RESEARCH

Weed control
in ornamental grasses
Ornamental grasses can tolerate some common herbicides.

John Tallarico, M.S., and Tom Voigt, Ph.D.

Ornamental grasses are considered low-

maintenance because they usually require lit-
tle more than an annual pruning and
occasional- the frequency depends on the
grass - division to prevent overgrowth or
encourage new growth (4). As use of orna-
mental grasses continues to rise, proper man-
agement practices need to be explored so that
the plants will always look their best. Perhaps
the greatest challenge in maintaining orna-
mental grasses is effective weed control.

Traditional weed control

A number of traditional methods exist for
controlling weeds in ornamental plantings.
One is to start with a clean planting bed by
allowing the bed to go fallow and then rotary
tilling it several times. Treating the planting
bed with a nonselective systemic herbicide
such as glyphosate can help control undesir-
able plant growth before planting.
After planting, covering the bed with a 2-
to 3-inch (5- to 7.6-centimeter) layer of a
fine-textured organic mulch such as shredded
bark or well-rotted compost inhibits weed
invasion and water evaporation from the soil
and moderates soil temperatures.
KEYI points
More Info: www.gcsaa.org
Figure 1. In all three studies, only the 1 x + 1 x application rate of Lontrel (c1opyralid) caused damage to maiden grass
(Miscanthus sinensis Gracillimus). Moudry fountain grass (Pennisetum alopecuroides Moudry) did not exhibit
damage from applications of Lontrel.
In some cases, breathable weed mats can
be placed on the soil beneath the mulch to
reduce weed encroachment. These mats,
however, can restrict the growth of rhizoma-
tous ornamental grasses.
Using proper spacing can create a living
mulch of ornamentals by covering the entire
planting bed, decreasing open area and light
and thereby limiting weed growth. Finally,
once weeds begin to invade a bed, mechan-
ical removal (hand pulling, hoeing or cut-
ting) and/or herbicides are control options.
Herbicides for weed control
Herbicides applied to ornamental grasses
must control weeds without damaging desir-
able plants. Unfortunately, only a few pertinent
studies about herbicide use in ornamental
grasses have been published (3,5,6,7), and only
a modest number of herbicides are labeled for
use on ornamental grasses (Table 1).
In 2000, we began experiments to evalu-
ate the damage caused to ornamental grasses
by several pre- and post-emergence herbicides.
Study 1
In the first study, we applied Lontrd
(clopyralid) to container-grown grasses.
Lontrd, a post-emergence herbicide, is used
to control many annual and perennial
broadleaf weeds (1). The 35 ornamental
grasses arrived as 2.2S-inch (S.7-centimeter)
square plugs in April and were potted in 1-
gallon O.7-liter) nursery pots containing a
mix of 75% high-porosity artificial potting
mix and 25% silty clay loam in May and June
2000 (Table 2). The pots were placed on an
outdoor gravel pad at the University of
Illinois Landscape Horticulture Research
Center in Urbana and watered as necessary as
a randomized complete-block experimental
design with four replications. The first exper-
iment began on June 12 and was repeated,
beginning on July 10.

