Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-11T08:23:51.747Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Handheld Flame Cultivators as a Management Option for Woody Weeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Katherine M. Ghantous*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, & Insect Science, 101 Fernald Hall, 270 Stockbridge Road, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003
Hilary A. Sandler
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts Cranberry Station, P.O. Box 569, East Wareham, MA 02538
Wesley R. Autio
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, & Insect Science, 101 Fernald Hall, 270 Stockbridge Road, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003
Peter Jeranyama
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts Cranberry Station, P.O. Box 569, East Wareham, MA 02538
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: kghantou@psis.umass.edu

Abstract

Dewberry is a weed found on cranberry bogs that spreads quickly, causes high yield loss, and has no effective management strategy. Finding options to manage damaging perennial weeds in a perennial crop system, such as cranberry, is key to long-term industry sustainability. This study presents preliminary data on the use of flame cultivation (FC) in cranberry weed management. Utilizing weeds transplanted from commercial cranberry farms to a prepared area at the UMass Cranberry Station, we evaluated three handheld propane-fueled FC instruments: infrared torch, open flame torch, and an infrared torch with a spike. A single, midsummer exposure (zero, low, medium, or high duration) with each FC was tested. The industry standard of using a single wipe application of an herbicide solution (111 g L−1 ae glyphosate, isopropylamine salt) was also included in the evaluation. Dewberry shoot, root, and total biomass decreased linearly as exposure increased; the effect of FC tool type was not significant. Data indicated that, regardless of the specific torch utilized, spot treatment with FC reduced dewberry biomass. The results of this exploratory study suggest that FC may offer an alternative technique for managing woody weeds and that further research is warranted.

Rubus sp. es una maleza que se encuentra en el cultivo de arándano y que se dispersa rápidamente, causa altas pérdida en rendimiento y no tiene una estrategia eficaz de manejo. Encontrar opciones para el manejo de malezas perenes dañinas en sistemas de cultivos perennes, tal como el arándano, es clave para la sostenibilidad de la industria a largo plazo. Este estudio presenta información preliminar sobre el uso de un quemador de llama (FC) en el manejo de malezas en este cultivo. Utilizando malezas trasplantadas de granjas comerciales de arándano hacia un área preparada en la estación de arándano en la Universidad de Massachussets, evaluamos tres instrumentos manuales de gas propano FC: antorcha infrarroja (IR), antorcha de llama abierta (OF) y antorcha infrarroja con una espuela (IRS). Se evaluó una sola exposición a la mitad del verano (duración cero, baja, media o alta) con cada FC. También se incluyó en la evaluación el tratamiento estándar de la industria haciendo una sola aplicación de herbicida con una solución de 111 g/L ea de glifosato, sal isopropylamine. La parte aérea, la raíz y el total de la biomasa de Rubus disminuyeron linealmente conforme la exposición se incrementó y el efecto del tipo de herramienta FC no fue significativo. Los datos indicaron que sin importar la antorcha específica utilizada, el tratamiento localizado con FC redujo la biomasa de Rubus. Los resultados de este estudio exploratorio sugieren que FC puede ofrecer una técnica alternativa para el manejo de malezas leñosas y que se justifica investigación adicional.

Type
Notes
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Alvarado-Rays, H. E., Darnell, R. L., and Williamson, J. G. 2007. Root to shoot relations in an annual raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) production system. HortScience 42:15591562.Google Scholar
Cape Cod Cranberry Growers' Association. 2008. Bog Renovation Program: Costs to Renovate. http://www.cranberries.org/email/cccga_bogside_jul2008.pdf. Accessed: September 25, 2008.Google Scholar
Daniell, J. W., Chappell, W. E., and Couch, H. B. 1969. Effect of sublethal and lethal temperatures on plant cells. Plant Physiol. 44:16841689.Google Scholar
Darrow, G. M., Franklin, H. J., and Malde, O. G., eds. 1924. Managing cranberry fields. Farmers' Bulletin 1401. Washington, DC U.S. Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
DeMoranville, C. J. 2010. Nutrition Management for Producing Bogs 2010. UMass Amherst Cranberry Station Extension. http://www.umass.edu/cranberry/downloads/chartbooks/2010/Nutrition%202010.pdf. Accessed: November 2, 2010.Google Scholar
Diver, S. 2002. Flame Weeding for Vegetable Crops. Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas. https://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/summaries/summary.php?pub=110. Accessed December 15, 2011.Google Scholar
Ellwanger, T.C.J., Bingham, S. W., and Chapell, W. E. 1973. Physiological effects of ultra-high temperatures in corn. Weed Sci. 21:296299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Else, M. J., Sandler, H. A., and Schluter, S. 1995. Weed mapping as a component of integrated pest management in cranberry production. HortTechnology 5:302305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghantous, K. M. and Sandler, H. A. 2010. Flame cultivation as an option in the fight against weeds. Fruit Growers News 48:1415.Google Scholar
Ghantous, K. M., Sandler, H. A., Jeranyama, P., and Autio, W. R. 2009. Response of cranberry vines to hand-held flame cultivators-initial year evaluation. (Abstract.) Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 63:2.Google Scholar
Ismail, A. A. and Yarborough, D. E. 1981. A comparison between flail mowing and burning for pruning of lowbush blueberries. HortScience 16:318319.Google Scholar
Jensen, K.I.N. and Hall, I. V. 1979. The biology of Canadian weeds. 36. Rubus hispidus L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 59:769776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kays, J. S. and Canham, C. D. 1991. Effects of time and frequency of cutting on hardwood root reserves and sprout growth. Forest Sci. 37:524539.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, T. T. 1992. Carbohydrate sources and sinks in woody plants. Bot. Rev. 58:107222.Google Scholar
Landhausser, S. M. and Lieffers, V. J. 2003. Seasonal changes in carbohydrate reserves in mature northern Populus temuloides clones. Trees 17:471476.Google Scholar
Loescher, W. H., McCamant, T., and Keller, J. D. 1990. Carbohydrate reserves, translocation, and storage in woody plant roots. HortScience 25:274281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richburg, J. A. 2005. Timing Treatments to the Phenology of Root Carbohydrate Reserves to Control Wood Invasive Plants. Ph.D. dissertation. Amherst, MA University of Massachusetts. 162 p. http://www.umass.edu/nebarrensfuels/publications/pdfs/Richburg%20dissertation%20Adobe.pdf.Google Scholar
Sandler, H. A. 2001. Dewberries and brambles fact sheet. East Wareham, MA UMass-Amherst Cranberry Station Extension.Google Scholar
Sandler, H. A. 2010a. Weed management. Pages 2141. In Sylvia, M. M. and Guerin, N., eds. Cranberry Chart Book-Management Guide for Massachusetts. East Wareham, MA UMass Amherst Cranberry Station.Google Scholar
Sandler, H. A. 2010b. Weed Priority Survey. UMass Cranberry Station Newsletter. http://www.umass.edu/cranberry/downloads/newsletters/mar10.pdf. Accessed: April 13, 2010.Google Scholar
Sandler, H. A. and Ghantous, K. 2011. Economics of using hand-held flame cultivators for weed management in cranberry. http://wssaabstracts.com/public/4/abstract-142.html. Accessed: March 9, 2011.Google Scholar
Vander Kloet, S. P. and Pither, J. 2000. Is fall burning preferable to spring burning for promoting growth characteristics favorable for mechanical harvesting in Vaccinium myrtilloides Michaux? HortScience 34:608619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1999. Fundamentals of weed science. 2nd edition. San Diego, CA Academic Press. 556 p.Google Scholar