Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Archivio Istituziona...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
addClaim

Control of Ailanthus altissima in a historical fortress

Authors: Fogliatto, Silvia; Vidotto, Francesco; Milan, Marco; Serra, Francesca; Ferrero, Aldo;

Control of Ailanthus altissima in a historical fortress

Abstract

The Citadel of Alessandria is a military fortress built in the 18th century, located in the north-west of Italy. It spans over 70 hectares and is composed of buildings, bastions, roads, all enclosed by a moat. Since 2007, the fortress was abandoned and gradually became invaded by weeds. One of the most problematic weed is Ailanthus altissima, a tree that colonized many areas in the fortress, including buildings and roofs, accelerating their deterioration. In July 2015, different Ailanthus control techniques were compared. In particular, cut stump and basal bark applications were tested in three areas of the fortress. The used herbicides were: glyphosate 360 g/l, fluroxypyr 20 g/l+triclopyr 60 g/l and aminopyralid 35.5 g/l+ fluroxypyr 144.1 g/l, each diluted 1:10 with water. For cut stump application the plants were first cut at the base and immediately sprayed on the cut surface. Herbicides were applied using a 2 l pressure spray bottle. Untreated cut plants were used as a comparison. For basal bark application, the lower 50 cm of the plants were sprayed with the herbicides by using a backpack sprayer. After 50 days from the treatment, an efficacy assessment was performed by counting the resprouts and their height in the cut stump application, and by observing the symptoms in the basal bark treatment. In the case of cut stump treatments, the number of resprouts ranked as follows: untreated > glyphosate > fluroxypyr+triclopyr > aminopyralid+fluroxypyr, with 4.7, 2.0, 1.3, and 0.06 resprouts per plant, respectively. The same ranking was observed for the height of the resprouts, with 20 cm observed for aminopyralid+fluroxypyr and up to 75 cm for untreated plants. For basal bark application, very limited symptoms were observed on the treated plants.

Country
Italy
Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average