American Potato Journal

, Volume 36, Issue 4, pp 115–123 | Cite as

Investigations with maleic hydrazide on potatoes I. Effect of time of application and concentration upon potato performance

  • Herman Timm
  • J. C. Bishop
  • B. J. Hoyle


Maleic hydrazide was applied to the foliage of five varieties of potatoes grown at two California locations, Shafter and Tulelake. Plants were sprayed two and three weeks before harvest, and harvested tubers were held for six months at 45°–55° and 68° F.

No significant differences in yield or specific gravity of tubers due to MH-40 spray treatments were found.

Increasing concentrations of MH-40 spray resulted in a reduction in sprout development and loss of tuber weight in stored potatoes. Application three weeks before harvest was more effective in reducing losses in storage than application two weeks before harvest.

A greater loss in tuber weight and more sprouting occurred at 68° F. than at 45°–55° F.

Applications of MH-40 caused no change in chipping or cooking quality of tubers.


Specific Gravity AMERICAN Potato Journal Tuber Weight Potato Jour Maleic Hydrazide 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Crafts, A. S.,et al. 1952. Comparative studies on herbicide transport. Res. Rept. Western Weed Control Conf.: 97.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Denisen, E. L. 1953. Response of Kennebec potatoes to maleic hydrazide. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 62:411–421.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Franklin, E. W., and N. R. Thompson. 1953. Some effects of maleic hydrazide on stored potatoes. Amer. Potato Jour. 30: 289–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Highlands, M. E., J. J. Licciardello, and C. E. Cunningham. 1952. Reducing sugar content of Maine-grown potatoes treated with maleic hydrazide. Amer. Potato Jour. 29: 225–227.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kennedy, E. J., and O. Smith. 1951. Response of the potato to field application of maleic hydrazide. Amer. Potato Jour. 28: 701–712.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    — and. 1953. Response of seven varieties of potatoes to foliar applications of maleic hyydrazide. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 61: 395–403.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Payne, M. G., and J. L. Fults. 1955. The effect of maleic hyydrazide and 2,4-D on reducing sugars and sources of Red McClure potatoes. Amer. Potato Jour. 32: 144–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rao, S. N., and S. H. Wittwer. 1955. Further investigations on the use of maleic hydrazide as a sprout inhibitor for potatoes. Amer. Potato Jour. 32: 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith, A. E.,et al. 1955. Absorption studies of maleic hydyrazide by plants. U. S. Rubber Co., Naugatuck Chem. Div., Bethany Info. No. 88.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Timm, H. 1958. Potato sprout inhibitor spray Cal. Agr. 12:6, 12.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zukel, J. W. 1957. A literature summary on maleic hydrazide. U.S. Rubber Co., Naugatuck Chem. Div., Naugatuck, Conn., MHIS-No. 8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1959

Authors and Affiliations

  • Herman Timm
    • 1
  • J. C. Bishop
    • 1
  • B. J. Hoyle
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Vegeable CropsUniversity of CaliforniaDavis
  2. 2.Field Station AdministrationUniversity of CaliforniaDavis

Personalised recommendations