February 20041 GeM 143

RESEARCH
Each plot had three treatments: an
untreated control, Lontrel applied at a rate of
1~ pints product! acre (1.5 liters/hectare) (1x
the label rate), and Lontrel applied at a rate
of 213 pints product/acre (3.1 liters/hectare)
(2x the label rate). The herbicide was
applied twice at 30-day intervals in each
experiment. Therefore, by the conclusion of
each experiment, each herbicide-treated grass
had received the equivalent of either two or
four times the label rate ofLontrel (Figure 1).
In each experiment, ornamental grass
damage was rated five times at two-week
intervals, using a subjective scale of 0-10,
where 0 = no herbicide damage and 10 = grass
death. A rating of 0-3 was considered commer-
cially acceptable.
144 GeM I February 2004
Study 2
In the 2001 study, Gallery (isoxaben) and
Snapshot TG (isoxaben + trifluralin) were
applied in two experiments to field-grown orna-
mental grasses to determine potential plant
injury. Gallery is a pre-emergence herbicide that
controls many annual broadleaf weeds. A pre-
emergent with the characteristics of Gallery,
Snapshot TG also controls annual grasses and
small-seeded broadleaf weeds because it con-
tains trifluralin as well as isoxaben (1).
Fifteen ornamental grasses (Table 3) were
field-planted May 18-22, 2001, using 2.25-
inch (S.7-centimeter) square plugs in silty clay
loam soil at the University oflliinois Landscape
Horticulture Research Center. The study plots
were unfertilized and received irrigation to
ensure grass survival and to incorporate herbi-
cide treatments into soil. A split-plot design was
used; there were four replications. Treatment
plots were hand-weeded weekly to prevent lim-
itation of grass growth by weeds.
Each plot contained five individual plants
of the same species. The five treatments were:
an untreated control; Gallery at 1.3 pounds
product/acre (1.4 kilograms/hectare); Gallery
at 2.6 pounds product/acre (2.9 kilo-
grams/hectare); SnapshotTG at 200 pounds
product!acre (224.1 kilograms/hectare); and
Snapshot TG at 400 pounds product/acre
(448.3 kilograms/hectare). These rates corre-
spond to 1x and 2x label rates of Gallery and
Snapshot (Figure 2).
Gallery was applied over the top of the
plants using a C02 backpack sprayer.
Snapshot TG, a granular product, was
applied over the top of the plants with a turf
drop spreader. The herbicides were applied on
June 8 and July 6 in experiment 1 and July 6
and Aug. 4 in experiment 2. Therefore, by the
conclusion of each experiment, each herbi-
cide-treated grass had received the equivalent
of either two or four times the label rates of
Gallery or Snapshot TG. An area 3 feet by 3
feet (0.9 meter by 0.9 meter) around each
plant was treated.
In both experiments, subjective visual rat-
ings were used to evaluate the tolerance of
newly transplanted grasses subsequent to her-
bicide applications of Gallery and Snapshot.
Herbicide-caused plant injury was visually eval-
uated five times at two-week intervals in each
experiment, using a scale of 0-10, where 0 = no
damage and 10 = plant death; a rating of 0-3
was considered commercially acceptable.
Extreme cases of reduced plant size and shoot
deformations, or combinations thereof, led to
ratings that were not commercially acceptable.
After the final plant evaluation, the
grasses were removed and shaken to remove
loose soil. The root systems were immediately
rated using the same visual rating scale.
Considerations affecting root ratings were
reductions in the overall size of the root sys-
tem (development of lateral and secondary
roots) and swelling of roots.
Study 3
In this 2001-2002 study, ornamental
grasses were treated with Ronstar G (oxadia-
lOn) or Preen (trifluralin). Both of these are
pre-emergence herbicides that control many
annual grasses and broadleaf weeds (1). On
May 23 and 24, 2001,. eight ornamental
 RESEARCH
grasses were field-planted using 2.25-inch
(5.7-centimeter) square plugs and treated
FOLIAR QUALITY
with Ronstar G (oxadiazon) and Preen (tri-
t
fluralin) (Table 4, Figure 3). The plants were Grass 2x rate*4x rate Control
watered as needed to ensure survival and
incorporate herbicides. Arrhenatherum elatius ssp. bulbosum Variegatum
Separate sets of grasseswere planted in 2001 (stripedtuber oat grass) 2.9 3.1 2.7
for each year of the study. The 200 1 evaluation Bouteloua curtipendula Trailway(trailway side-oats grama) 2.6 3.3 2.9
was conducted on newly planted grasses. The
B. gracilis (blue grama) 2.8 3.1 3.1
2002 results are from plants that had been
Briza media (commonquaking grass) 2.6 3.0 3.0
growing on the site for one season. The only
exception is purple fountain grass plants, Calamagrostis brachytricha (Koreanfeather reed grass) 3.3 3.2 3.2
which were replanted in 2002 because they are C.x acutiflora Karl Foerster(Karl Foersterfeather reed grass) 3.6 3.4 3.7
unable to survive the winter in central Illinois. Chasmanthium latifolium (northernsea oats) 3.6 3.5 3.7
The grasses were planted using a ran- Cortaderia selloana (pampasgrass) 2.0 2.0 2.0
domized complete block design with three
C..a selloana Rosea(roseapampas grass) 1.9 2.2 2.0
replications. The plants were spaced 4 feet
Deschampsia caespitosa (tufted hair grass) 2.9 3.1 3.2
(1.2 meters) apart within rows and 8 feet (2.4
meters) apart between rows. Each plot had Hystrix patula (bottle-brush grass) 5.5 5.3 5.2
three plants: an untreated control; a plant Imperata cylindrica RedBaron(Japaneseblood grass) 2.5 2.1 2.5
treated with Ronstar (150 pounds prod- Leymus arenarius (blue Iyme grass) 2.6 2.7 2.8
uct/acre [168.1 kilograms/hectare]); and a Miscanthus Purpurascens(autumn red flame grass) 2.7 2.6 2.6
plant treated with Preen (272 pounds prod-
M. sinensis Adagio (adagiomiscanthus) 2.8 2.9 2.8
uct/acre [304.8 kilograms/hectare]).
M. s. Gracillimus(maidengrass) 3.6 3.1 3.1
Both herbicides were applied on June 14,
2001, and June 24, 2002, by treating a 2- M. s. Sarabande(sarabandemiscanthus) 2.4 2.6 2.4
foot-by-2-foot (0.6-meter-by-0.6-meter) area M. s. Variegatus(variegatedmiscanthus) 3.2 4.0 3.7
around each plant in 2001, and a 3-foot-by- M. s. Zebrinus(zebragrass) 3.7 3.9 3.4
3-foot (0.9-meter-by-O.9-meter) area around Nasella tenuissima Ponytails(ponytailsMexicanfeather grass) 3.5 3.5 3.2
each plant in 2002 when plants were older
Panicum virgatum Trailblazer(trailblazerswitch grass) 3.7 3.2 3.2
and larger. Phytotoxicity was evaluated using
a scale of 0-1 0, where 0 = no damage and 10 Pennisetum alopecuroides (fountaingrass) 3.4 3.3 3.3
= plant death; a rating of 0-3 was deemed P. a. Caudatum(white flowering fountain grass) 2.9 2.5 2.6
commercially acceptable. P. a. Hameln(Hamelnfountain grass) 2.1 2.1 2.0
P.a. Moudry (Moudryfountain.grass) 3.1 3.2 3.1
Results P. setaceum Rubrum(purplefountain grass) 3.2 3.4 3.3
This work was conducted to evaluate
P. villosum (feathertop) 4.1 3.8 4.0
product-plant interactions, and the results of
these experiments are not intended as use rec- Phalaris arundinacea Feesey(strawberriesand cream ribbon grass) 3.7 3.4 3.6
ommendations. Be sure to read, understand P. a. Picta (gardener'sgarters) 3.0 2.8 2.8
and follow pesticide label instructions for the P. a. WoodsDwarf (dwarf's garters ribbon grass) 3.1 2.9 3.0
safest, most effective pest control. Rhynchelytrium nerviglume Pink Crystals(pink crystals ruby grass) 2.9 2.8 2.6
Saccharum ravennae (ravennagrass) 3.8 3.7 3.8
Study 1
Schizachyrium scoparium Blaze(blazelittle bluestem) 2.7 2.6 2.5
At each evaluation, the grass species
showed significant differences in foliage rat- Sesleria autumnalis (autumn.ffioor grass) 3.1 3.3 3.0
ings (data not shown), but the foliar condi- S. caerulea (blue moor grass) 2.3 2.3 2.2
tions could not be attributed to herbicide
applications. The differences among grass Note. Treatment means of five evaluations of four replications over two experiments (a total of 40 ratings) in
species were more likely due to the natural 2000 at the University of Illinois Landscape Horticulture Research Center in Urbana. Grasses were rated on a
scale of 0-10; 0 = no damage, 10 = death. Plants exhibiting a mean rating of 3 or less were deemed com-
differences among the 35 species, their mercially acceptable.
interaction with the environment or the qual- *Two applications of 1~ pints product/acre (1.5 liters/hectare) (1x+ the label rate); one application on June
ity of the original transplants. 12 and one on July 10.
tTwo applications of 2~ pints product/acre (3.1 liters/hectare) (2x the label rate); one application on July 11
The herbicides did not have significant
and one on Aug. 9.
effects on grasses at any evaluation (data not
shown). At one foliar evaluation in experi- Table 2. Foliar quality means following .application of Lontrel (clopyralid) to 35 container-grown grasses.
ment 1 Quly 10,2000), treated grasses had

