Growing Birch in Clear-cut Areas with Herbicide Application. P. 58–74

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 1.7MB )

UDС

630:632.51:632.954

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2023-5-58-74

Abstract

Birch, being one of the main forest-forming tree species, has valuable and soughtafter timber. In production forest conditions, natural regeneration and crops of this species experience strong competition from both grass cover and undesirable hardwoods (aspen, gray alder and willow). Without carrying out high-quality maintenance (agrotechnical care, clearing), the formation of economically valuable birch forests is impossible. The most effective and economical is the chemical care method, which involves the use of modern environmentally friendly herbicides. However, if technological regulations and practical recommendations for the use of herbicides have already been developed for the care of coniferous species (pine, spruce and others), then there are currently no such recommendations for birch. The aim of the research is to develop a scientifically based method of caring for natural young birch stands (clearing, agrotechnical care) using selective herbicides on forest fund lands. The objects of research are seed and vegetative regeneration of birch in young stands formed in clear-cut areas, as well as undesirable herbaceous and tree-shrub vegetation. When laying the experiments and evaluating their results, we were guided by the generally accepted methodology for testing herbicides in agriculture. In field production and small-scale experiments with herbicides magnum, magnum super, mortira and anchor-85 in young stands with birch trees, the biological effectiveness of the action of the preparations on a wide range of undesirable vegetation was determined, as well as their selectivity with respect to birch. High efficiency of herbicides magnum (100–300 g/ha) and magnum super (100–200 g/ha) on dicotyledonous species of herbaceous vegetation and deciduous species – willow, aspen, gray alder and mountain-ash, as well as high resistance of birch to them at continuous spraying during the growing season was established. Herbicides mortira (100–200 g/ha) and anchor-85 (100 g/ha) were recognized as unsuitable for birch care. It was found that after a single application of herbicide magnum at rates of 100 and 200 g/ha in mixed young stands dominated by aspen, willow and gray alder and with participation of birch 1–2 composition units, stands dominated by the latter are formed.

Authors

Alexander B. Egorov, Doctor of Agriculture; ResearcherID: G-4300-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2624-214X
Lidiya N. Pavluchenkova, Candidate of Agriculture; ResearcherID: G-4285-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8884-2496
Anton M. Postnikov*, Candidate of Agriculture; ResearcherID: G-4313-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8942-8155
Alexander A. Bubnov, Candidate of Agriculture; ResearcherID: E-1666-2015, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5716-3503

Affiliation

Saint-Petersburg Forestry Research Institute, Institutsky prospect, 21, Saint-Petersburg, 194021, Russian Federation; herb.egorov@yandex.ru, lipav.172@gmail.com, cucule88@gmail.com*, a.bubnov@list.ru

Keywords

birch, young stands, clear cutting, mixed stand, weed vegetation, agrotechnical care, clearing, herbicides, effectiveness, selectivity

For citation

Egorov A.B., Postnikov A.M., Bubnov A.A., Pavluchenkova L.N., Partolina A.N. Growing Birch in Clear-cut Areas with Herbicide Application. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2023, no. 5, pp. 58–74. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2023-5-58-74

References

1. Bubnov A.A., Egorov A.B., Pavlyuchenkova L.N., Postnikov A.M. Ecological Assessment of Herbicides Used in Forestry Cultivation. Proceedings of SPBFRI. Saint-Petersburg, 2022, no. 4, pp. 58–75 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21178/2079-6080.2022.4.58

2. Egorov A.B. Reproduction of Economically Valuable Forests Using Chemical Method: History, Current State, and Development Prospects. Proceedings of SPBFRI. Saint-Petersburg, 2000, iss. 2(3), pp. 18–33. (In Russ.).

3. Egorov A.B., Belkov V.P. Chemical Method of Forest Phytocenoses Regulation. Taiga Forests on the Threshold of the XXI Century. Proceedings of SPBFRI. (Dedicated to the 70th anniversary of SPBFRI). Saint-Petersburg, 1999, pp. 157–163. (In Russ.).

4. Egorov A.B., Bubnov A.A., Ryabinkov A.P. The Use of Herbicides in the Cultivation of Conifers and Birches in Forest Nurseries: Practical Recommendations. Saint-Petersburg, SPBFRI Publ., 2005. 49 p. (In Russ.).

