Agricultural Research center 1976 progress report

(1)

Research

Center

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTER 1976 PROGRESS REPORT

(2)

AGENDA FOR MEETING ARC AND AG STAFF December 14-15 and 16-17 Ramada Inn I-25 and Highway 119

Longmont, Colorado

December 14 & 16

10:00 a.m. - J. F. Gonyou, Chairman Welcome - L. H. Henderson

10:05 a.m. - LaMar Henry - The Purity Committee Report and 1977 Contracting

11:05 a.m. - Elmer Loose - The Growers Study 11:25 a.m. - Vicki Trussel - UpBeet

11:45 a.m. - George Walters - Servicing Loaders 12:00 noon - LUNCH

1:00 p.m. - Dwayne Westfall - Fertilizers

2:00 p.m. - Walt Akeson - Beet Storage and Handling 2:30 p.m. - Art Freytag - Seed Emergence and PGR 3:00-5:00 - Tour ARC and Beet Seed Plant

6:00 p.m. - Cocktails and Dinner - Black Bear Inn -Lyons, Colorado

December 15 & 17

8:00 a.m. - R. W. Hettinger, Chairman 9:00

9:15 10:15 10:30 11:10

E. F. Sullivan - Herbicides and a.m. - Vince Erickson - New Post Spray a.m. - W. C. McGuffey, Paul Blome a.m. - BREAK

a.m. a.m.

- Joe Brown - Experimental Plots - Plant Breeders - J. Widner, A.

A. Quinn - LUNCH

PGR Rig

Suzuki,

- Plant Breeders - R. K. Oldemeyer 12:00 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:40 3:40 noon p.m. p.m. p.m. p.m. p.m.

- Jim Hanna - Sugar Market Outlook

- Y. Mok Yun - Nematodes, Maggots, Diseases - Summary and Discussion

(3)

@

P~STIC.lb~ L.1',I;:,

®

.

~c..

~~R1H1;.~AL. Sf;E:D f'R.o<:.ESS/ NG

-!

Afl..C.. 5~et> WI\?-(;; t\OvSE" - I

STREET

No, c..oi..o. H e-1•,D Q\l~R S

/\RC..

Hf:C-\O(?Ui'.>i-RTE~S

CD

-- 1 - I

(4)

Plan*

Section A B C

1 3:00 to 3:30 3:15 to 3:45 3:30 to 4:00

2 3:30 to 4:00 3:45 to 4:15 4:00 to 4:30

*

Plan letter is determined by the time of arrival at Longmont.

People in Section 1 on arrival at the ARC, shall proceed directly to the Commercial Seed House. People in Section 2 and those not wanting to tour the Seed House should proceed to one of the ARC tour sites. Commercial Seed House transportation at location 6 on map for Section 2. Each person has a choice of visiting the commercial seed house with his section and tw0 tours of his choice at the ARC, or visiting four tours of the ARC and not visiting the commercial seed house.

ARC tours are: (1) ARC headquarters and laboratories; (2) greenhouses and plant breeding; (3) pesticides laboratories; (4) experimental seed storage and processing. Each begins at the circled number on the map. Tours at the ARC will begin on arrival at the ARC and will be repeated 4 times on the quarter hour. One hour after the tours begin, everyone shall assemble at the Service Lab, location (5), for tour of lab, examination of poster show and refreshments.

(5)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOIL FERTILITY AND PLANT NUTRITION, Dwayne G. Westfall

SOIL SAMPLE HANDLING . . .

FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS • .

PILE STORAGE/1975-76 CAMPAIGN, W.R. Akeson, D. G. Westfall,

A. H. Freytag and J. N. Widner. . . • • FERTILITY TOPPING STUDIES

RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS.

GROWTH REGULATORS RECOMMENDATIONS

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS FUNGICIDES . . • .

RECOMMENDATIONS

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION CULTIVARS

RECOMMENDATIONS

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

GERMINATION AND EMERGENCE, W.R. Akeson, D. G. Westfall, A.H. and J. N. Widner . • . . . • . • . .

GERMINATION AND EMERGENCE UNDER MOISTURE, TEMPERATURE, AND

IMPEDANCE STRESS • . • . . . • •

RECOMMENDATIONS

OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

SOIL CRUSTING RECOMMENDATIONS

OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS.

.

Freytag,

.

. .

.

Page 1 1 4 6 11 11 11 11 13 13 13 13 13 15 15 15 15 19 19 19 19 23 23 23

.

(6)

SUMMARY

-iii-.

.

_.

.

. .

.

. .

.

. . .

.

. .

.

CROP ESTABLISHMENT AND PROTECTION - SEED EMERGENCE AND GROWTH

REGULATORS . . • . • • . • . • . . . • . • • . . . .

HERBICIDES AND PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS, E. F. Sullivan, L. 0. Britt,

Page

24

27

D.R. Rademacher, and W. L. Eitzman • • • • 29

SUMMARY OF RESULTS FUTURE WORK

PESTICIDE SAFETY, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL, L. O. Britt PESTICIDE SAFETY . .

PESTICIDE STORAGE

DISPOSAL . . . • •

PLANT BREEDING, R. K. Oldemeyer, J. N. Widner, A. Suzuki, and A. Quinn . . . . CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF TRIAL FIELDS .

VARIETY RESISTANCE TO SUGARBEET CYST NEMATODE FUSARIUM RESISTANT VARIETIES . .

CURLY TOP RESISTANT VARIETIES RHIZOCTONIA RESISTANT VARIETIES POLYPLOID VARIETIES

INTERPRETATION OF VARIETY TRIAL RESULTS INSECTS, NEMATODES, AND DISEASES, Y. Mok Yun

INSECT CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS .

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

NEMATODE CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS . . .

DISEASE CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS

DISCUSSION AND CONSLUSIONS .

NOTES

. .

.

29 35 36 36 38 38 40 40 40 40 40 41 41 42 45 45 45 46 46 46 47 48

(7)

SOIL FERTILITY AND PLANT NUTRITION Dwayne G. Westfall

SOIL SAMPLE HANDLING

Recommendations

Large increases in the nitrate-nitrogen (N03-N) concentration of soil samples can occur if they are not dried innnediately after collection. This will result in a N fertilizer recommendation that is in error. To insure that the analyzed level of N0 3-N found in the sample represents that level in the field, soil samples should be air dried within 12 hours after collection. At least 20 cores should be taken from a field (20-40 acres). This number of cores, when composited, will guarantee a represen-tative sampling and increase the accuracy of the N fertilizer recommendation. Soil sample collection in the field is the weakest link in determining the fertilizer recommendation.

Results

The N fertilizer recommendation is only as good as the accuracy by which the collected sample represents the true field residual N level. It is always assumed samples are dried "immediately" after collection. This does not always occur. What happens to the NO -N concentration in a sample during any time period between collection in t~e field and drying in the laboratory? The results of studies conducted to answer this question are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Samples were collected in th& field, kept field moist for the indicated time period under various storage conditions and

then dried at 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 days after collection. Samples of high residual N0

3-N level placed in the window so the sun would impinge on them for 4-6 hours per day, showed an increase in N0

3N from an initial field level of 100 lb/A to 220 lb/A over the 7 day period (Figure 1). At room temperature the same trend was observed but to a smaller degree. Samples refrigerated showed a significant increase from 110 to 150 lb N0

3-N/A. When the samples were frozen, a very small increase occurred which would not affect the N fertilizer recommendation significantly. Samples with lower residual N0

3-N levels showed similar trends under all treatments but at a smaller magnitude due to the lower initial residual N0

3-N level (Figure 2). If samples are not dried immediately after time of collection in the field large increases in the analyzed levels of N0

3-N in the laboratory will occur. Mineralization of soil organic matter and ammonification of NH

4 in the soil undoubtedly accounts for the increases observed in Figures 1 and 2. These changes will make the resultant N fertilizer recommendation in error and result in low yields and reduced profits.

(8)

-2-60

----,,-

. Window~

,'o

50 _{(,,_,}

/ / ~

/

i

_t:1-4

_~

40

-

/

'

,✓ M 0

z

_/

30

/

:t.

~

•

20 ~ 0 2 4 6 TIME (DAYS)

60

50

· .

REFRIGERATED

'i:

40 o--

---0..

---

--~

0

-z

_,_,o I

0--('t) _~

~

30

/

'-,.A---tr

FROZEN

20

0

2

4

6 TIME (DAYS)

Figure 1..

EFFECT

OF SOIL

HANDLING BEFORE DRYING

ON

N0

₃

•N

CONTENT

OF HIGH RESIDUAL N SOIL

6 I 60

-~

a, .0

140 _d

,

120

~ 0

z

100

80 .I

I

220

200

180

160 -

_cc

..._

_..

Cit

140

.Cl ...J .

-120

z ~ (Yl O · Z ·

100

80

(9)

20 -

:e:: 0... 0...

-

10

z I M 0 .z 0 20

-

:e:: ₁₀ 0... 0..,

-

z I. M 0 z 0

""

.

...

~J

80 ROOMTE~

.

---fl

1/

60 ~

c~---irftioow

1:

~

{SUN)

d

✓01/

40 ~

~ b .

20 g

2

4 TIME {DAYS)

6

0

0 -0~

VI .0 ..J

Qz

I M 0 z

-t---~---~----,----,-0

₂ ₄ ₆

.

TIME {DAYS)

Figure 2.

EFFECT

OF SOIL HANDLING BEFORE DRYING ON N0

3 -N

CONTENT OF

LOW

RESIDUAL N

SOIL

(10)

-4-FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS

N Recommendation

\

To insure a proper N balance that will result in the optimum produc-tion of quality sugarbeets, a N fertilizer recommendation should be made based on a deep profile soil test. Samples should not be taken after April 1 because nitrate levels generally start to rise in the spring as microbial conversion of various forms of nitrogen to nitrate begins as soils warm up. Samples should be sent to the GW Soil Testing Laboratory in Sterling. The

top foot should be analyzed for nitrate-nitrogen, organic matter and

phos-phorus and all other foot increments for nitrate-nitrogen. If a field has

a history of producing unusually low sugar content, sampling depth should be extended to six feet in order to detect nitrate accumulations at lower

depths if they exist, otherwise a 3 foot sampling depth is adequate.

Nitrogen recommendations can be read from Table 1 for all 3 foot

soil samples for varied content of organic matter. If the field had legumes

as a previous crop, or a manure application, nitrogen made available to the

crop from these sources should be subtracted from the appropriate figure in Table 1, based on the following standards:

Alfalfa as previous crop, subtract 50 lb N/A

Previous crop beans contribute 30 lb N/T

Each ton manure contributes 5 lb N/T (Low straw content manure

contributes 7 lb N/T

If samples are taken from a depth other than three feet, proceed as follows:

1) Add up total N0

3-N in profile (ppm x 3.6

=

lb N/A)

2) Multiply the sum by the profile factor (Table 2) that corresponds with.sampling depth to get projected N0

3-N level of entire

rooting zone. .

3) Using projected N0

3--N level determine N recommendation from Table 1.

The N budget system that many are familiar with, can be used. It

should be remembered that the rooting depth of the sugarbeet is 4 ft. plus. If only a 3 foot profile was sampled all the NO that is available to the

plant is not measured. About 18% more N0₃-N wi!l be found in the 4th foot.

Consequently, multiply the lb N/A in the 0-3 foot profile by 18% and add this value to the 0-3 foot lb N/A quantity to determine the total amount of N0

3-N to use in determining the fertilizer recommendation. Our research, as well as independent University work, has shown that no more than 125 lb N/A should be applied. This is the maximum recommendation in Table 1. The

only possible exception to this rule is where new ground is corning under irrigation for the first time. In this situation the nitrogen recommendation may need to be as much as 150 lb N/A if residual levels are very low.

Kemp. The potential use of a 0-1 foot soil sample with which to make fertilizer recommendations in the Kemp district was determined. Between September, 1974 and October, 1976, 357 fields were sampled and the data

compiled for linear regression analysis. The analysis was made between the amount of N0

(11)

Table 1. Nitrogen recommendation for a 20 T/A* or greater yield goal based on a three foot sampling depth at various soil organic matter

contents.

Soil Organic Matter Content (%)

Soil Test 0-0.5 0. 6-1. 0 1.1-1. 5 1. 6-2.0 :> 2. 0 N0

3-N (lb/A) N Recommendation (lb/A)

0- 22 125 125 125 115 100 23- 43 125 125 110 100 85 44- 65 120 105 95 80 70 66- 86 100 85 70 60 45 87-108 75 65 50 40 25 109-130 60 45 35 20 0 131-151 40 30 20 0 0 152-173 20 0 0 0 0 173 0 0 0 0 0

*For lower yield goal subtract 10 lb N/A per ton from the N recommendation.

Table 2. Profile factors to be used to determine projected N0

3-N levels

for sampling depths other than three feet.

Depth (Ft.) 2 4 5 6 Profile Factor 1.36 0.82 0. 72 0.67

(12)

-6-0-1 foot sample. The deviation from the actual NO -N level in the 0-3 foot profile is broken down in± 25 lb NO₃-N/A incremen~s in Table 3. The amount of NO

3-N in a 0-3 foot profile of 73.4% of the fields (262 of 357) will be tredicted within: 0-25 lb/A accuracy by sampling a 0-1 foot depth. In the

_ 26-50 lb/A accuracy catagory were 17.7% of the fields. Sampling to a 0-1 foot depth appears to be an acceptable compromise to be used only if a very

extensive sampling program was to be undertaken.

If a 0-1 foot mass sampling program is initiated, the simple N budget system of determining N'fertilizer recommendations cannot be used

because only the NO

3-N in the top foot would be measured, the 2-4 foot depth

not being sampled. The N recommendation for 0-1 foot samples in Kemp area

can be determined by using Table 4. For ex3mple, if a 0-1 foot sample has 22 lb NO

3-N/A and the 0.M. content was 0.7% the N recommendation would be 105 lb N/A.

P Recommendations

Phosphorus (P) fertilizer recommendations should be made based upon

a soil analysis of the surface sample. Research has shown our P

recommenda-tions have been excessive over the past years. Based on results obtained by GW and Colorado State University, .new P recommendation standards have been made (Table 5). This new recommendation represents about a 50 lb/A decrease

in the P

2

o

5 application rate.

Starter Fertilizers

The application of part of the N and all the P can be made as a

starter fertilizer at planting. For maximum efficiency and response a

liquid material such as 10-34-0 should be injected 1/2 inch to the side and 2 inches below the seed at planting. On light textured soils, 20 lb of N/A

and on heavier textured soils, 30 lb of N/A should be applied along with

an appropriate amount of P

2

o

5 as determined by the ratio of N-P2

o

5 in the liquid fertilizer material. Higher rates should not be used ana contact with the seed will reduce germination.

RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS

With the increased emphasis and concern that exists regarding beet

quality (sugar and purity) today the adverse effects of excessive N fertility is becoming of greater economic importance to our growers every year.

The relationship between the factory average residual soil NO 3-N level and the sugar content is shown in Figure 3, for several factories for the 1975 crop. Regardless of the fertility program followed by growers at various factories, the percent sugar is closely dependent on the initial residual NO

3-N level. Kemp, as usual, does not comply to the trend. Evident-ly our present system of evaluating the nitrogen-quality relationship does not hold true for these soils. New experiments are planned for future

(13)

Table 3. Deviation of predicted 0-3' N0

3-N level based on analysis of 0-1' from that found by analysis of entire 0-3' profile.

_ Deviation from

Actual N03-N in No. of Percent Cumulative

0-3' Profile lb/ A Fields of Fields Deviation (%)

0- 25 262 73.4 73.4 26- 50 63 17.7 91.1 51- 75 19 5.3 96.4 76-100 8 2.2 98.6 101-125 3 0.8 99.4 126-150 0 0 99.4

>

151 2 0.6 100.0

Table 4. Nitrogen reconnnendations for Kemp district using 0-1 ft. deep

soil samples.

0-1' Soil Test

N03-N Fertilizer Recommendation Lb N/A

Lb/A 0-0.5 0. 6-1. 0 1.1-1.5 1.6-2.0 ✓ 2.0 0-10 165 150 135 120 105 11-20 140 125 110 95 85 21-30 120 105 90 75 60 31-40 100 85 70 55 40 41-50 80 65 50 35 20 51-60 55 40 25 10 0 61-70 35 20 0 0 71-80 15 0 80 0

Table 5. New P fertilizer reconnnendations (1977).

Phosphorus Soil Test ppm p 0- 7 (Very Low) 8-14 (Low 15-22 (Medium)

>

23 (High) Fertilizer Requirement Lbs/A P205 100 50 30 0

(14)

..

0::: c:( ~

17.5

17.0 ~

16.5

I-I' z w u 0::: w a.

16.0

Lovell oveland •Kemp

1 5 . 5 1 ~ . . .

-0

50

100

1.50

LBS. RESIDUAL N0 3-N

Figure 3. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RESIDUAL SOIL N0

3-N

AND SUGAR PERCENT

I

co

(15)

Over the past three years, ten Prate soil test correlation ex peri-ments have been conducted with cooperation of Colorado State University and others. The results of ~hese tests are summarized in Table 6. Even at very low soil test levels of P there was not a statistically significant increase or decrease in yield or quality of sugarbeets. For this reason the P recommendation has been revised (see Table 5).

The question is often, "What is the best way to evaluate a grower's N management system as it relates to quality?" The Brei N0

3 program is one

effective method. The second method is petiole sampling for N during

September and residual soil N0

3-N sampling after harvest. Table 7 shows the various values obtained for petiole N0

3-N residual soil N03-N yield and

quality as related to total lb available N to the crop for one test in 1976. The residual soil N0₁-N in a 3 foot profile varied from 46 to 60 lb/A after

harvest while the petiole N0

3-N level ranged from 315 to 1300 ppm on

September 1. The petiole N is a much more sensative indicator of N avail-ability and supply than is the residual N0

3-N after harvest.

The use of starter fertilizer in the sugarbeet production program

has been investigated for a couple of years. The use of starter fertilizer will result in a more vigorous plant in the early stages of growth. This

is very important because stand establishment is one of the major problems

of sugarbeet production. In addition to increased plant vigor during this

critical stage of development, a yield increase generally results. The average of 3 experiments conducted in 1976 are shown in Table 8. These

tests were not combined using statistical methods, therefore, LSD values are

not given. The use of starter fertilizer banded 1/2 inch to the side and 2 inches below the seed generally resulted in a yield and recoverable sugar increase. The use of a starter fertilizer broadcast on the soil surface and

incorporated only by the planter units and ditchers showed good results.

Since this was only tried in 1976 a recommendation regarding this technique

(16)

-10-Table 6. P fertilizer rate and soil test calibration results, 1974-1976.

P Soil Test Level Statistically Significant

Location (:epm P) Response to P Fertilizer

Bridgeport 12 (Low) Bray Ill None

Stratton 12 (Low) None

Kanorado 19 (Medium) None

Sharon Springs 17 (Medium) None

Burlington 11 (Low) None

Burlington 7 (Very Low) None

Iliff 7 (Very Low) None

Eaton 9 (Low) None

Merino 7 (Very Low) None

Crook 9 (Low) None (2.5 T/A over Ck)

Table 7. The relationship of petiole N, Residual N0

3-N after harvest, yield and quality of sugarbeets.

Residual

Soil Rec.

Total Petiole N N03-N, 3' Yield Sugar Purity Sugar Lb N/A Sept. 1 Sept. 15 (Lb/ A) (T/ A)

(

%)

(%)

(Lb/A)

125 315 152 46 26.1 17.1 93.08 7664

200 800 333 54 26. 9 16.9 92.70 7772

275 1300 560 60 25.9 16.7 92.82 7434

Table 8. The effect of starter fertilizer on sugarbeets. (Average of 3 experiments, 1976)

Rec.

Sugar Yield Sugar Purity

Treatment (Lbs/A) (T/A)

(%)

No starter, total 150 lb N/A 6191.13 22.06 16.50 92. 60 No starter, total 200 lb N/A 6615.40 23.90 16.36 92. 56 20-68-0 starter banded*, total 150 lb N/A 6658.17 24.03 16.40 92.43 20-68-0 starter banded, total 200 lb N/A 6413. 33 23.33 16.20 92.63 30-102-0 starter banded, total 150 lb N/A 6842.07 24.43 16.33 92. 60 30-102-0 starter banded, total 200 lb N/A 6782.40 24.53 16.30 92. 60 30-76-0 starter broadcast, total 200 lb N/A 6958.90 25.50 16.16 92.40 60-76-0 starter broadcast, total 200 lb N/A 6551.27 24.06 16.20 92.53 *On light textured soils the banded rate of N was decreased by 10 lb/A.

(17)

PILE STORAGE/1975-76 CAMPAIGN

W.R. Alceson, D. G. Westfall, A.H. Freytag and J. N. Widner

FERTILITY TOPPING STUDIES

RECOMMENDATIONS

Continue studies investigating the relationship of nitrogen fertility with crown size and storage loss. Determine what interaction occur between degree of crown removal and quality and storability of beets grown on different fertility levels. Control fertilizer usage to minimize crown size.

Harvest quality and yield of flailed, half topped and topped beets grown at five fertility levels (O, 60, 120, 180 and 240 lb/A) are summarized in Table 1. Storage characteristics of beets grown at three fertility levels

(0, 120 and 240 lb N/A) are also given. As the nitrogen application rate was increased, the crown size increased while the sugar and purity at har-vest decreased. Likewise, sugar and purity decreased as more crown material was left on the beet. Nitrogen application rate had a more dominant effect on quality factor;, however, than did crown removal. Over all, treatments reducing the nitrogen application by 120 lb/A increased percent sugar and pu-rity by an average of 0.75 and 1.0 respectively; whereas, complete crown removal improved percent sugar and purity by only 0.2 and 0.3 respectively. Proper topping to the lowest leaf scar improved recoverable sugar by an average of 8 lbs of sugar per ton of beets, however, a similar improvement in recoverable sugar would be obtained by reducing nitrogen application rate by 40 lbs per acre. On the other hand, removal of the crown to improve quality reduced the yield of recoverable sugar (183 lb/A for half topped and 632 for topped); whereas, reducing the nitrogen rate improved the yield of recoverable sugar per acre slightly. The yield of the large crowned high fertility beets was drastically reduced by proper topping. These studies show that while quality can be reduced by improper topping, excessive use of nitrogen fertilizer has a more drastic effect.

Topping had a stronger effect upon storage loss than did nitrogen fertility but interactions were apparent. At all fertility levels flailed beets lost less sugar than topped beets (averaged j9.1% less). At the higher fertility levels, the half topped beets lost as much sugar as the topped beets. On the other hand, the half topped low fertility beets lost no more sugar than did flailed beets of the same treatment. The small cut surface area and absence of hollow pith areas was responsible for the low losses in the half topped low fertility beets.

(18)

Table 1. Effect of crown removal and soil nitrogen fertility on beet yield, quality and storage loss - 122.4 average storage days. (Average of six locations)

Amount Harvest Harvest Harvest Rec. Sugar

Treatment Removed Sugar Purity Yield* Loss

Nitrogen Rate Topping Rec. Sugar

Lb/A Procedure % % % Lb/A Lb/T Lb/T/D

All treatments: 0 Flailed 0.00 17.0 92.5 6077 289 0.351 0 Half Topped 4.82 17.4 92.5 5781 294 0.384 0 Topped 10.86 17.4 93.1 5514 296 0.473 60 Flailed 0.00 17.1 92.5 6407 288 60 Half Topped 4.87 17.3 92.1 6265 290 60 Topped 11.76 17.2 92.6 5784 293 120 Flailed 0.00 16.4 90.9 5881 269 0.412 120 Half Topped 5.66 16.6 91. 3 5755 271 0.540 120 Topped 13.73 16.8 91. 6 5337 278 0.555 180 ii'':=-Flailed 0.00 16.2 90.9 6021 261

--

,_.. I 180 Half Topped 6.35 16.2 90.8 5838 260

--

N I 180 Topped 15.39 16.2 91. 2 5411 266 240 Flailed 0.00 15.6 90.4 5923 248 0.358 240 Half Topped 5.94 15.8 90.8 5756 257 0.453 240 Topped 16.10 16.1 90.8 5103 261 0.423

Topping treatments at all nitrogen rates:

Flailed 0.00 16.5 91.5 6062 271 0.374 Half Topped 5.53 16.7 91.5 5879 274 0.459 Topped 13. 57 16.7 91.8 5430 279 0.483 Nitrogen rates at all topping treatments:

0

--

5.22 17.3 92.7 5791 293 0.402

60

--

5.54 17.2 92.4 6152 290

120

--

6.46 16.6 91. 3 5658 273 0.502

180

--

7.24 16.2 91. 0 5757 262

(19)

GROWTH REGULATORS

RECOMMENDATIONS

Discontinue investigation of soil injected ethylene as a means of reducing storage loss until tests show it has a positive effect upon yield of

treated beets. Intensively investigate the use of propylene treatment on freshly harvested beets as a means of reducing storage loss. Investigate methods, rates and duration of treatments to find one which is both

prac-tical and effective.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Beets treated with soil injected ethylene in late July were stored as

captive samples in factory piles at Eaton, Longmont and Ft. Morgan. Effect

of treatment on sugar and recoverable sugar loss is shown in Table 2.

Beets treated with ethylene at the 2.8 Lb/A rate lost 30.1 and 25.5 percent less sugar and recoverable sugar than non-treated beets. As observed last year, beets treated with the 2.8 Lb/A rate had numerically lower losses

than those treated with the 5.6 Lb/A rate. This is the third consecutive year in a row the soil injected ethylene treatment has substantially

re-duced sugar losses; however, until consistent yield or quality increases can be demonstrated, the treatment will not be feasible on a commercial basis. A summary of three years of investigation is given in Table 3.

Propylene in a small laboratory test was shown to substantially reduce respiration and quality losses when applied as a gas directly to the har-vested beet. Propylene is also sufficiently soluble in water to apply

during piling in a water spray. Results were dramatic and consistent enough

to warrant extensive testing. The effects of the propylene treatment (lower

ethylene evolution, lower respiration and lower invert sugar formation)

appears to be similar to those observed for the soil injected ethylene

treatment. If storage results are the same, application of propylene at piling time would be more practical than treatments with soil injected ethylene.

FUNGICIDES

RECOMMENDATIONS

Discontinue testing of fungicides for controlling rot during long term storage of beets. Continue testing new agricultural chemicals for adverse effect on storage loss.

(20)

-14-Table 2. Effect of soil injected ethylene on sugar losses in beets stored as captive samples in commercial piles.

Ethylene Loss - Lb/T/D

Treatment Recoverable

Lb/A Sugar Sugar

0 0.319 0.385

2.8 0.223 0.287

5.6 0.253 0.316

Table 3. Effect of soil injected ethylene on storage loss (3-years, locations).

Rec. Sugar Purity Invert Sugar Raffinose 12

Loss Loss Accumulation Accumulation

Treatment Lb/T/D % g/l00RDS g/l00RDS

Control 0.389 2.09 0.89 0.32

Ethylene - 2.8 lb/A 0.314 1.88 0.76 0.33

(21)

Freshly harvested beet samples were treated with solutions of Benlate, Mertect, Topsin, Baydam, and sulfur at 500, 1500, and 5000 ppm; sulfur dioxide at 1000 and 10,000 ppm and ozone at an undetermined rate. ·

None of the treatments showed any positive long term effect in reducing respiration or invert sugar fonnation. Several of the chemicals at the higher concentration caused significantly higher respiration and invert

sugar formation as a result of phytotoxicity. Lack of extensive rot in

control beets may have resulted in lack of response from chemical treat-ments.

CULTIVARS

RECOMMENDATIONS

Test cultivars for storage characteristics before releasing them for

commercial production. Select genotypes with superior storage charac-teristics for development of cultivars with improved storage character-istics.

Sixty cultivars were evaluated for respiration rate and accumulation of raffinose and invert sugars. Cultivars were evaluated for impurity accumu-lation at three temperatures--30°F, 40°F and 58°F--to determine behavior of varieties under a wide range of storage conditions. Varieties were also evaluated during a long term storage period (137 days) in addition to the usual intermediate storage period (106 days).

Sizable differences existed between varieties in respiration rate, invert sugar after storage and raffinose after intermediate term storage (27.6, 175 and 30% respectively). A 47.5 percent difference in total sugar loss

existed between low and high sugar loss varieties for the same period. The principle components of storage loss--respiration, invert sugar ac-cumulation, raffinose accumulation--are under independent genetic control. Certain inbreds have a strong effect on storage loss components of resul-ting hybrids; whereas, other inbreds have little negative or positive effect on storage characteristics.

We have found that the storage loss

quite consistent from year to year.

rates for five varieties over four

The loss for each variety for each

test mean for 30 to 60 varieties.

components for a given variety are A comparison of relative respiration years testing is given in Table 4.

year is expressed as a percent of the The respiration of each variety relative

(22)

-16-to the test means and -16-to the other varieties remained consistent over the four years. Mono Hy D2 consistently had numerically lower respiration than Mono Hy Al which averaged better than normal. Mono Hy E2 and USH20 consistently averaged well above the test mean. HH19 averaged below the test mean in the first three years and then reversed its position.in the last year. Since HH19 is not a GW variety, we could not be certain that it was genetically the same as in previous years. The same consistency in varieties in invert sugar accumulation was seen from year to year

(Table 5). Mono Hy D2 consistently had the lowest invert accumulation and MonoHy Al was always lower than average. HH19 and USH20 were always well above the respective test means for each year in invert sugar accumu-lation. The only inconsistency was Mono Hy E2 which was higher than the test average in the first year and lower in the remaining three years. Raffinose accumulation likewise showed consistent year to year patterns

(Table 6).

A comparison of the relative respiration rate, invert sugar accumulation and raffinose for the five varieties is given in Table 7. Some varieties such as Mono Hy Al and D2 were lower than average in all three storage characteristics. Mono Hy E2 was lower than average in invert accumula-tion but above average in respiraaccumula-tion and raffinose accumulaaccumula-tion. The opposite was true with HH19 which was very high in invert sugar accumu-lation but better than average in respiration and raffinose. USH20 on the other hand had high respiration and high invert accumulation, but low raffinose accumulation. These data show that storage characteristics are somewhat independent of each other but that varieties can be found which are strong in all three characters.

(23)

Table 4. Respiration rates of commercial varieties.

Respiration Rate - % of Test Mean

-~

1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75

Variety 30 var. 50 var. 50 var. 60 var. Avg.

Mono Hy Al 94.2 103.2 95.1 97.4 97.5 Mono Hy D2 93.0 96.1 94.0 92.4 93.9 Mono Hy E2 112.8 110.4 106.9 105.5 108.9 HH-19 90.8 95.4 94.7 107.3 97.1 USH20 105.3 114.8 114.6 111. 6 111. 6 Test Mean Lb/T/D 0.257 0.294 0.272 .344

Days Storage llO 117 ll3 105

Table 5. Invert sugar accumulation of commercial varieties.

Invert Sugar Accumulation - % of Test Mean

1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75

Variety 30 var. 50 var. 50 var. 60 var. Avg.

Mono Hy Al 77. 3 73.7 88.1 97.2 84.1 Mono Hy D2 59.2 16.3 53.7 78.8 52.0 Mono Hy E2 120.9 65.0 77.6 78.6 85.5 HH19 127.5 159.3 135.4 203.6 156.5 USH20 204. 5 177.4 130.9 162.7 153.9 Test Mean g/100 RDS 0.463 ·0.736 0.633 1.178 Days Storage 110 117 113 105

(24)

-18-Table 6. Raffinose accumulation in commercial varieties.

Raffinose Accumulation - % of Test Mean

1973-74 1974-75

Variety 50 var. 60 var. Avg.

Mono Hy Al 93.5 98.3 95.9 Mono Hy D2 84.1 92.4 88.3 Mono Hy E2 107.5 111.8 109.7 HH19 67.9 68.3 68.1 USH20 83.7 78.9 81.3 Test Mean g/100 RDS 0.501 0.444 Days Storage 113 105

Table 7. Relative respiration rates and invert sugar and raffinose accumulation in commercial varieties.

Respiration Invert Sugar Raffinose

Variety Rate Accumulation Accumulation

Mono Hy Al 97.5 84.1 95.9 Mono Hy D2 93.9 52.0 88.3 Mono Hy E2 108.9 85.5 109.7 HH19 97.1 156.5 68.1 USH20 111. 6 153.9 81.3 100

=

.292 .753 .473 Lb/T/D g/100 RDS g/100 RDS

(25)

GERMINATION AND EMERGENCE

W, R. Akeson, D. G. Westfall, A.H. Freytag, and J. N. Widner

GERMINATION AND EHERGENCE UNDER MOISTURE,

TEMPERATURE, AND IMPEDANCE STRESS

RECOMMENDATIONS

Several methods have been developed for improving germination and emergence under stress (Temperature, moisture, and impedance) but will not be recormnended for connnercial use until extensively tested under field conditions has been carried out.

Evaluate seed treatments developed from laboratory tests for improving germination emergence in extensive field tests. In laboratory and field tests, evaluate moisture and temperature changes at planting depth, improve techniques for seed coat modification, evaluate effect of genetic and seed lot effect on germination and emergence.

The objective of these investigations has been to develop a system or systems by which satisfactory stands would be obtained from space planted beets without thinning and with irrigation for emergence only under abnormally dry soil conditions.

Reproducible laboratory tests have been developed to measure the effect of seed coat modifications, growth regulators, varieties, and seed lot on germination and emergence under controlled moisture, temperature and impedance stresses individually or in combinations. The objective of the tests is to impose sufficient stresses so that germination or emergence of the control or in some cases the test mean is only fifty percent. This allows differentiation between treatments, varieties or seedlots. The laboratory tests are as follows:

Germination on blotter paper under controlled temperature and

moisture stress. The moisture availability is controlled with osmotic solutions of polyethylene glycol 600 in water (normally -1 to -5 bars) while temperature is maintained in a controlled temperature chamber

(48° to 60°F). Rate of radical elongation gives an estimate of potential emergence rate. This test gives quick measure of the effect of treatment or variety on germination under moisture and/or temperature stress.

Emergence through 1" greenhouse soil under controlled temperature and moisture stress. The water contenc of the soil and temperature of the

chamber control moisture and temperature stresses. This procedure tests the effect of treatment or variety on emergence under temperature and/or

moisture stress with little resistance to emergence (impedance). Additional resistance to emergence can be obtained by covering the seeds with a

(26)

-20-emergence is not reproducible with this procedure.

Emergence through packed sand under moisture, temperature, and/or _impedan~e stress. A packed layer of moist sand gives a reproducible

resistance to emergence. Moisture availability and temperature are controlled by water content and controlled temperature room. This test is effective in measuring "emergence power" in the presence or absence of temperature or moisture stresses.

These tests have shown that the hull or coat surrounding the seed is a major factor reducing germination under limited moisture conditions. Mechanical removal of the hull lowered the moisture requirement for germination and increased rate of germination but damaged the seed so

that emergence was impaired. Tests also showed that both water requirement for germination and emergence power are strongly related to temperature.

