Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
The NFU backs gene editing. Do you ?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Exfarmer" data-source="post: 6997771" data-attributes="member: 1951"><p>It is incorrect to say that it is not down to low rates of the spray causing the issue.</p><p>There was no plant totally immune to Glyphosate delivered into the plant.</p><p>However odd species can tolerate very high levels, this is excluding plants with very waxy leaves such as Ivy which require the product applied with a carrier to break through the wax.</p><p>one conventional species grown occasionaly as a crop is Evening promrose shows very high tolerance of glyphosate as do several weed species.</p><p>overcoming this tolerance means spraying the plant at the correct concentration at the correct growth stage.</p><p>Reducing concentrations will probably knock out 95% of these weeds to a level where they pose absolutely no threat to the crop, particularly as they will be very likely to be stunted by the spray.</p><p>There is also the fact that the crop can only stand a certain concentration of glyphosate even when it is GM .</p><p>However the problem come after a few generations of these weeds hybridise them selves. In a monoculture situation they will have no competition except the crop and will rapidly naturally develop a greater resistance to Roundup.</p><p>it was noticed in early Sugar beet trials here that several weeds posed a threat if glyphosate was used at reduced rates .</p><p>some of these trials were deliberately done to see how Low levels could go with out reducing yield Frim competition. The results were quite interesting and I think from memory 2 x .3 l/ hectare gave good weed control in the beet. Those weeds who survived were of no economic importance.</p><p>When some beet trials were trashed by FOE / greenpeace/ anti GMO activist vandals, they actually destroyed the wrong plots as they assumed the weedy plots were the traditional Non GMO beet .</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Exfarmer, post: 6997771, member: 1951"] It is incorrect to say that it is not down to low rates of the spray causing the issue. There was no plant totally immune to Glyphosate delivered into the plant. However odd species can tolerate very high levels, this is excluding plants with very waxy leaves such as Ivy which require the product applied with a carrier to break through the wax. one conventional species grown occasionaly as a crop is Evening promrose shows very high tolerance of glyphosate as do several weed species. overcoming this tolerance means spraying the plant at the correct concentration at the correct growth stage. Reducing concentrations will probably knock out 95% of these weeds to a level where they pose absolutely no threat to the crop, particularly as they will be very likely to be stunted by the spray. There is also the fact that the crop can only stand a certain concentration of glyphosate even when it is GM . However the problem come after a few generations of these weeds hybridise them selves. In a monoculture situation they will have no competition except the crop and will rapidly naturally develop a greater resistance to Roundup. it was noticed in early Sugar beet trials here that several weeds posed a threat if glyphosate was used at reduced rates . some of these trials were deliberately done to see how Low levels could go with out reducing yield Frim competition. The results were quite interesting and I think from memory 2 x .3 l/ hectare gave good weed control in the beet. Those weeds who survived were of no economic importance. When some beet trials were trashed by FOE / greenpeace/ anti GMO activist vandals, they actually destroyed the wrong plots as they assumed the weedy plots were the traditional Non GMO beet . [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
The NFU backs gene editing. Do you ?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top