Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nswdpe.intersearch.com.au/nswdpejspui/handle/1/20184
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCook, Tony-
dc.contributor.authorDavidson, Bill-
dc.contributor.authorMiller, Bec-
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-23T04:16:06Z-
dc.date.available2024-10-23T04:16:06Z-
dc.date.issued2015-
dc.identifier.issn2208-8199-
dc.identifier.urihttps://nswdpe.intersearch.com.au/nswdpejspui/handle/1/20184-
dc.description.abstractKey findings • Glyphosate resistant sowthistle was completely controlled by both night tank mixes and standard double knocking of selected systemic herbicides and paraquat at the early flowering growth stage. • There is no benefit of applying paraquat after sunset (night spraying) for better brownout of sowthistle. This is contrary to research findings for weeds such as awnless barnyard grass. • Some incompatibility issues arose with paraquat and 2,4‑D amine products. This phenomenon was seen in another experiment on fleabane. • A tank mix of paraquat and Balance® appears to have good potential due to its excellent early brownout of sowthistle which was faster than the other treatments examined in this study.en
dc.publisherDepartment of Primary Industriesen
dc.subject2014, biomass, control, controlled environment, double-knock, glyphosate, herbicide, night tank mixes, paraquat, resistance, sowthistle, Tamworthen
dc.titleComparing effects of night spraying tank mixes and double knocking on glyphosate resistant common sowthistle using boom spray rates – pot experiment 2014en
dc.title.alternativeNorthern NSW research results 2015en
dc.typeBook chapteren
Appears in Collections:DPI Agriculture - Southern and Northern Research Results [2011-present]

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat  
NRR15-17-Cook Davidson sowthistle doubleknock-+.pdf272.37 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing