Effectiveness of Herbicides for Weed Control and Their Phytotoxicity for Sugar Beet depending on Age of the Treated Plants and Consumption Rates of Chemicals

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

In field experiments at the VNIISS experimental field, various combinations of herbicides were tested against juvenile dicotyledonous weeds in the sugar beet crop in 2018-2020, including preparations: Betanal maksPro (BMP), Betanal Expert OF (BEOF), Betanal 22, Mitron, Caribou. The effectiveness of chemical weeding has been investigated depending on the age of weeds and the rate of consumption of drugs. It is shown that the highest efficiency of chemical weeding (98-100%) in combination with low phytotoxicity for sugar beet was provided when processing the lowest (of the recommended) consumption rates of drugs in the early phases of weed development: cotyledons-the 1st pair of true leaves. The delay in herbicide treatment increased the heterogeneity of weeds in the development phase and reduced the effectiveness of chemical weeding. Sugar beet, especially in the early stages of development, experienced stress after the introduction of herbicides for 6 to 14 days. The duration of stress depended on the dose of herbicide, environmental conditions, and the phase of sugar beet development. With excessive application of herbicides, sugar beet plants were subject to a longer depression. The formation of productive indicators of sugar beet depends on weather conditions, the effectiveness of a combination of herbicides on weeds and their toxicological load on crop plants. The use of maximally permissible and increased herbicide consumption rates for overgrown weeds at all stages of chemical weeding created prerequisites for reducing the productive indicators of sugar beet. In experiments where relatively “rigid” herbicide schemes were used, the calculated sugar harvest decreased by 0.64-1.01 t/ha.

About the authors

E. A. Dvoryankin

The A.L. Mazlumov All-Russian Research Institute of Sugar Beet and Sugar

Author for correspondence.
Email: dvoryankin149@gmail.com
Russian Federation, p. VNIISS 86, Ramonsky district, Voronezh region 396030

References

  1. Шпаар Д., Дрегер Д., Захарченко А. Сахарная свекла. Минск, 2004. 326 с.
  2. Иващенко А.А. Современные тенденции защиты посевов сахарной свеклы от сорняков // Защита и карантин раст. 2005. № 2. С. 26-30.
  3. Иващенко А.А. Особенности защиты посевов сахарной свеклы от сорняков в условиях температурного стресса // Защита и карантин раст. 2014. № 3. С. 25-26.
  4. Спиридонов Ю.Я., Ларина Г.Е., Шестаков В.Г. Методическое руководство по изучению гербицидов, применяемых в растениеводстве. М.: Печатный Город, 2009. 252 с.
  5. Баздырев Г.И. Защита сельскохозяйственных культур от сорных растений. М.: Колос, 2004. 328 с.
  6. Артохин К.С. Сорные растения. М.: Печатный город, 2010. 272 с.
  7. Дворянкин Е.А. Особенности проявления фитотоксичности гербицидов группы бетанала на сахарной свекле // Сахар. свекла. 2011. № 9. С. 25-29.
  8. Одум Ю. Основы экологии. М.: Мир, 1975. 740 с.
  9. Паденов К.П., Довбан В.К. Сорные растения, их вредоносность, методы учета и меры борьбы. Минск, 1979. 55 с.
  10. Доспехов Б.А. Методика полевого опыта. М.: Колос, 1979. 416 с.
  11. Дворянкин Е.А., Дворянкин А.Е. Полевая оценка фитотоксичности гербицидов в свекловичных посевах // Сахар. свекла. 2015. № 10. С. 38-41.
  12. Гродзинский А.М., Гродзинский Д.М. Краткий справочник по физиологии растений. Киев: Наукова думка, 1973. 592 с.

Copyright (c) 2023 The Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies