Herbicide Programs for Enhanced Glyphosate-Resistant and Glufosinate-Resistant Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 526-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dilpreet S. Riar ◽  
Jason K. Norsworthy ◽  
Griff M. Griffith
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Experimental Research ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Cotton Yield ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Late Season ◽  
Pitted Morningglory ◽  
Herbicide Programs ◽  
Cotton Cultivar

Research was conducted at experimental research stations near Keiser and Marianna (Marianna-A), AR, in 2007, and in a grower's field near Marianna (Marianna-B), AR, in 2008, to compare herbicide programs, including POST application(s) of glyphosate/glufosinate alone or in combination with residual herbicides applied as PRE, mid-POST (MPOST), or layby POST-directed (PD) in enhanced glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant cotton. Weed species evaluated included Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, hemp sesbania, barnyardgrass, and a mixture of large crabgrass and goosegrass. At Marianna-B, AR, the Palmer amaranth population was a mixture of glyphosate-resistant and -susceptible plants. For both cotton cultivars and at all locations, inclusion ofS-metolachlor plus fluometuron PRE increased weed control and/or decreased the number of glufosinate or glyphosate applications needed in-season. At Marianna-B, AR, PRE residual herbicides and/or glufosinate were required to control glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. Addition of pyrithiobac to glufosinate or glyphosate did not increase weed control. A layby PD application of flumioxazin plus MSMA was required to increase late-season control of all weed species in POST glufosinate-only programs, but not in POST glyphosate-only programs. None of the programs caused > 5% injury to either cotton cultivar. Seed-cotton yield was similar in all herbicide programs at Keiser, AR, and Marianna-A, AR, except for the POST glyphosate-only program, which yielded less than the PRE followed by POST programs in glyphosate-resistant cotton at Keiser, AR. In general, PRE herbicides did not increase cotton yield but did improve early and late-season control of glyphosate-susceptible and -resistant weeds in both cotton cultivars.

Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Control by Glufosinate plus Fluometuron Applied Postemergence to WideStrike®Cotton

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly A. Barnett ◽  
A. Stanley Culpepper ◽  
Alan C. York ◽  
Lawrence E. Steckel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Acetolactate Synthase ◽  
The United States ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Amaranthus Palmeri ◽  
Cotton Yield ◽  
Cotton Cultivar

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds, especially GR Palmer amaranth, are very problematic for cotton growers in the Southeast and Midsouth regions of the United States. Glufosinate can control GR Palmer amaranth, and growers are transitioning to glufosinate-based systems. Palmer amaranth must be small for consistently effective control by glufosinate. Because this weed grows rapidly, growers are not always timely with applications. With widespread resistance to acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides, growers have few herbicide options to mix with glufosinate to improve control of larger weeds. In a field study using a WideStrike®cotton cultivar, we evaluated fluometuron at 140 to 1,120 g ai ha−1mixed with the ammonium salt of glufosinate at 485 g ae ha−1for control of GR Palmer amaranth 13 and 26 cm tall. Standard PRE- and POST-directed herbicides were included in the systems. Glufosinate alone injured the WideStrike® cotton less than 10%. Fluometuron increased injury up to 25% but did not adversely affect yield. Glufosinate controlled 13-cm Palmer amaranth at least 90%, and there was no improvement in weed control nor a cotton yield response to fluometuron mixed with glufosinate. Palmer amaranth 26 cm tall was controlled only 59% by glufosinate. Fluometuron mixed with glufosinate increased control of the larger weeds up to 28% and there was a trend for greater yields. However, delaying applications until weeds were 26 cm reduced yield 22% relative to timely application. Our results suggest fluometuron mixed with glufosinate may be of some benefit when attempting to control large Palmer amaranth. However, mixing fluometuron with glufosinate is not a substitute for a timely glufosinate application.

Influence of Spray-Solution Temperature and Holding Duration on Weed Control with Premixed Glyphosate and Dicamba Formulation

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratap Devkota ◽  
Fred Whitford ◽  
William G. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Solution Temperature ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Spray Solution ◽  
Giant Ragweed ◽  
Pitted Morningglory ◽  
Low Rate

Water is the primary carrier for herbicide application, and carrier-water–related factors can influence herbicide performance. In a greenhouse study, premixed formulation of glyphosate plus dicamba was mixed in deionized (DI) water at 5, 18, 31, 44, or 57 C and applied immediately. In a companion study, glyphosate and dicamba formulation was mixed in DI water at temperatures of 5, 22, 39, or 56 C and sprayed after the herbicide solution was left at the respective temperatures for 0, 6, or 24 h. In both studies, glyphosate plus dicamba was applied at 0.275 plus 0.137 kg ae ha−1(low rate), and 0.55 plus 0.275 kg ha−1(high rate), respectively, to giant ragweed, horseweed, Palmer amaranth, and pitted morningglory. Glyphosate plus dicamba applied at a low rate with solution temperature of 31 C provided 14% and 26% greater control of giant ragweed and pitted morningglory, respectively, compared to application at solution temperature of 5 C. At both rates of glyphosate and dicamba formulation, giant ragweed and pitted morningglory control was 15% or greater at solution temperature of 44 C compared to 5 C. Weed control was not affected with premixture of glyphosate and dicamba applied ≤ 24 h after mixing herbicide. When considering solution temperature, glyphosate and dicamba applied at low rate provided 13 and 6% greater control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory, respectively, with solution temperature of 22 C compared to 5 C. Similarly, giant ragweed control was 8% greater with solution temperature of 39 C compared to 5 C. Glyphosate and dicamba applied at high rate provided 8% greater control of giant ragweed at solution temperature of 22 or 39 C compared to 5 C. Therefore, activity of premixed glyphosate and dicamba could be reduced with spray solution at lower temperature; however, the result is dependent on weed species.

scholarly journals Weed control via intercropping with gliricidia: I. cotton crop

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.S.L. Silva ◽  
J.C.V. Silva ◽  
L.P. Carvalho ◽  
K.M.B. Silva ◽  
F.C.L. Freitas
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Dry Matter ◽  
Chemical Pollution ◽  
Cotton Yield ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Seed Cotton Yield ◽  
Fiber Yield ◽  
Poaceae Family ◽  
Uniform Manner

The majority of cotton grown commercially in the world has white lint, but recently, there has been a growing interest in colored lint cotton in several countries, including Brazil. The use of naturally-colored fiber reduces chemical pollution. The objective of this paper was to evaluate cotton cultivar fiber yield in response to weed control via intercropping with gliricídia. Cultivars BRS-Verde (greenish fibers), BRS-Rubi (reddish brown fibers), BRS-Safira (brown fibers), and BRS-187 8H (white fibers) were submitted to the following treatments: no hoeing, two hoeings (at 20 and 40 days after transplanting), and cotton intercropped with gliricídia. In the intercropped treatment, gliricídia was planted between rows of cotton plants, using one seedling pit-1, in pits spaced 50.0 cm apart. Twelve weed species predominated in the experiment, many of them belonging to the Poaceae family. Weeds occurred at different frequencies and in a non-uniform manner in the experimental area. Cultivars did not influence weed dry matter. Intercropping with gliricídia reduced weed dry matter but did not prevent reductions in cotton fiber and seed cotton yield, which were higher in hoed plots. Cultivar BRS Safira had the highest fiber yield, but no differences were observed between cultivars regarding to seed cotton yield.

Weed Control and Crop Response to Glufosinate Applied to ‘PHY 485 WRF’ Cotton

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Stanley Culpepper ◽  
Alan C. York ◽  
Phillip Roberts ◽  
Jared R. Whitaker
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Selectable Marker ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Glufosinate Ammonium ◽  
Crop Tolerance ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
Pitted Morningglory ◽  
Fourth Experiment

Field experiments were conducted in Georgia to evaluate weed control and crop tolerance with glufosinate applied to ‘PHY 485 WRF®’ cotton. This glyphosate-resistant cotton also contains a gene, used as a selectable marker, for glufosinate resistance. Three experiments were maintained weed-free and focused on crop tolerance; a fourth experiment focused on control of pitted morningglory and glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. In two experiments, PHY 485 WRF cotton was visibly injured 15 and 20% or less by glufosinate ammonium salt at 430 and 860 g ae/ha, respectively, applied POST two or three times. In a third experiment, glufosinate at 550 g/ha injured cotton up to 36%. Pyrithiobac or glyphosate mixed with glufosinate did not increase injury compared to glufosinate applied alone;S-metolachlor mixed with glufosinate increased injury by six to seven percentage points. Cotton injury was not detectable 14 to 21 d after glufosinate application, and cotton yields were not reduced by glufosinate or glufosinate mixtures. A program of pendimethalin PRE, glyphosate applied POST twice, and diuron plus MSMA POST-directed controlled glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth only 17% late in the season.S-metolachlor included with the initial glyphosate application did not increase control, and pyrithiobac increased late-season control by only 13 percentage points. Palmer amaranth was controlled 90% or more when glufosinate replaced glyphosate in the aforementioned system. Pitted morningglory was controlled 99% by all glufosinate programs and mixtures of glyphosate plus pyrithiobac. Seed cotton yields with glufosinate-based systems were at least 3.3 times greater than yields with glyphosate-based systems because of differences in control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth.

Interaction of Cultivar, Planting Pattern, and Weed Management Tactics in Peanut

Weed Science ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. T. Place ◽  
S. C. Reberg-Horton ◽  
D. L. Jordan
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Planting Pattern ◽  
Economic Return ◽  
Common Lambsquarters ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Pitted Morningglory ◽  
Herbicide Programs ◽  
Management Tactics

