%0 Article
%T Weed control trials with fibre mulch, glyphosate and terbuthylazine in Scots pine plantations.
%A Siipilehto, Jouni
%A Lyly, Olavi
%D 1995
%J Silva Fennica
%V 29
%N 1
%R doi:10.14214/sf.a9196
%U https://silvafennica.fi/article/5545
%X <p>The following treatments were compared in three Scots pine (<em>Pinus sylvestris</em> L.) reforestation areas on a scarified moist mineral-soil site in southern Finland, planted with 1+1 bareroot stock in spring 1987: (a) no weed control treatment; (b) mulching with a fibre slurry produced by mixing wastepaper with water and applied 1 cm deep to an area of 60 cm in diameter around the seedling soon after planting; (c) glyphosate (at 2 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>) sprayed on a 1 m<sup>2</sup> spot around the seedling in early August 1987; (d) terbuthylazine (at 10 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>) applied as (c). Monitoring of the trials over a 4-year period between 1987–90 showed that none of the treatments reduced surface vegetation to an extent that would have benefited pine. The percentage cover development of the vegetation, dominated by <em>Agrostis capillaris, Calamagrostis arundinaceae, Deschampsia flexuosa, Festuca ovina, Epilobioum angustifolium</em> and <em>Pteridium aquillinum</em>, followed much the same pattern in all treatments, with (c) slightly favouring forbs. Survival of pine at the end of the study period was about 90%, with non-significant differences between treatments. Mulching and terbuthylazine treatment slightly reduced seedling height growth in the second year. Growth was better in glyphosate treatment than in terbuthylazine treatment in the lowest (&lt;30%) and the highest (&gt;60%) pre-treatment weed cover classes, and in the latter also better than in untreated control. Mulching gave variable results; at its best it provided also good control of weeds for several years, without, however, improving the initial development of pine in these trials.</p>