4 100% in the untreated control, consistently across every site, strength (x1 and x1.33) and application timing (4, 5 and 6 weeks after felling). With no within-treatment variation to partition, the treatment effect is categorical and unambiguous, and inferential testing would add nothing to the interpretation of the result. Figure 4a. Piet Retief results: Percentage coppice regrowth observed across the different Eucalyptus spp. stumps observed at the month 1 to 12 assessment stages after facing specified herbicide treatments. treatment variation to partition, the treatment effect is categorical and 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor x1 Turbodor x1.33 Garlon 2% Diesel Week 4 Month 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel Week 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel Week 6 returned an absolute 0% coppice presence against nsistently across every site, strength (x1 and x1.33) weeks after felling). n to partition, the treatment effect is categorical and sting would add nothing to the interpretation of the Percentage coppice regrowth observed across the spp. stumps observed at the month 1 to 12 after facing specified herbicide treatments. arlon 2% Diesel Month 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel Week 5 ted ol Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel Week 6 odor 29MPA treatments returned an absolute 0% coppice presence against the untreated control, consistently across every site, strength (x1 and x1.33) lication timing (4, 5 and 6 weeks after felling). within-treatment variation to partition, the treatment effect is categorical and guous, and inferential testing would add nothing to the interpretation of the 4a. Piet Retief results: Percentage coppice regrowth observed across the different Eucalyptus spp. stumps observed at the month 1 to 12 assessment stages after facing specified herbicide treatments. treatment variation to partition, the treatment effect is categorical and eated trol Turbodor x1 Turbodor x1.33 Garlon 2% Diesel Week 4 Month 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel Week 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel Week 6 Figure 1: Percentage coppice regrowth from one to twelve months following application of the specified herbicide treatments at four, five and six weeks post-felling. The trial was conducted in an ex-E. nitens stand in cool temperate Piet Retief (Data from Ecoguard Biosciences Pty (Ltd)) Figure 3: Decomposing E. grandis x E. urophylla stumps at the 9 month assessment period. The stumps were treated with Turbodor 29MPA at four weeks after felling (Data from Ecoguard Biosciences Pty (Ltd)) Figure 2: Percentage coppice regrowth from one to twelve months following application of the specified herbicide treatments at four, five and six weeks post-felling. The trial was conducted in an ex-E. grandis x E. urophylla stand in subtropical Zululand (Data from Ecoguard Biosciences Pty (Ltd)) Figure 4b. Zululand results: Percentage coppice regrowth observed across the different Eucalyptus spp. stumps observed at the month 1 to 12 assessment stages after facing specified herbicide treatments. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 4 Weeks Month 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 5 Week 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 6 Weeks Figure 4b. Zululand results: Percentage coppice regrowth observed across the different Eucalyptus spp. stumps observed at the month 1 to 12 assessment stages after facing specified herbicide treatments. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 4 Weeks Month 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 5 Week 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 6 Weeks 5 Figure 4b. Zululand results: Percentage coppice regrowth observed across the different Eucalyptus spp. stumps observed at the month 1 to 12 assessment stages after facing specified herbicide treatments. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 4 Weeks Month 1 Month 3 Month 6 Month 9 Month 12 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 5 Week 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Untreated control Turbodor 6% Turbodor 8% Garlon 2% Diesel 6 Weeks Across all three trials, 0% coppice was recorded on all Turbodor-treated stumps at 12 months posttreatment (Figure 1 and 2). Compared to the other treatments (Garlon with diesel and no herbicide), Turbodor-treated stumps were observed to be decomposing at nine months, indicating that they were completely dead (Figure 3). These results are particularly relevant during establishment of the next crop. Canopy closure in forestry generally occurs within approximately 12 to 24 months after planting, reducing light penetration to the forest floor. These results are particularly relevant during establishment of the next crop. Canopy closure in forestry generally occurs within approximately 12 to 24 months after planting, reducing light penetration to the CONCLUSION forest floor. As light is important for coppice development, the absence of coppice over the 12-month assessment period suggests that Turbodor can provide effective control during the critical establishment period of the next crop. Importantly, the ability to apply Turbodor several weeks after felling provides greater flexibility in the timing of treatment and may reduce the safety risks associated with working around active harvesting operations. Turbodor appears to be a promising option for Eucalyptus stump management, particularly where the timing and safety constraints associated with conventional cutsurface treatments are a concern. However, forest managers should conduct an economic analysis when considering Turbodor against existing methods, taking into account the potential benefits of effective once-off treatment and reduced follow-up operations. Herbicides can also pose environmental risks if not used responsibly. Label guidelines should therefore be followed, staff appropriately trained, and the correct nozzle and application rates used. Where necessary, guidance should be sought from the chemical provider or the Timber Industry Pesticide Working Group (TIPWG). 27 26
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyNjA0