IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cfcs92/259019.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Multispecies Herbicide Screening Test for the Phytotoxicity Evaluation of Four Herbicides on Seven Spices

Author

Listed:
  • Espaillat, J.R.
  • West, S.H.
  • French, E.C.
  • Colvin, D.L.

Abstract

A herbicide screening experiment determined the phytotoxicity (phyto) effect of norflurazon (NOR), simazine (SIM), bentazon (BEN), dicamba (DIC) and a nontreated control on sage (Salvia O/ficinalis L.), pot marjoram (Origanum onites), wild marjoram (Origanum vulgare subsp. vulgare), lavender (Lamndula angustifolia), winter savory (Satureja Montana), rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.), and sweet marjoram (Origanum mejorana). A stripsplit plot design with four reps was sprayed with each herbicide at three rates. Phyto rating was determined 21 days after application. Differences between herbicides, rates and spices was significant. Interactions between each paii of factors and between the three treatments were significant. NOR proved to be the least phytotoxic herbicide. NOR was safe at½ X in wild marjoram, lavender, winter savory, rosemary and sweet marjora!D and at 1 X in lavender and rosemary; BEN at 112 X in sage, pot marjoram, winter savory and rosemary, and at 1 X in rosemary; and DIC at½ X in sage, rosemary and sweet marjoram showed potential. SIM killed the exposed plants at all rates.

Suggested Citation

  • Espaillat, J.R. & West, S.H. & French, E.C. & Colvin, D.L., 1992. "A Multispecies Herbicide Screening Test for the Phytotoxicity Evaluation of Four Herbicides on Seven Spices," 28th Annual Meeting, August 9-15, 1992, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic 259019, Caribbean Food Crops Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cfcs92:259019
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.259019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/259019/files/28-203.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.259019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cfcs92:259019. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://cfcs.eea.uprm.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.