Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-19T11:21:57.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Accepted manuscript

Response of stevia (Stevia rebaudiana) to reduced risk synthetic and nonsynthetic herbicides applied post-transplant

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2024

Stephen J. Ippolito*
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Katherine M. Jennings
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
David W. Monks
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Sushila Chaudhari
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
David Jordan
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Levi D. Moore
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Southeast Ag Research, Inc, Chula, GA, USA
Colton D. Blankenship
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Stephen J. Ippolito, Graduate Student, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, 2721 Founders Drive, Raleigh, NC 27965. (Email: sjippoli@ncsu.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Greenhouse trials were conducted to determine the response of stevia to reduce risk synthetic and nonsynthetic herbicides applied over-the-top post-transplant. In addition, field trials were conducted with stevia grown in a polyethylene mulch production system to determine crop response and weed control in planting holes to reduced risk synthetic and nonsynthetic herbicides applied post-transplant directed. Treatments included caprylic acid plus capric acid, clove oil plus cinnamon oil, d-limonene, acetic acid (200 grain), citric acid, pelargonic acid, eugenol, ammonium nonanoate, and ammoniated soap of fatty acids. Stevia yield (dry above ground biomass) in the greenhouse was reduced by all herbicide treatments. Citric acid and clove oil + cinnamon oil were the least injurious, reducing yield by 16 to 20%, respectively. In field studies, d-limonene, pelargonic acid, ammonium nonanoate, and ammoniated soap of fatty acids controlled Palmer amaranth > 90% 1 wk after treatment (WAT). In field studies caprylic acid plus capric acid, pelargonic acid, and ammonium nonanoate caused > 30% injury to stevia plant at 2 WAT, and D-limonene, citric acid, acetic acid, and ammoniated soap of fatty acids caused 18 to 25% injury 2 WAT. Clove oil plus cinnamon oil and eugenol caused < 10% injury. Despite being injurious, herbicides applied in the field did not reduce yield compared to the nontreated check. Based upon yield data, these herbicides have potential for use in stevia; however, these products could delay harvest if applied to established stevia. In particular, clove oil plus cinnamon oil has potential for use for early season weed management for organic production systems. The application of clove oil + cinnamon oil over-the-top resulted in <10% injury 28 DAT in the greenhouse and 3% injury 6 WAT POST-directed in the field. In addition, this treatment provided 95% control of Palmer amaranth 4 WAT.

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2024