EVALUATION OF MH FREE CHEMICALS FOR SUCKER

CONTROL

Gary Palmer, Bob Pearce & Andy Bailey

University of Kentucky

MH Free Tobacco - 2005

Trials were conducted in Jessamine County to study the mechanical application of sucker control chemicals that do not contain Maleic Hydrazide. Control has been well documented with methods that run Butralin, Flupro or Prime+ down the stalk. However, such methods are slower and labor intensive and not likely to be adopted by larger growers.

Spraying with Coarse Nozzles

Location Day Chemical Boom Nozzle Drought Sucker Control Comments

Home 16 Prime + Straight TG-3 LowFair-Poor

Two - Three 4-7" suckers in 1/2 of plants in top

Dodd 16 Butralin Straight TG-3 Moderate Good Occasional 4-7" sucker

Dodd 16 Prime + Straight TG-3 Moderate Good Occasional 4-7" sucker

Dodd 16 Butralin3

nozzleTG-3&TG-5

Low-Moderate Excellent Few suckers

Dodd 16 Prime + Straight TG-3 Moderate Good Occasional 4-7" sucker

MH Free Tobacco Trial

Location Day Chemical Boom Nozzle Drought Sucker Control Comments

Creek* 9 Prime + Straight TG-5

Moderate-

High GoodOccasional 4-7"

sucker

By-Pass 15

FA+ Flupro Straight TG-5 0-Low Poor

Two 5-9" in tops of most plants

By-Pass 15 Prime + Straight TG-5 0-Low Poor

Three or more suckers in tops of most plants

Shop 14 Prime + Straight TG-5 0-Low Fair

Two - Three 5-9" suckers in 1/3 of plants in top

MH Free Tobacco Trial

Summary - 2005

• Although initial results were encouraging, none of the treatments provide acceptable control in the end.

MH Free Tobacco - 20061) Chemicals Trial

2) Topping Study

No 1st Rate 2nd 7 days Rate 3rd 14 days Rate

1 Butralin 1 gal Butralin* 1 gal

2 Royaltac-M 2 gal Butralin 1 gal    

3 Royaltac-M 2 gal Royal MH-30 1.5 gal

4 Royaltac-M 2 gal Royaltac-M 2 gal  

5 Royaltac-M 2 galRoyaltac-M + Butralin

2 gal 1 gal    

Treatment Initial 3 days

1 Normal Topping  

2 High Top (8-10 leaf) Retop to Normal

3 Not Topped Top to Normal

* Not applied due to weather

MH Free Tobacco - 2006

3) Nozzle StudyNo. Size PSI MPH

1 3-4-3 25 2

2 5-5-5 25 4

3 5-6-5 30 4

All treatments were applied with a CO2 backpack with an over-the –shoulder two row boom. Plots were 40 ft by 2 rows (40” rows) in a randomized complete block design with four replications.

Comparison of Sucker Control Treatments on Degree of Control Harrison Co. - Ricci Rowland Farm

27.5

60

95

30

42.5

24

0

20

40

60

80

100

%

Butralin RTM fbBut

RTM fbMH

RTM fbRTM

RTM fbRTM+B

LSD

RTM=Royal Tac M, But=Butralin, MH= Royal MH-30, fb=followed by at 7 days

Comparison of Sucker Control

Treatments on Yield of Burley Tobacco Harrison Co. - Ricci Rowland Farm

324 332 341 357 370

1097 1135 1166 1146 1046

716 688 837 747 870223 367 253 261 327

53

308

190

185

28526132512259725222361

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Yie

ld l

b/A

RTM=Royal Tac M, But=Butralin, MH= Royal MH-30, fb=followed by at 7 days

MH Free Topping Study Harrison Co. - Ricci Rowland Farm

391581 612

1189 778 808

493481 485

312354 363

186

246

86

98

291226821942384

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1 2 3 LSD

Yie

ld lb

/A TOTAL

TIPS

LEAF

LUGS

FLYINGS

TRT First Top Re-top

Sucker Control

Rating

1 Normal Topping None Fair 4.75

2 High Top (8-10" leaf) Re-top to Normal 3 days Moderate 4.5

3 Not Topped Top to Normal 3 days Poor 3.25

MH Free Nozzle Study Harrison Co. - Ricci Rowland Farm

357 316 323

12831141 1177

630745 692

397 340 477

121

255

147

136

387267025422667

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1 2 3 LSD

Yie

ld lb

/A TOTAL

TIPS

LEAF

LUGS

FLYINGS

TRT Nozzle type PSI Speed

Rating

(0-10 best)

1 TG-3 – TG-4 – TG-3 30 2 mph 5

2 TG-5 – TG-5 – TG-5 25 4 mph 3

3 TG-5 – TG-6 – TG-5 25 4 mph 3

Summary - 2006

• Although initial results were encouraging, none of the treatments provide acceptable control in the end except for the one containing MH.

