• Topics: Horticultural Sciences  | Citrus Weed Management  |  Citrus REC - Lake Alfred  | Citrus Publications from the Hort. Sci. Dept. Collection  | Stephen H. Futch  |  Futch, Stephen Hubbard 

Weed Control in Florida Citrus¹

Introduction

Citrus is one of the most important agricultural crops in Florida, comprising 850,000 acres with an on-tree value of $1.15 billion for the 1998-99 crop year. Florida's citrus industry consists of oranges (78%), grapefruit (16%), and specialty varieties (6%). Control of weeds is a major economic cost, estimated at $172.8 million or 25% of annual production budget. Total production costs per acre is estimated at $850 which includes weed control cost of $205 per acre. An estimated 90% of the acreage receives some form of chemical weed control as well as mechanical control.

Florida's favorable climate allows for weed germination and year-round growth. Weeds compete with citrus trees for nutrients, light, water, space and harbor insects and rodents that attack citrus trees. Additionally, weeds increase cold damage during radiation freezes, increase the incidence of Phytophthora foot rot, impede harvesting of citrus crops, interfere with low volume irrigation systems, and intercept soil-applied chemicals. Thus, the objective of today's citrus weed management program is the suppression of the undesirable effects of weed populations to an acceptable level.

Weed Control

Chemical weed control minimizes hand labor, increases tree growth, reduces damage to tree trunks, and improves movement within the grove. When properly selected and applied for specific tree age, scion, and soil type, herbicides will not injure healthy citrus trees. Positive responses in tree trunks and canopy volume have been noted when weeds are controlled which promotes greater production.

Herbicides used in groves are divided into two groups: soil-applied preemergence (Table 1), and foliar-applied postemergence (Table 2). The postemergence herbicides can be further divided into systemic or contact. Commonly used preemergence herbicides for the control of grasses include: bromacil (Hyvar), norflurazon (Solicam), oryzalin (Surflan), and thiazopyr (Mandate). Preemergence herbicides for the control of broadleaf weeds include: diuron (Diuron, Karmex, Direx), oxyfluorfen (Goal), and simazine (Princep, Simazine). Soon to be released, azafenidin (Milestone) controls both broadleaf and grass weeds. Postemergence herbicides include non-selective paraquat (Gramoxone), glyphosate (Roundup), sulfosate (Touchdown), and selective grass control herbicides are fluazifop-P-butyl (Fusilade) and sethoxydim (Poast Plus). Control of specific weeds is dependent on herbicide selection (Table 3), application rate, and weed species. For the effective control of all weed species (broadleaf and grasses) combinations of products may be necessary to achieve successful control.

Weed control methods include preventative, chemical, chemical mowing, mechanical, biological, and hand labor. Hand labor is minimized due to its high cost and uncertain availability.

Materials

The average of three 120 days after treatment (DAT) visual ratings for twelve months were averaged to determine the annual weed control rating for selected herbicide combinations (Table 4). Rating percentages are for combinations of broadleaf, grasses, and sedges. The rating scale is 0 to 100, with 0% being complete ground cover and 100% completely weed free. Herbicide application rates varied due to weed intensity at study sites. All applications were made with a tractor mounted sprayer applying 30 gpa at approximately 120-day intervals. Treatments were applied to 5 tree plots replicated 5 times in a randomized complete block design to a young grove on the ridge (Lake Garfield) and flatwoods (Indiantown).

Conclusions

Herbicide combinations which controlled both grasses and broadleaf increased percent weed control. Herbicide combinations that included bromacil or norflurazon generally provided higher levels of weed control. Weed intensities vary among the different locations within the state with higher weed pressure being in the south Florida flatwoods area. Herbicide rates must be adjusted to control the weeds present at a given site. Herbicide products and/or rates that work at one location may not provide effective control at other locations. A clear understanding of weed species present and knowledge of species that are controlled by a given herbicide are important.

Weed control of approximately 80% at the end of the rating period (every 120 days after treatment) should provide acceptable control under most conditions. Complete weed control (100%) is not necessary, may not be cost effective and could pose environmental risks. Seasonal differences in weed control will occur, with lower levels of weed pressure occurring during the winter months.

References

Florida Citrus Pest Management Guide, SP-43, University of Florida, Florida Cooperative Extension Service. 1990-2000.

Futch, S. H. 1997. Horticultural and Environmental Aspects of Weed Control in Florida Citrus. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Florida.

Tucker, D. P., R. L. Phillips, & T. W. Oswalt. 1969. Guide for Use of Herbicides in Florida Citrus. Agricultural Extension Service, University of Florida, Gainesville, Circular 303B.

Tucker, D. P., R. L. Phillips, & T. W. Oswalt. 1971 & 1976. Weed Control Guide for Florida Citrus. Florida Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, Gainesville, Circular 355.

Tables

The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Millie Ferrer-Chancy, Interim Dean.

• Copyright 2009 |
• Site Feedback |
• About This Site