GeM 145
February 2004
I
RESEARCH
significantly different ratings from untreated
(control) grasses. In this case, the mean rat-
ings for all herbicide treatments and
untreated controls, however, were less than 3,
the maximum commercially acceptable rat-
ing, so no herbicide treatments caused unac-
ceptable foliage damage.
When examining the data in Tables 2-4,
it is important to compare the treated
means with the control means, keeping in
mind that a rating of 3 or less reflects com-
mercially acceptable quality. In most
instances, the means were similar to the con-
trol (within 0.1) or were less than 3.
However, in several cases in study 1 (Table 2)
(striped tuber oat grass, Japanese blood grass,
maiden grass, zebra grass, ponytails Mexican
feather grass, trailblazer switch grass), the rat-
ing for the control was noticeably lower than
that for the herbicide-treated grasses.
Although it appears that neither herbicide
treatment in study 1 caused unacceptable
foliage damage to most of the ornamental
grasses, further work, particularly on the six
grasses in question, should be conducted.

Study 2
At each evaluation, grass species showed
significant differences in foliar ratings and root
ratings (data not shown). These differences
could, as in study 1, be attributed to the inter-
action of each species with the environment or
to the original quality of the transplants. Foliar
and root conditions should not be attributed
to herbicide applications because only one
foliar evaluation in each study (Aug. 3, 200 1)
showed significant effects of herbicides on
grasses, and this effect could be attributed to
excessivelyhot weather in the weeks before the
evaluation (data not shown). In both experi-
ments, the grasses did grow out of this, and
subsequent ratings improved.
In both experiments 1 and 2, quality rat-
ings for the four herbicide treatments were
not significantly different from one another,
but they were significantly higher than the
untreated controls (data not shown).
However, the mean ratings for all herbicide
treatments and the untreated controls were
less than 3, so none of the plants suffered
unacceptable levels of damage (Table 3).
Overall, applications of Gallery and
Snapshot herbicides at 2x and 4x label rates
did not cause unacceptable foliar or root dam-
age to the 15 grasses in this study, and we rec-
ommend that the ornamental grasses tested be
added to the Isoxaben and Snapshot herbicide

146 GeM I February 2004

 RESEARCH
labels at the 1x rates.

Study 3
In the two years of study 3, zebra grass
displayed unacceptable phytotoxicity in three
evaluations Guly 7, Aug. 6 and Aug. 21,
2002) (data not shown). Because herbicides
had no significant effects on zebra grass on
these dates, foliar quality could not be attrib-
uted to herbicide application.
In the two years of this study, treatment
significantly affected the quality of the grasses
at only one evaluation (Aug. 12,2001) (data
not shown). At this evaluation, however, the
quality resulting from the application of oxa-
diazon was not significantly different from the
control, nor was it significantly different from
the quality of the trifluralin-treated grasses.
Thus, there were no evaluations in which the
application of oxadiazon or trifluralin caused
concern. In fact, the two-year mean ratings
were all less than 3 (Table 4), and overall the Figure 2. Moudry fountain grass (Pennisetum alopecuroides Moudry) (foreground) did not exhibit damage from appli-
application of oxadiazon and trifluralin did cations of clopyralid, and Korean feather reed grass (Calamagrostis brachytricha) (background) was not damaged by
not result in commercially unacceptable phy- clopyralid, isoxaben or isoxaben + trifluralin.
totoxicity in the two years of study on the
eight field-grown ornamental grasses. 5. Derr, J.F. 2002. Tolerance of ornamental grasses to
preemergence herbicides. Journal of Environmental John Tallarico (tallaric@students.uiuc.edu) recently
Horticulture 20(3):161-165.
Conclusion 6. Hubbard, J., and 1Whitwell. 1991. Ornamental
completed an M.S. degree in horticulture at the
The results of these studies show that orna- grass tolerance to postemergence grass herbicides. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and will enter
mental grasses are, for the most part, a tough HortScience 26(12):1507-1509 the U.S. Army's officer candidate school in spring
7. Neal, J.C., and A.F. Senesac. 1991. preemergent 2004. Tom Voigt, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the
group of plants capable of tolerating a number
herbicide safety in container-grown ornamental department of natural resources and environmental
of different herbicides, even when the herbi- grasses. HortScience 26(2):157-158. sciences at the university.
cides are applied in excess of the label rate, as
,
they were in studies 1 and 2. Following these
and additional studies elsewhere, we anticipate FIELD HERBICIDE TRIALS
the addition of several grasses to the herbicide
Ratinns
labels. Additional tools should soon be avail-
Grass Oxadiazon Trifluralin Control ~
able for battling weeds in landscape plants.
Acknowledgments Calamagrostis x acutiflora Karl Foerster
The authors thank J. Meyer, B.E. Branham and lW. (Karl Foerster feather reed grass) 1.4 1.4 1.5
Fermanian of the University of Illinois and J.M. Breuninger
of Dow AgroSciences for their assistance. We also grate- M. sinensis Arabesque
fully acknowledge funding for this work from the state of (arabesque miscanthus) 1.2 1.1 1.5
Illinois through the Illinois Council on Foodand Agricultural
Research (C-FAR), Dow AgroSciences, Aventis Environ- M. s. Gracillimus (maiden grass) 0.7 0.5 0.7
mental Science and the Illinois Turfgrass Foundation. M. s. Variegatus (variegated miscanthus) 0.9 2.1 1.3
Literature cited M. s. Zebrinus (zebra grass) 2.5 2.8 2.2
1. Ahrens, W.H. (ed.). 1994. Herbicide handbook
7th ed. Weed Science Society of America, Pennesetum alopecuroides (fountain grass) 1.3 1.6 1.3
Champaign, III.
2. C&P Press. 2003. Turf and ornamental reference P. setaceum Rubrum (purple fountain grass) 0.5 1.1 1.3
for plant protection products, 12th ed. C&P Press, Sorghastrum nutans Indian Steel
New York.
3. Cole, J.l, and J.C. Cole. 1999. Tolerance of five (Indian steel Indian grass) 1.8 1.3 2.0
perennial ornamental grasses to five preemergent , ...

herbicides. SNA Research Conference 44.
www.sna.org/research/99proceedings/Section0832
.html. Verified Nov.17, 2003.
4. Darke, R. 1999. The color encyclopedia of orna-
mental grasses: Sedges, rushes, restios, cat-tails,
and selected bamboos. Timber Press, Portland, are.
Note. Treatment means of four evaluations of three replications over two experiments (a total of 24 ratings)
in 2001 and 2002 at the Universityof IllinoisLandscape Horticulture Research Center in Urbana. The grasses
were rated on a scale of 0-10; 0 = no damage, 10 = death. Plants exhibiting mean rating of 3 or less were
deemed commercially acceptable.
Table 4. Field-grown ornamental grasses in oxadiazon and trifluralin herbicide trial.

GCM 147
February 2004
I