Sucker Control Trials - 2007

• The Regional Sucker Control Trials are conducted under the auspices of the Regional Growth Regulator Committee of the Tobacco Worker’s Conference. Treatments proposed by the committee were treatments 1-7. Treatment 8 was added for this study only.

Regional Sucker Control Treatments*

  1st Treatment (Elongated Bud) 2nd Treatment (At topping – 10-25% bloom)

1 Untreated Check

2 Royal MH-30 (2 gal/a)

3 Royal MH-30 (1.5 gal/a)

4 Royal MH-30 (1.5 gal/a + Flupro 0.5 gal/a)

5 Royal MH-30 (1.5 gal/a + Butralin 0.5 gal/a)

6 Off-shoot T (3%) Off-shoot T (4%) + Butralin (0.5 gal/a)

7 Butralin (1 gal/a)

8 Off-shoot T (3%) Off-shoot T (4%) +Butralin (1 gal/a)

* 60 gal/a at 2.4 mph and 30 psi using a West Texas Lee high clearance sprayerTreatments were scheduled for 5 days apart but were applied 7 days apart due to weather.

Treatment 8 was added to the RSC treatments.

Comparison of Sucker Control Treatments at Two Weeks after Application

UK Spindletop Farm

0

45

96.25 10091.25

60

77.5

32

81.25

0

20

40

60

80

100

%

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal) O=Off-Shoot-T in (%), UTC=untreated check, fb=followed by at 7 days. *=Sprayer malfunctioned

The Effects of Sucker Treatment on Sucker Number per Plant

UK Spindletop Farm

6.875

3.425

0.4 0.35 0.3

2.1

0.675

1.94

0.675

0

2

4

6

8

10Suckers/Plant

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal) O=Off-Shoot-T in (%),

UTC=untreated check fb=followed by at 7 days. *=Sprayer malfunctioned

The Effects of Sucker Treatment on Sucker Weight

UK Spindletop Farm

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

(g)

Wt/plt 522.5 216.62 9.38 3.87 6.38 92.13 182.38 77.38 164.86

Wt/Sucker 76.68 38.25 18.13 20.4 14.85 162 84.38 101.83 53.46

UTC MH2* MH1.5MH1.5

F.5MH1.5

B.5O3fbO4

B.5B1

O3fbO4 B1

LSD

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal) O=Off-Shoot-T in (%),

UTC=untreated check, fb=followed by at 7 days. *=Sprayer malfunctioned

The Effects of Sucker Treatment on Yield

UK Spindletop Farm

Summary

• A sprayer malfunction produced results that were not characteristic of the past performance of MH at 2 gal/a.

• Treatments 3 (MH at 1.5 gal/a), 4 (MH at 1.5 gal/a + Flupro at 0.5 gal/a), & 5 (MH at 1.5 gal/a + Butralin at 0.5 gal/a) were all excellent treatments.

• Both the Off-shoot T followed by Off-shoot T + Butralin at 0.5 gal/a & Off-shoot T followed by Off-shoot T + Butralin at 1 gal/a were acceptable, but not as clean as MH containing treatments 3-5.

• Butralin at 1 gal/a by itself was as good as when Off-shoot T was added.

MH Free Trials - 2007

• All Treatments were made with a West Texas Lee high clearance sprayer using a three nozzle arrangement in a TG-3 – TG-5 – TG-3 configuration and an application volume of 60 gal/a. Applicator speed was 2.4 mph at 30 psi. Plots were 30 ft by 2 rows (42” rows) in a randomized

complete block design with four replications.

MH Free Trails Treatments

1st Treatment (Elongated Bud)

2nd Treatment At topping ( 10-25% bloom)

3rd Treatment5 days post top

1 Off-Shoot T 3% Off-Shoot T 4% Butralin 1

2 Off-Shoot T 4% Off-Shoot T 4% Butralin 1

3 Off-Shoot T 4% Butralin 1

4 Off-Shoot T 4% Off-Shoot T 4%+Butralin 1

5 Off-Shoot T 4% Off-Shoot T 4%+Butralin 1 Butralin 1

6 Off-Shoot T 4% Flupro 1 Butralin 1

7 Off-Shoot T 4% Butralin 1 Butralin 1

8 Off-Shoot T 4% Royal MH 1.5

9 Off-Shoot T 4% Butralin 0.5+Royal MH1.5

10 Untreated Check

* 60 gal/a at 2.4 mph and 30 psi using a West Texas Lee high clearance sprayerTreatments were applied 5 days apart

MH Free TrialsComparison of Sucker Control Treatments

UK Coldstream Farm

89.596.5

9095.75 99.75 93.5 100 100

05.83

97.75

0

20

40

60

80

100

%

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal) O=Off-Shoot-T in (%),

UTC=untreated check (-) followed by at 5 days.

