwest silviculture? Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 42: 121–128.Google Scholar
  15. Parker B., Mille G. and Burrill L.C. 1994. Weeds—Scotch broom, Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link. Pacific Northwest Extension, Corvallis, OR, Publication No. 103, 2 p.Google Scholar
  16. Peterson D.J. and Prasad R. 1998. The bilology of Canadian weeds. 109. Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link. Can. J. Plant Sci. 78: 497–504.Google Scholar
  17. Prasad R. and Petersen D.J. 1997. Mechanisms of invasiveness of the exotic weed, Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link) in British Columbia Proc. Expert Committee on Weeds Ann. Meeting, 9–12 December 1996, Victoria BC. (Abstr.)., pp. 197–198.Google Scholar
  18. Ramsey F.L. and Schafer D.W. 1997. The Statistical Sleuth: A Course in Methods of Data Analysis. Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA, 599–627 p.Google Scholar
  19. Randall W.R., Keniston R.F., Bever D.N. and Jensen E.C. 1994. Manual of Oregon Trees and Shrubs. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, 305 p.Google Scholar
  20. Raven P.H., Ever R.F. and Curtis H. 1981. Biology of Plants. 3rd edn. Worth Publishers, Inc., New York, 686 p.Google Scholar
  21. Williams P.A. 1981. Aspects of the ecology of broom (Cytisus scoparius). New Zealand J. Bot. 19: 31–43.Google Scholar
  22. William R.D., Burrill L.C., Ball D., Miller T., Parker R., Boerboom C.M. et al. 1994. Pacific Northwest Weed Control Handbook. Joint Extension Services Publication of Oregon State University, Washington State University and the University of Idaho, 343 p.Google Scholar
  23. Wilson H.D. 1994. Regeneration of native forest on Hinewai reserve, Banks Peninsula. New Zealand J. Bot. 32: 373–383.Google Scholar
  24. Zielke K., Boateng J., Caldicott N. and Williams H. 1992. Broom and Gorse: A Forestry Perspective Problem Analysis. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Queen's Printer, Victoria, BC, 20 p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forest ScienceOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations