Agriculture, Pêche et Aquaculture
Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries
New Brunswick's Provincial Flower:  The  Violet  (Viola  cucullata) New Brunswick's Provincial Bird:  The  Chickadee  (Parus  atricapillus)
  Evaluation of Fall Application of Group Four Herbicides in Addition to Tank Mixes of 2,4–D Ester for Lambkill and Rhodora Control in Wild Blueberries

G.L. Graham, G. Chiasson and É. Thériault

Partner: Bleuets NB Blueberries

Abstract: Lambkill (Kalmia angustifolia) and rhodora (Rhododendron canadense) are potentially difficult weeds to control in wild blueberry fields. Dicamba has shown activity in previous research on both weeds, with increased control when tank–mixed with 2,4–D ester. The effect of 2,4–D ester, in combination with additional Group 4 herbicides, should be evaluated to determine if the herbicide effect can be increased on these difficult to control species. A trial was established in the fall after the blueberry harvest in a newly developed wild blueberry field in the Val Doucet region of New Brunswick. The trial design was a factorial experiment with the main factor represented by the presence or absence of 2,4–D ester and the sub–factor represented by the Group 4 tank mix partner. A high level of crop injury from 2,4–D ester alone was noted, with higher injury from every tank mix as compared to the Group 4 blank. No commercially significant yield reduction occurred. The inclusion of 2,4–D ester increased lambkill control for all products and rates tested. Applied alone, 2,4–D ester suppressed lambkill, with higher control ratings in the tank mix as compared to each herbicide applied singly. All 2,4–D ester plus dicamba, triclopyr or aminopyralid mixes showed lambkill control in the crop year, while a high rate of dicamba or triclopyr alone suppressed populations. The effect of 2,4–D ester on rhodora was not as pronounced. Within the crop year, only the high rate of dicamba, either with or without 2,4–D ester consistently reduced rhodora populations in a commercially acceptable manner. No difference in weed control or crop injury was noted between the dicamba formulations tested.

Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries
E-mail | Contacts | Disclaimer | Privacy Statement