Synthetic herbicides are commonly used in weed management, however, 70 years of use has led to weed resistance and environmental concerns. These problems have led scientists to consider alternative methods of weed management in order to reduce the inputs and impacts of synthetic herbicides. The aim of this experiment was to test the level of weed control using four weeding methods: glyphosate applied at an ultra-low volume, the organic herbicide nonanoic acid, flaming, and hot foam. The results showed that weed control was eective only when flaming and hot foam were applied (99% and 100% weed control, respectively). Nonanoic acid at a dose of 11 kg a.i. ha1 diluted in 400 L of water did not control developed plants of Cyperus esculentus (L.), Convolvulus arvensis (L.) and Poa annua (L.). Glyphosate at a dose of 1080 g a.i. ha1 (pure product) only controlled P. annua (L.), but had no eect on C. esculentus (L.) and C. arvensis (L.). After the aboveground tissues of weeds had died, regrowth began earlier after flaming compared to hot foam. There was no regrowth of P. annua (L.) only after using hot foam and glyphosate. Hot foam was generally better at damaging the meristems of the weeds. In one of the two experiment sites, significantly more time was needed after the hot foam to recover 10% and 50% of the ground compared to flaming. The time needed to recover 90% of the ground was on average 26–27 days for flaming and hot foam, which is the time that is assumed to be required before repeating the application. A total of 29 days after the treatments, weeds were smaller after flaming, glyphosate and hot foam compared to nonanoic acid and the control, where they had more time to grow.

Flaming, glyphosate, hot foam and nonanoic acid for weed control: a comparison.

Martelloni, L
;
Frasconi, C;Sportelli, M;Fontanelli, M;Raffaelli, M;Peruzzi, A
2020-01-01

Abstract

Synthetic herbicides are commonly used in weed management, however, 70 years of use has led to weed resistance and environmental concerns. These problems have led scientists to consider alternative methods of weed management in order to reduce the inputs and impacts of synthetic herbicides. The aim of this experiment was to test the level of weed control using four weeding methods: glyphosate applied at an ultra-low volume, the organic herbicide nonanoic acid, flaming, and hot foam. The results showed that weed control was eective only when flaming and hot foam were applied (99% and 100% weed control, respectively). Nonanoic acid at a dose of 11 kg a.i. ha1 diluted in 400 L of water did not control developed plants of Cyperus esculentus (L.), Convolvulus arvensis (L.) and Poa annua (L.). Glyphosate at a dose of 1080 g a.i. ha1 (pure product) only controlled P. annua (L.), but had no eect on C. esculentus (L.) and C. arvensis (L.). After the aboveground tissues of weeds had died, regrowth began earlier after flaming compared to hot foam. There was no regrowth of P. annua (L.) only after using hot foam and glyphosate. Hot foam was generally better at damaging the meristems of the weeds. In one of the two experiment sites, significantly more time was needed after the hot foam to recover 10% and 50% of the ground compared to flaming. The time needed to recover 90% of the ground was on average 26–27 days for flaming and hot foam, which is the time that is assumed to be required before repeating the application. A total of 29 days after the treatments, weeds were smaller after flaming, glyphosate and hot foam compared to nonanoic acid and the control, where they had more time to grow.
2020
Martelloni, L; Frasconi, C; Sportelli, M; Fontanelli, M; Raffaelli, M; Peruzzi, A
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
agronomy-10-00129-v2.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione finale editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 4.93 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
4.93 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/1035959
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 13
social impact