Preharvest Applications of Glyphosate for Yellow Toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) Control

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 777-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirza N. Baig ◽  
A. Lloyd Darwent ◽  
K. Neil Harker ◽  
John T. O'Donovan
Keyword(s):  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
Flowering Stage ◽  
Linaria Vulgaris ◽  
Yellow Toadflax ◽  
Crop Harvest

The effectiveness of preharvest applications of glyphosate on yellow toadflax was evaluated at five sites in Alberta from 1992 to 1994. At each site, glyphosate at 0.9 to 1.8 kg ae/ha was applied with or without nonionic surfactant and/or ammonium sulfate. Glyphosate at 2.7 kg/ha and glufosinate at 0.6 kg ai/ha were applied without additional adjuvants. The treatments were applied 7 to 10 d before crop harvest, when the majority of the yellow toadflax was in a flowering stage. Eleven to 12 mo after glyphosate application, yellow toadflax density was reduced by more than 80%. In most instances, there was no advantage in increasing the glyphosate rate above 0.9 kg/ha. The addition of nonionic surfactant and/or ammonium sulfate did not enhance glyphosate activity. Glufosinate did not control yellow toadflax in the year following treatment. Barley, canola, and flax yields in the year following applications were significantly higher in all preharvest glyphosate-treated plots than in untreated plots.

Adaptive Development of Yellow Toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) Chemical Control Recommendations

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 276-283
Author(s):  
Travis L. Almquist ◽  
Katie L. Wirt ◽  
Jason W. Adams ◽  
Rodney G. Lym
Keyword(s):  
North Dakota ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Control Program ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Application Timing ◽  
Linaria Vulgaris ◽  
Yellow Toadflax ◽  
Nontarget Species ◽  
Adaptive Development

AbstractYellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris P. Mill.) infestations in North Dakota increased 300-fold from 1997 to 2011, when the plant was added to the state noxious weed list. Long-term control of other invasive species had included biological control agents, but no effective agents for yellow toadflax had been identified, so a control program using herbicides was needed. The objective was to shift from short-term control with picloram applied in the fall at maximum allowed rates to long-term management with minimal nontarget species impact with an adaptive management approach. Yellow toadflax control was increased from an average of 64% with picloram at 1,120 g ha−1 alone 12 mo after treatment (MAT) to over 90% when applied with diflufenzopyr while the picloram rate was reduced 50%. Yellow toadflax control with aminocyclopyrachlor applied at 140 g ha−1 ranged from 91 to 49% 12 MAT when applied in June or September, respectively. In contrast, yellow toadflax control with picloram plus dicamba plus diflufenzopyr averaged > 90% regardless of application date during the growing season. Land managers now have at least two options for long-term yellow toadflax control with a wide window of application timing. The goal of replacing a single high-use–rate herbicide treatment was met but both picloram and aminocyclopyrachlor can injure many desirable forbs. However, application timing can now be adjusted to have the least impact on nontarget species. The adaptive development program led to a 58% reduction in yellow toadflax infestations in North Dakota by 2014.

Quantifying Invasiveness of Plants: A Test Case with Yellow Toadflax (Linaria vulgaris)

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik A. Lehnhoff ◽  
Lisa J. Rew ◽  
Bruce D. Maxwell ◽  
Mark L. Taper
Keyword(s):  
Test Case ◽  
Linaria Vulgaris ◽  
Yellow Toadflax

Effect of Ammonium Sulfate on Absorption of Imazethapyr by Quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) and Maize (Zea mays) Cell Suspension Cultures

Weed Science ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Gronwald ◽  
Scott W. Jourdan ◽  
Donald L. Wyse ◽  
David A. Somers ◽  
Mark U. Magnusson
Keyword(s):  
Cell Wall ◽  
Plasma Membrane ◽  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
Equilibrium Concentration ◽  
Ammonium Assimilation ◽  
Concentration Addition ◽  
Plasma Membrane Atpase ◽  
Medium Acidification ◽  
Membrane Atpase

Field trials indicated that addition of ammonium sulfate to imazethapyr plus nonionic surfactant increased quackgrass control, especially at low imazethapyr rates. In greenhouse experiments, approximately twice as much imazethapyr was absorbed by quackgrass leaves when the herbicide was applied in combination with nonionic surfactant plus ammonium sulfate than when the herbicide was applied with nonionic surfactant alone. Black Mexican Sweet maize (BMS) suspension-cultured cells were used to evaluate the effects of ammonium sulfate and nonionic surfactant on cellular absorption of imazethapyr in the absence of a cuticular barrier. Imazethapyr absorption by BMS cells was diffusion-mediated, energy-dependent, and exhibited a pH optimum of approximately 3. Over the concentration range of 0.1 to 10.0 μM, the equilibrium concentration of imazethapyr in BMS cells was a linear function of the external concentration. Addition of ammonium sulfate to the external medium of BMS cells enhanced both the rate of imazethapyr uptake and medium acidification. There was a linear correlation between the ability of ammonium sulfate (0.5 to 10 mM) to promote medium acidification and imazethapyr uptake by BMS cells. The ammonium sulfate-induced stimulation of imazethapyr absorption in BMS cells was sensitive to plasma membrane adenosine triphosphatase inhibitors (sodium vanadate, diethylstilbestrol), the uncoupler carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenylhydrazone, and energy metabolism inhibitors (sodium azide, nitrogen gas), demonstrating that this effect was dependent on ATP production and the functioning of the plasma membrane ATPase. It is hypothesized that cytoplasmic acidification in BMS cells due to ammonium assimilation stimulates the plasma membrane ATPase to pump protons across the plasma membrane which in turn acidifies the cell wall promoting cellular accumulation of imazethapyr by ion-trapping. Cell wall acidification due to ammonium assimilation may contribute to the ability of ammonium sulfate to enhance the efficacy of imazethapyr and other foliar-applied herbicides.

Efficacy of Glyphosate Plus Bentazon or Quizalofop on Glyphosate-Resistant Canola or Corn

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Tao ◽  
Jingkai Zhou ◽  
Calvin G. Messersmith ◽  
John D. Nalewaja
Keyword(s):  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Ammonium Nitrate ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
Cationic Surfactant ◽  
Seed Oil ◽  
Wild Buckwheat ◽  
Silicone Surfactant ◽  
Greenhouse Experiments ◽  
Petroleum Oil ◽  
Glyphosate Formulations

Greenhouse experiments were conducted to determine the effect of glyphosate on efficacy of bentazon for glyphosate-resistant (GR) canola control and of quizalofop for GR corn control. Control also was evaluated for glyphosate plus bentazon on wild buckwheat and wheat and glyphosate plus quizalofop on velvetleaf. Glyphosate plus bentazon synergistically controlled GR canola and wild buckwheat but were antagonistic for wheat control. Glyphosate plus quizalofop were additive for control of GR corn and velvetleaf. Inert ingredients in glyphosate formulations, i.e., cationic surfactant, NH4, or K, contributed to glyphosate synergism of bentazon, but the major contribution came from glyphosate itself. Efficacy of glyphosate plus bentazon on GR canola was enhanced by ammonium nitrate (AMN), ammonium sulfate (AMS), nonionic surfactant (NIS), or silicone surfactant (SiS) but was slightly decreased by methylated seed oil (MSO) or petroleum oil concentrate. AMN, AMS, NIS, and SiS partially overcame the antagonism of bentazon to glyphosate for wheat control. NIS enhanced phytotoxicity of glyphosate plus quizalofop to GR corn and velvetleaf, but the enhancement was less than by SiS or MSO to GR corn and SiS or AMS to velvetleaf.

Low Volume Invert Emulsions for Purple Nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) Control

1990 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 907-909 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles T. Bryson ◽  
Gene D. Wills ◽  
Paul C. Quimby
Keyword(s):  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Cyperus Rotundus ◽  
Purple Nutsedge ◽  
Greenhouse Experiments ◽  
Invert Emulsion ◽  
Oil Water ◽  
Low Volume

Greenhouse experiments were conducted in 1989 at Stoneville, MS to evaluate the efficacy of fluridone and MSMA applied at 0.3 and 1.0 kg ai ha-1, respectively, either alone or in combination and with or without 0.1 M ammonium sulfate on purple nutsedge. The herbicides were applied at 19 L ha-1in an oil-water, invert emulsion (low-volume) and at 187 L ha-1in water with a nonionic surfactant (0.25% v/v) (high-volume). Purple nutsedge control with both herbicides alone or in combination was greater with the low-volume than with the high-volume application. Addition of MSMA to fluridone, or of ammonium sulfate to fluridone plus MSMA did not enhance purple nutsedge control over fluridone alone applied in low volume. The addition of ammonium sulfate to fluridone alone applied in low volume reduced purple nutsedge control.

Optimal Glyphosate Application Time for Control of Foxtail Barley (Hordeum jubatum)

1995 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffery S. Conn ◽  
Richard E. Deck
Keyword(s):  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
Optimal Time ◽  
Application Time ◽  
Time Of Application ◽  
Hordeum Jubatum ◽  
Seed Fill

Optimal time of application of the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate for long-term control of foxtail barley was studied near Delta Junction, AK in 1992 and 1993. Applications of either 0.6 or 1.1 kg/ha of glyphosate with 2.2 kg/ha of ammonium sulfate and 0.5% (v/v) nonionic surfactant were made to different foxtail barley plots at approximately 2-wk intervals from May to September. Control was rated in July of the year following application. The 0.6 kg/ha rate produced ≤ 60% control on all application dates. At 1.1 kg/ha, foxtail barley control was best from applications made between early August and mid-September. May and mid-June applications provided up to 80% control in 1993 but ≤ 50% control in 1992. For both rates, applications made from late June through July, during foxtail barley flowering and seed fill, consistently provided little control (< 50%).

Quizalofop and Sethoxydim Activity as Affected by Adjuvants and Ammonium Fertilizers

Weed Science ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Beckett ◽  
Edward W. Stoller ◽  
Loren E. Bode
Keyword(s):  
Surface Tension ◽  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Ammonium Nitrate ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
Buffering Capacity ◽  
Ammonium Polyphosphate ◽  
Laboratory Studies ◽  
Giant Foxtail ◽  
Urea Ammonium Nitrate ◽  
Petroleum Oil

Ammonium fertilizers, petroleum oil concentrate, and nonionic surfactant were evaluated as postemergence spray additives to improve giant foxtail and volunteer corn control by 28 g ai ha−1of the ethyl ester of quizalofop or 56 g ha−1sethoxydim. Additions of 0.25% by vol nonionic surfactant or 2.5% petroleum oil concentrate improved grass control, but additions of 10% urea ammonium nitrate (28-0-0), 10% ammonium polyphosphate (10-34-0), or 0.1M ammonium sulfate (21-0-0-24S) did not consistently affect grass control. In laboratory studies with corn, greatest14C absorption from leaf-applied14C-quizalofop (8 h after treatment) was found with additions of petroleum oil concentrate (80% absorbed) or nonionic surfactant (18% absorbed), while less absorption was observed with treatments containing either no additive, urea ammonium nitrate, ammonium polyphosphate, or ammonium sulfate (8 to 13% absorbed). Surface tension and droplet size of spray solutions were affected primarily by additions of nonionic surfactant, petroleum oil concentrate, and the formulated herbicides. Solution density, solute potential, pH, and buffering capacity were primarily affected by fertilizer additions.

Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Growth and Tuber Production in Response to Increasing Glyphosate Rates and Selected Adjuvants

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Felix ◽  
Joseph T. Dauer ◽  
Andrew G. Hulting ◽  
Carol Mallory-Smith
Keyword(s):  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Effective Dose ◽  
Ammonium Sulfate ◽  
Dose Response ◽  
Logistic Models ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Cyperus Esculentus ◽  
Response Curves ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Tuber Production

Greenhouse studies were conducted to evaluate the influence of selected adjuvants on glyphosate efficacy on yellow nutsedge and tuber production. Glyphosate was applied at 0, 0.25, 0.43, 0.87, 1.26 (1× rate), and 1.74 kg ae ha−1at 31 d after yellow nutsedge was planted. Each rate was mixed with one of the following adjuvants: ammonium sulfate (AMS), AMS plus nonionic surfactant (NIS), or AMS plus an experimental adjuvant (W-7995) plus NIS. Plants were evaluated for injury and for the number and size of tubers produced. Dose–response curves based on log-logistic models were used to determine the effective glyphosate rate plus adjuvant that provided both 90% effective dose (ED90) for yellow nutsedge injury and reduced tuber production. Addition of NIS to glyphosate plus AMS resulted in the greatest yellow nutsedge injury at 28 d after treatment (DAT). Addition of the experimental adjuvant plus NIS resulted in injury similar to NIS alone. The ED90for injury at 28 DAT was 2.12 kg ha−1with glyphosate plus AMS and NIS compared with 2.18 kg ha−1for W-7995 plus NIS and 3.06 kg ha−1with AMS alone. The ED90rates with different adjuvants represent 168%, 173%, and 243% of the highest glyphosate rate (1.26 kg ha−1) labeled for application on many glyphosate-resistant crops. However, the estimated ED90to reduce small, medium, large, and total tubers were 1.60, 1.50, 1.63, and 1.66 kg ha−1, respectively. Increases in labeled rates of glyphosate may be required to reduce yellow nutsedge tuber production in field conditions. Use of lower glyphosate rates should be discouraged because it may increase tuber production and exacerbate yellow nutsedge expansion in infested fields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document