5. Egorov A.B., Zhigunov A.V. Reforestation Using Chemical Method: Training Manual. Saint-Petersburg, SPBSFTU, SPBFRI Publ., 2009. 68 p. (In Russ.).

6. Egorov A.B., Omelyanenko A.Y., Postnikov M.V., Bubnov. A.A. The Use of Herbicides in Forest Care: Practical Recommendations. Saint-Petersburg, SPBFRI, 2005. 28 p. (In Russ.).

7. Egorov A.B., Pavlyuchenkov N.A., Pavlyuchenkova L.N. Formation of Young Spruce and Birch Stands in Clear-cut Areas After Preliminary Chemical Drying of Aspen. Lesovedenie = Forestry. 2012, no. 2, pp. 61–65. (In Russ.).

8. Guidelines for Registration Testing of Herbicides in Agriculture (Section - Testing of Herbicides on Non-agricultural Lands). All-Russian Institute of Plant Protection, Ministry of Agriculture of Russia. Saint-Petersburg, 2013, pp. 186–189. (In Russ.).

9. Kasparov V.A., Promonenkov V.K. Pesticide Use Abroad. Moscow, Agropromizdat Publ., 1990, 224 p. (In Russ.).

10. Leontiev V.N., Akhramovich T.I., Ignatovets O.S., Lazovskaya O.I. Natural Ways of Degradation of Herbicides of the Sulfonylurea Series. Proceedings of BSTU. Chemistry, Technology of Organic Substances and Biotechnology, 2013, no. 4. pp. 197–204. (In Russ.).

11. Makeeva-Guryanova L.T., Spiridonov J.Y., Shestakov V.G. Sulfonylureas - New Promising Herbicides: Overview Information. Moscow, VNIITE And Agroprom Publ., 1989. 57 p. (In Russ.).

12. Makeeva-Guryanova L.T., Spiridonov J.Y., Shestakov V.G. The Use of Some Sulfonylureas in Agriculture and Their Behavior in Environmental Objects. Agrokhimiya = Agrochemistry, 1989, no. 1, pp. 127–136. (In Russ.).

13. Omelyanenko A.Y., Pavlyuchenkov N.A. Peculiarities of Subsequent Natural Regeneration of Spruce After Preliminary Chemical Drying of Aspen Before Clear-cutting of Forest Stands. Proceedings of SPBFRI. Saint-Petersburg, SPBFRI Publ., 2006, iss. 3(16), pp. 61–67. (In Russ.).

14. Postnikov M.V. Care of Birch Seed Regeneration in Northwest Russia Using Modern Herbicides of Selective Action: Cand. Agric. Sci. Diss. Abs. Saint-Petersburg, 2000, 21 p. (In Russ.).

15. List of Pesticides and Agrochemicals Permitted for Use on the Territory of the Russian Federation. Appendix to the journal «Plant Protection and Quarantine», 2022, no. 4. Moscow, Kolos Publ., 2022. 880 p. (In Russ.).

16. Anderson R.L. Environmental Effects of Metsulfuron and Chlorsulfuron Bioactivity in Soil. Journal of Environmental Quality, 1985, vol. 14, iss. 4, pp. 517–521. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1985.00472425001400040011x

17. Grey T.L., McCullough P.E. Sulfonylurea Herbicides' Fate in Soil: Dissipation, Mobility, and Other Processes. Weed Technology, 2012, vol. 26, iss. 3, pp. 579–581. https://doi.org/10.1614/WT-D-11-00168.1

18. Nix S. Herbicides Used to Control Woody Stem Plants. ThoughtCo, 2019. Available at: https://www.thoughtco.com/herbicides-to-control-woody-stem-plants-1342625 (accessed 11.08.21).

19. Nosnikov V.V., Mayseenok A.P. Herbicides Application at Cultivation of the Planting Stock of Deciduous Species in Forest Nurseries. Proceedings of BSTU. Forestry, 2014, no. 1, pp. 99–103.

20. Sarmah A.K., Kookana R.S., Alston A.M. Fate and Behavior of Triasulfuron, Metsulfuron-methyl, and Chlorsulfuron in the Australian Soil Environment: a Review. Australian Journal of Agriculture Research, 1998, vol. 49, iss. 5, pp. 775–790. https://doi.org/10.1071/A97131