At 60°F beet seeds will germinate at a lower water potential and have

0

more emergence power than at 50 F.

Treatment of seed with dilute hydrochoric acid partially dissolves the seed coat and greatly improves germination and emergence under moisture and temperature stress, Acid treatment neither increases germination under optimum moisture nor increases emergence power, Growth regulators such as ethylene and propylene increase both rate of germination and emergence power. Varieties differ widely in moisture and temperature requirements for germination as well as in emergence power.

Interactions between treatments occur. Emergence under moisture and temperature stress but no impedance stress(Table 1) is improved most by acid treatment with only a slight increase attributed to the growth regulator. Adding on impedance stress to the moisture and temperature stress brought out an additive effect between the growth regulator and acid treatments (Table 2).

A three fold difference is germination under moisture and temperature stress was measured between 8 varieties (Table 3). The germination was improved in all varieties with acid treatment. The same acid treatment gave no improvement in emergence under severe impedance stress without moisture stress (Table 4). On the other hand highly significant differ-ences were measured between varieties under these stress conditions.

(27)

Table 1.

Effect of Acid and Growth Regulators on Percent Emergence

Under Moisture and Temperature Stress.

Growth Regulator Check

Ethylene Propylene

-1" Greenhouse Soil, 48° F. Acid Treatment

Check 0.5 N HCl 2.0 N HCl 58.0 55.0 66.0 78.0 84.0 85.0 79.0 88.0 85.0 Avg effect of Acid 59.7 82.3 84.0

LSD - 0.05 Table 2. Treatment Means Acid effect PGR effect 7.4 4.3 4.3 Avg. Effect of PGR 71.6 75.7 78.7

Effect of Acid and Growth Regulators on Percent Emergence of Seed Under Combined Moisture, Temperature and Impedance Stress

-1.3" pack sand, 3.5% moisture, 48° F.

Acid Treatment Growth Regulator Check Check · 0.5 N HCl 2.0 N HCl Ethylene Propylene 37.3 59.3 52.0 61.3 68.7 66.0

Avg effect of Acid 49.6 65.3

LSD - 0.05 Treatment means Acid effect PGR effect 6.0 3.5 3.5 58.7 74.3 76.0 69.7 Avg. Effect of PGR 52.4 67.4 64.7

'

(28)

-22-Table 3.

Effect of Acid Treatment on Percent Germination of Varieties Under Temperature and Moisture Stress

Varieties 73MSH184 73MSH172 73MSH188 73MSH102 73MSH105 73MSH182 73MSH180 73MSH185 -1 Bar Moisture, 48° F. Acid Treatment None 2 N HCl 56 46 72 46 66 26 60 38 68 84 80 94 90 62 82 68 -Avg Effect ·of ·varieties 62 65 76 70 78 44 71 53

Avg effect of Acid 51.3 78.5

11.1 LSD -0.05 Table 4. Treatment Means Variety Effect Acid Effect 7.9 3.9

Effect of Acid Treatment on Emergence of Varieties Under Severe

Impedance Stress

0

-48 F, 2 1/2" loose sand - 4% moisture Acid ·Treatment Avg Effect Varieties ·None 2 N HCl of Varieties

73MSH184 6.7 7.3 7.0 73MSH172 18.0 16.7 17.3 73MSH188 8.7 10.0 9.3 73MSH102 20.0 24.7 22.3 73MSH105 40.7 33.3 36.7 73MSH182 9.3 14.7 12.0 73MSH180 21.3 19.3 20.3 73MSH185 14.7 23.3 19.0 Avg effect 17.4 18.7 LSD - 0.05 Treatment Means 7.5 Variety Effect 5.3 Acid Effect N.S.

(29)

SOIL CRUSTING

RECOMMENDATIONS

Soil crust cracking materials should be used on a trial basis. Research results are very limited in this new area of research. The materials that appear to be the most effective over a broad range of soils are Coherex and Petroset SB, Rates of application, costs, etc. are shown below. A solid stream nozzle, orfice diameter 0.046 inch, should be used to apply the material directly over the seed at planter behind

dragchain or scratche~. This material should penetrate the soil 1/4 inch deep by the time it dries. The bead should not be disturbed.

Crust Cracking Materials~ Rates and Costs Material Coherex Petroset Material 7.5 1.5

J/

FOB Denver

.,V

FOB Texas Rate (g_/A) Water 22.5 28.5 Pressure Total (PSU) 30 15 30 15

Cost

Gal. · ·Freight Per Acre $0.47

.1/

11

3.53

2.00

.so

$ 3.75

Soil crusting is one of the factors that limits stand establishment. If rainfall of high intensity is received between planting and emergence the ·vast majority of the soils in our production area will form a hard surface

crust thereby preventing the sugarbeet seedling from emerging. Over the past years various soil stabilizing compounds have been applied in an attempt to stabilize a 2-4" band over the seed row to prevent crusting. This has met with no success. Large volumes of materials are needed and costs are prohibitive. Stabilization of a 2-4" band over the row is virtually impossible under practical cultural practices.

When a soil crusts, sugarbeet seedlings emerge through cracks that form in the crust upon drying. It was decided to use this principle to control soil crusting to allow seedling emergence.

(30)

-24-Over the past year, 16 different materials have been evaluated as potential crust cracking materials. The latest evaluation included six materials. It was also found that some materials were effective on one soil series but not another. Results of the last evaluation is in Table 5.

Table 5.

Crack Development in a Hard Soil Crust in Three Soils by Six Chemicals

Soil Series

Material Tripp Mitchell Ascalon

Crack formation effectiveness

Celca-Loid Latex poor good good

Coherex (CA-9-56-456) good excellent excellent

Petroset SB excellent excellent excellent

Natrasol - 250 GR good fair fair

CMC - 6 CTL poor poor poor

Anti-crustant A fair poor poor

Coherex and Petroset, two petroleum base materials, were effective on

all three soils. The Latex base materials, Celca-Loid and

Anti-crustant A, were not consistently effective, The same situation existed with the cellulose base materials, Natrasol and CMC.

In a previous study where emergence was measured (Figure 1) marked increases were found. Only 30% emergence was observed in the check

(no crust cracking material), When crust cracking materials were applied directly over the seed to control crack formation and thereby form an emergence channel the% emergence increased to 70-95%, depending

on the material. This was on only one soil type. As pointed out above

all materials are not effective on all soils, Petroset SB and Coherex have been found to have the widest range of effectiveness. These

materials prevent soil welling and the resultant crust formation as a result of complete soil dispersion. All other materials promote aggregate

stability by cementing the soil aggregates together.

SUMMARY

Treatments have been developed for improving germination and emergence under moisture, temperature and impedance stress conditions. The

development of reproducible laboratory tests with controlled stress

con-ditions have made these developments possible. Treatments remain to be confirmed in field tests.

(31)

A systematic approach will be used to insure emergence under the wide range of stress conditions.encountered under field conditions. The key to.success is a greater planting depth (2" or more) at which the soil will not dry out before the seed has a chance to germinate. An acid treatment or other treatment to soften the seed coat is needed to improve rate and extent of germination under moisture and temperpture stresses. Growth regulators or varieties must be found which will improve rate of emergence and emergence power so that emergence from a greater planting depth can be insured. Finally a crust control material is essential to give satisfactory emergence if a crust is formed.

(32)

-26-100

Coherex

90 Natrosol

250 GR

Jcelcaloid

,'t.

80

• _.

.,,. ,

/

Latex

. / / / , / I

70

.' I I _.1r.tr""

_Petroset

(I)

_I

I u I Jr C: • I -I a, _I I -I en

₆₀

.

,

s...

_I

I

_;

a, _I E

.

w I I

_I

.

I ~

50 .

I I I

,.

I

(I)

I

en I

.,.

tO

_•

I _-I s...

I

I (I)

40 I

>

_•

I <(

I

I 1 I I,

_Check

• I

30

I

/

I

/

I

,,,,,,,,,

"

/

,'

_I

_/

• I I

_/

20

~ I • I I / I

-1-I

I

"

10

I , I

,

I

I "ti

I

~

_I

0 --l

2

3

4

5

6

7 Days from Planting

Effect of Soil

Anti-crustant

Materials on

Seedling Emergence

in the

Greenhouse

Fig. 1, The Effect of Crust Cracking Materials on Emergence of

(33)

Seed Emergence

CROP ESTABLISHMENT AND PROTECTION SEED EMERGENCE A..~D GROWTH REGULATORS

A.H. Freytag

Laboratory. About 35 compounds were tested in 6 coldroom (55° F) emergence tests in soil. The results of these tests show the following compounds improved emergence under the test conditions,

1) Ethrel + Gibberellic acid, 2) Carbon+ Propylene gas, 3) Ethylene carbonate, 4) Silver nitrate, 5) Kinetin + Calcium Chloride, 6) Acid seed soak+ Kinetin Ca Cl, 7) Acid seed soak+ gibberellic acid,

8) Acid seed soak only, 9) Acid seed soak+ propylene, 10) Seed fermentation.

If we could plant sugarbeet seed at ~epth of 3 inches and have

no impedence to the seedling emergence this would facilitate our planting to stand. To accomplish this soda straws were placed at the respective depth in the soil and a seed was dropped down each tube. The results of preliminary lab tests show it is possible to get a germination rate of 80 to 90 percent at the 3 inch depth and 60 to 70 percent emergence at the 4 inch depth in heavy soils.

In preliminary petri dish tests other methods of stimulating seed germination have shown promise. For example, the fermentation of sugarbeet seed has shown a 20 percent increase of germination over control at 54°F. Another method of stimulating sugarbeet seed

germination has been found, seed will germinate better at a specific pH. Test results show that sugarbeet seed respond at pH 3 and 11 with higher percent germination and growth regulators respond better during a seed soak at the same pH.

Field. About 25 seed treatments to stimulate emergence were tested in 7 field tests. There were 6 spring tests and 1 test this fall. The results from these tests show the following treatments

significantly increased emergence above the control by about 20 percent, ethylene plus propylene saturated carbon rolled on seed and gibberellic acid on acid treated seed.

Growth Regulators Yield

Laboratory. About 40 folier applied treatments of growth regulators were tested in 14 greenhouse tests on young sugarbeet

plants in pots. The results of these tests show the following treatments significantly increase root or foliage weight, 1) Polyethylene glycol,

(34)

' i '

-28-2) Ethylene saturated carbon, clay and perlite in soil, 3) Propylene

saturated carbon, clay and perlite in soil, 4) Silver nitrate, 5) Ethylene saturated carbon in soil, 6) Propylene saturated carbon in soil, 7) Latex, 8) Latex+ tetrachloroethylene. Also as there was a growth regulator

pH interaction on seed emergence, there is also the same interaction

on sugarbeet plant yield. Kinetin

+

Calcium chloride and gibberellic

acid folier applied at pH 3, 5.7, and 7.7 gave 20 percent yield .increase /, of foliage and roots over the controls.

Field. Eight growth regulators treatments were applied in two field tests. The growth regulator field tests were an attempt to improve

tonnage, sugar or purity. The results of the two tests showed ·there were no significant differences between treatments by analysis of

variance although soil injected propylene showed numerical increases in recoverable sugar per acre.

Miscell::meous Projects. A cooperative program with Dr. Akeson

on ethylene and propylene to reduce sugar loss in the pile has shown

very good results. The ethylene project has shown about a 20 percent

reduction in sugar loss in pile storage samples in all three years of testing. The propylene treatment for sugar loss has also shown about

20 percent reduction in sugar loss in the respiration chambers but this

is only the second year of research on propylene. The propylene will

be more feasible if it is as good as ethylene because we can apply it directly to the pile of beets, while ethylene must be injected in the soil at a greater expense. The final results of this work will be reported by Dr. Akeson.

The cooperative project ethylene diffusion in factory has been

terminated at this time. We hope to improve the method this coming

year. The final report was submitted by Dr. Linden.

The cellulose to glucose conversion with the use of ethylene

still shows promise but not much work has been accomplished this year.

We hope to continue with this project next year.

A new cooperative program has been initiated with Dr. Murray Nabors of

c.s.u.

on tissue culture of sugarbeets. We have so far been

able to establish callus and shake cultures of the sugarbeet. The value

of this program would be the screening of growth regulators and obtain herbicide resistant strains of sugarbeets. This system would also

lend itself to obtaining haploid and tetraploid strains of sugarbeets for breeding purposes.

Cell fusion is another project I have devoted some effort to.

The value of this program is to initiate the fusion of cells and

obtain hybrids at the cellular level. If this can be accomplished we

could fuse cells of nematode resistant and disease resistant lines with

(35)

HERBICIDES AND PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS

E. F. Sullivan, L.

o.

Britt, D.R. Rademacher, and

w.

L. Eitzman

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

Synopsis of 1973-75 Results (CO, KS, MT, NB, WY)

Preplant applications. Nortron and Antor (H-22234) were effective

as shown previously .(1973-74). For example, Nortron averaged 85%. and

Ro-Neet 67% total weed control during 1973-75. Total weed control ranged from 84-86% for Nortron and from 64-68% for Ro-Neet at five research sites during the three years. Nortron gave 75 percentage points kochia control without yearly variance.

HOE-23408 (2 lb/A) averaged 96% grassy weed control from ten trials (1974-75). Control ranged from 89-100%.

In 1975, SD-29026 demonstrated excellent kochia and grass control.

Preplant mixtures. Nortron plus Ro-Neet, Pyramin or Antor were relatively effective on kochia and for general weed control (1973-75)

(Table 1). Nortron

+

Antor had greater efficacy and selectivity. Under certain conditions, Nortron was as effective as the mixtures.

Postemergence applications. In particular, HOE-23408 for grassy weed control, and Betanal

+

Betanex and Nortron

+

Betanal

+

Betanex for broad-spectrum control, were effective (Table 2). HOE-23408

+

Betanal

+

Betanex had promise also.

Sequence applications. Nortron/Betanal

+

Betanex demonstrated superior chemical weeding activity frequently until harvest with favorable crop selectivity at recommended field dosages. Ro-Neet/Betanal

+

Betanex had relatively acceptable yet less early weed control and no persistence on late emerging weeds. The Antor sequence was less reliable for kochia control, but effective broad spectrum control can be expected from this sequence especially on light soil types and where heavy stands of redroot pigweed and barnyardgrass prevail with other weeds (Table 3).

Apparently, Nortron sequences frequently provide season-long weed control without or with a minimal use of clean-up labor. It is assumed that Nortron sequences shown in Table 3, among others, permit only 1-2 weeds to remain per 100 ft. of row. This low infestation

represents 240 to 480 annual weeds per acre at harvest. Untreated plots contained 25 weeds per ft. of row or 598,950 per acre.

(36)

Table: 1 Experiment: Nerage weed and crop responses for three preplant

---mixtures, 1973-75. Site:

_Year:

---

---Treatments Nortron+Antor Nortron+Ro-Neet Nortron+Pyramin

.

_.

Plant count/sq ft Untreated Humber Observations 35 61 29 Fixed Dose

Lb/A

2+2.2 1.7+1.9 · 2.o+2.2

Remarks: Pre-thinning weed control results.

Beets

Injury Stand Kochia

(Scores and seedling counts 14 96 87 19 98 74 10 104 62

•

-

---

-

;•-·-

--

---

-

·-·

-

--

-

__,-

--

..

----

-

--

~

-

~

----~

~-

---Replications: Weeds as

i.

of controls) Total 92 89 83 I w 0 I

(37)

Table :_2_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Experimeut : _ _;_;Av;.;_,;_er;.;..a~g~e;;;,_;w.;..e;...;e;...;d.._.;;a;.;..n;.;;d;...;;c.;;r..:;.o.r.;.p_;;.r.;;;..es;;;.pi.;..o.:.;n;.;..r-.;..,e;;;.;s~f;;.;;o;.;;r;__;;t;.;.:h:..;;;r..;;;e..;;;e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ postemergence herbicides, 1973-75. i-fomber Treatments Observations (1974-75) HOE-23408 Nortron+Betanal+Betanex Betanal+Betanex

....

Plant

count/sq ft Untreated Remarks: 13 32 21

Site: Year: Replications:

Fixed _Beets _Weeds

Dose Injury Stand Pigweed Kochia Grass

.

Total

Lb/A ~Scores and seedling counts as

i.

of controls)

1.5 6 103 88 1 .• 5+·. 5+.

s

23 91 93 85 87 86 .5+. 5. 14 100 91 75 76 76

•

' • I w ,_. I

(38)

....

.

Table:

___

3 __,;_

____

~

Experiment:

Average weed and crop responses for four sequence

__ ap_p_l_i_ca_ti_o __ n_s_. _, _1_9_7_3_-_7_5 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Site : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Year : _ _ _ Replications: _ _ _ _ _ _

Treatments Nortron/Betanal+ Betanex Nortron/Nortron+ Betanal+Betanex Ro-Neet/Betanal+ Betanex ifomber Observations 10

7

5 Antor/Betanal+Betanex 5

.

·

Plant count/sq ft Untreated ·

Remarks:

Beets Weeds Fixed Dose

Lb/A

Injury Stand Pigweed Kochia Grass Total

(Scores and seedling counts as% of controls)

2.2/.5+.5 20 99 99 93 98 96 1.9/1.2+.4+.4 14 101 100 . ₈₂ ₁₀₀ ₉₄ 2.9/.5+.5 13 102 98 75 99 90 _3.7/.6+.6 20 88 98 67 98 86

•

· -

· ·-

-

---I w N I

(39)

Sugar Crop Herbicide Trials, 1976 (CO, MT, NB, WY)

Preplant screening. Nortron, Antor (H-22234), HOE-23408 and

SD-29026, among ochers, ~ere selectively effective. Nortron was the most

effective broad-spectrum preplant herbicide with the greatest residual

on late germinating weeds. HOE-23408 had excellent grass control,

while Antor revealed excellent control of grassy weeds and redroot

pigweed. S~29026 demonstrated good control of kochia, grassy weeds,

and good delayed redroot pigweed control. Nortron had the most effective

and consistent kochia control when applied at dosages of 2 lb/A or above.

Nortron formulations revealed little control difference, although

the flowable formulation tended to affect beets more. DRW-1139

(metamitron) was relatively ineffective applied preemergence but somewhat

more effective applied preplant.

Results obtained on the chemicals mentioned above were similar

to those recorded in previous years. Nortron, Anter and HOE-23408 are

su;i.table for commercial use on sugarbeets in Great Western territory.

More experimentation is required on S~29026 and DRW-1139; and on new

candidates including BAS-11916-H, CGA-24705 and H-26905.

Preplant mixture screening. Nortron + HOE-23408, Nortron + Anter,

Nortron

+

Ro-Neet, Nortron

+

SD-29026, Nortron + Herbicide 283, Nortron +

Avadex BW, Antor + DRW-1139, Nortron + Pyramin, Nortron_+ R-37878 and

Nortron + Ro-Neet + HOE-23408 were effective broad-spectrum weed killers.

Mixtures were crop selective without connnercial limiting damage

when applied at dosages applicable to soil textural conditions. Somewhat

more inJury was shewn on Nortron

+

Antor than previously. Nortron mixtures

had especially good late weed control extending to September.

· Postemergence annlications. Grassy weed control was excellent from

ROE-23408 and SL-501 showed promise. Nortron EC had more postemergence

effectiveness than that obtained with Nortron F. DRW-1139 was ineffective.

Postemergence ~ixtures. Betanex and Betanal herbicides in mixture

with

Nortron and iiOE-23408 were very effective witho~t undue crop inJury.

Three-way mixtures Betanex + Herb. 273 + HOE-23408, Pyramin

+

Betanex +

HOE-2340? and Nortron T Betanex + HOE-23408 were effective also; sometimes

with

less crop injury for equivalent weed control.

Sequence aoplications. Outstanding weed control and crop selectivity

responses occurred from several preplant/postemergence complementary

· treatments. Nortron/Betanal + Betanex and Nortron + HOE-23408/Nortron

+

Betanex were essentially complete with excellent late weed control. Ro-Neet

or

Antor/Betanal

+

Betanex were excellent also. DRW-1139 sequences were

less effective.

(40)

-34-Betanal and Betanex postemergence sequences were selectively effective but late weed control was inferior when compared to preplant/

· postemergence sequences$

Special herbicide trials. Certain adjuvants when applied -with specific preplant and postemergence herbicides tended to improve efficacy.

Chemical potentiators acted as antidotes especially HOE-23408, H-26905, Herb. 283, EDTA and GA. Crop responses were related to reducing formative effects or increasing vigor or seedling stand.

Chemical cultivation was exceptionally promising from Roundup alone and in oixture with Nortron. Stale seedbed use was suggested from the mixture.

Varieties (tbno Hy Al and Mono Hy D2) tolerated chemicals well yet Mono Hy Al was somewhat less tolerant. Mono Hy D2 had more Nortron leaf deformity.

Residue samples were obtained from several advanced performance

trials. In particular, samples we~e taken to facilitate labeling Betanal

(Betanex) sequence applications; Ro-Neet

+

Avadex BW, Nortron

+

Antor and Nortron

+

HOE-23408 applied preplant; Betanal

+

Betanex