You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) Response to Simulated Herbicide Spray Drift
Kassim Al-Khatib, Robert Parker and E. Patrick Fuerst
Vol. 6, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1992), pp. 956-960
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3988318
Page Count: 5
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Herbicides, Alfalfa, Symptomatology, Amines, Simulations, Plants, Plant growth, Weed control, Physical trauma, Regrowth
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
'Vernal' alfalfa response was evaluated when chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and selected combinations of those herbicides were applied at rates simulating spray drift during the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage following the first cutting in 1990 and 1991. The order of phytotoxicity was 2,4-D > chlorsulfuron > thifensulfuron > glyphosate > bromoxynil. By the end of each growing season, alfalfa had recovered from injury caused by all herbicides except the highest rates of 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate. The alfalfa stand was reduced only by 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate. All herbicides caused characteristic symptoms, but some specific symptoms were similar among different herbicides or resembled symptoms caused by disease, mineral imbalance, and adverse weather conditions.
Weed Technology © 1992 Weed Science Society of America