MH Free TrialsThe Effects of Sucker Treatment

on Sucker Number per Plant UK Coldstream Farm

1.630.54 0.96 0.75

0.08 0.38 0.00 0.00

5.63

1.99

0.210.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00Suckers/Plant

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal)

UTC=untreated check O=Off-Shoot-T in (%), (-) followed by at 5 days

MH Free TrialsThe Effects of Sucker Treatment

on Sucker Weight UK Coldstream Farm

0

100

200

300

(g)

Wt/plt 97.3 17.5 47.5 48.8 1.9 13.8 13.3 0.0 0.0 300.0 69.9

Wt/Sucker 63.8 37.5 43.9 36.2 5.6 61.7 34.4 0.0 0.0 63.6 49.2

O3-O4-B1

O4-O4-B1

O4-B1O4-

O4+B1

O4-O4+B1-

B1

O4-F1-B1

O4-B1-B1

O4-MH1.5

O4-B1+MH

1.5UTC

LSD 0.05

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal) O=Off-Shoot-T in (%),

UTC=untreated check, (-) followed by at 5 days.

MH Free Trials: The Effects of Sucker Treatment on Sucker Weight

UK Coldstream Farm

(MH= Royal MH-30, F=Flupro, B=Butralin,) in (gal) O=Off-Shoot-T in (%),

UTC=untreated check, (-) followed by at 5 days.

Summary

• Treatments with MH produced 100% control• Results from Off-shoot T at 4% followed by a tank mix of

Off-shoot T + Butralin at 1 gal/a followed by Butralin at 1 gal/a were close to those containing MH.

• Results from the above treatment were not statistically better than

– Off-shoot T at 4% fb Off-shoot T 4% fb Butralin 1– Off-shoot T at 4% fb Off-shoot T 4% + Butralin 1– Off-shoot T at 4% fb Flupro 1 fb Butralin 1– Off-shoot T at 4% fb Butralin 1 fb Butralin 1

• A 3% concentration of Off-shoot T applied before topping did not perform as well as a 4% concentration.

MH-Free Nozzle Study - 2007

• Application technique changed a MH-Free sucker control program from unsuccessful to successful. Nozzle size was studied as part of the overall application technique trial. While a rundown method is known to work successfully, mechanical application has proven difficult to achieve acceptable results. All treatments were applied with a CO2 backpack with an over-the –shoulder two row boom with a TG-(3-5-3) arrangement. Plots were 40 ft by 2 rows (42” rows) in a randomized complete block design with four replications.

• Treatments consisted of 4% Off-shoot T at elongated bud followed by a combination of Off-shoot T at 4 % plus Butralin at 1 gal /a.

MH-Free Nozzle Study Treatments

  Nozzles Arrangement PSI MPH Gal

1 TG-3 - TG-5 - TG-3 30 2 60

2 TG-3 - TG-5 - TG-3 30 3 50

3 TG-5 - TG-5 - TG-5 30 3 60

4 TG-5 - TG-6 - TG-5 30 3 60

All treatments were applied with a CO2 backpack with an over-the –shoulder two row boom. Plots were 40 ft by 2 rows (42” rows) in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Treatments consisted of 4% Off-shoot T at elongated bud followed by a combination of Off-shoot T at 4 % plus Butralin at 1 gal /a.

Effects of Nozzle Size on Sucker Control

All Nozzles were TG full cone nozzles

Effects of Nozzle Size on Sucker per Plant

0.225 0.2 0.1750.125 0.147

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

3-5-3 (60) 3-5-3 (50) 5-5-5 (60) 5-6-5 (60) LSD 0.05

Nozzles (Gal/a)

Suckers per Plant

All Nozzles were TG full cone nozzles

Summary

• Yields are not yet available• Percent control and suckers per plant were not

significantly different

Acknowledgement• Financial Support

– Chemtura Corporation

• Establishment, Plot Maintenance, Data Collection– Dr. Bob Pearce & Edwin Ritchie

• Treatments– Interns: Austin Perkins & Keith Johnson

• Equipment– Dr. Kenny Seebold