Planting peanut in narrow rows for weed control has not been investigated in recently released Virginia market peanut cultivars. Research was conducted in North Carolina from 2007 to 2009 to determine the effect of cultivar, planting pattern, and level of weed management inputs on weed control, peanut yield, and estimated economic return. Experiments consisted of three levels of weed management (clethodim applied POST, cultivation and hand-removal of weeds, and clethodim and appropriate broadleaf herbicides applied POST), three levels of planting pattern (single rows spaced 91 cm apart, standard twin rows spaced 20 cm apart on 91-cm centers, and narrow twin rows consisting of twin rows spaced 20 cm apart on 46-cm centers), and two Virginia cultivars (‘NC 12C’ and ‘VA 98R’). Weed management affected common lambsquarters, common ragweed, eclipta, nodding spurge, pitted morningglory, Texas millet, and yellow nutsedge control, irrespective of cultivar or planting pattern. Cultivar and planting pattern had only minor effects on weed control and interactions of these treatment factors seldom occurred. Weed control achieved with cultivation plus hand-removal was similar to weed management observed with grass and broadleaf herbicide programs. Pod yield did not differ among treatments when broadleaf weeds were the dominant species but did differ when Texas millet was the most prevalent weed. The highest yield with conventional herbicide weed management was in standard twin and narrow twin row planting patterns, although no differences among planting patterns were noted when cultivation and hand-removal were the primary weed management tactics. Differences in estimated economic return were associated with weed species, and interactions of treatment factors varied by year for that parameter.

MSMA Antagonizes Glyphosate and Glufosinate Efficacy on Broadleaf and Grass Weeds

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clifford H. Koger ◽  
Ian C. Burke ◽  
Donnie K. Miller ◽  
J. Andrew Kendig ◽  
Krishna N. Reddy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Redroot Pigweed ◽  
Pitted Morningglory ◽  
Hemp Sesbania ◽  
Prickly Sida ◽  
Grass Weed ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Levels Of Control

Field and greenhouse studies were conducted to investigate the compatibility of MSMA in a tank mixture with glyphosate or glufosinate for broadleaf and grass weed control. Glyphosate, glufosinate, and MSMA were evaluated at 0.5×, 1×, and 2× rates, with 1× rates of 0.84 kgae/ha, 0.5 kgai/ha, and 2.2 kgai/ha, respectively. Glyphosate and glufosinate provided similar levels of control for most weed species and were often more efficacious than MSMA alone. Glyphosate controlled Palmer amaranth better than glufosinate. Glufosinate controlled hemp sesbania, pitted morningglory, and ivyleaf morningglory better than glyphosate at one location. Weed control was not improved with the addition of MSMA to glyphosate or glufosinate when compared with either herbicide alone. MSMA antagonized glyphosate efficacy on barnyardgrass, browntop millet, hemp sesbania, Palmer amaranth, and redroot pigweed. MSMA antagonized glufosinate efficacy on browntop millet, hemp sesbania, ivyleaf morningglory, johnsongrass, Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, prickly sida, redroot pigweed, and velvetleaf. Antagonism of glyphosate or glufosinate by MSMA was often overcome by applying the 2× rate of either herbicide alone. MSMA is not a compatible tank-mixture partner with glyphosate or glufosinate for weed control in cotton.

Cover Crops Suppression of Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Cotton

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matheus G. Palhano ◽  
Jason K. Norsworthy ◽  
Tom Barber
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Cotton Yield ◽  
Cotton Production ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Cereal Rye ◽  
Seed Cotton Yield ◽  
Weed Emergence

AbstractWith the recent confirmation of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)-resistant Palmer amaranth in the US South, concern is increasing about the sustainability of weed management in cotton production systems. Cover crops can help to alleviate this problem, as they can suppress weed emergence via allelochemicals and/or a physical residue barrier. Field experiments were conducted in 2014 and 2015 at the Arkansas Agricultural Research and Extension Center to evaluate various cover crops for suppressing weed emergence and protecting cotton yield. In both years, cereal rye and wheat had the highest biomass production, whereas the amount of biomass present in spring did not differ among the remaining cover crops. All cover crops initially diminished Palmer amaranth emergence. However, cereal rye provided the greatest suppression, with 83% less emergence than in no cover crop plots. Physical suppression of Palmer amaranth and other weeds with cereal residues is probably the greatest contributor to reducing weed emergence. Seed cotton yield in the legume and rapeseed cover crop plots were similar when compared with the no cover crop treatment. The seed cotton yield collected from cereal cover crop plots was lower than from other treatments due to decreased cotton stand.

Herbicide Management Strategies in Field Corn for a Three-Way Herbicide-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Population

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathon R. Kohrt ◽  
Christy L. Sprague
Keyword(s):  
Field Experiments ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Late Season ◽  
Field Corn ◽  
Group 5 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Sites Of Action ◽  
Residual Herbicide ◽  
Herbicide Programs

Three field experiments were conducted from 2013 to 2015 in Barry County, MI to evaluate the effectiveness of PRE, POST, and one- (EPOS) and two-pass (PRE followed by POST) herbicide programs for management of multiple-resistant Palmer amaranth in field corn. The Palmer amaranth population at this location has demonstrated resistance to glyphosate (Group 9), ALS-inhibiting herbicides (Group 2), and atrazine (Group 5). In the PRE only experiment, the only herbicide treatments that consistently provided ~80% or greater control were pyroxasulfone and the combination of mesotrione +S-metolachlor. However, none of these treatments provided season-long Palmer amaranth control. Only topramezone provided >85% Palmer amaranth control 14 DAT, in the POST only experiment. Of the 19 herbicide programs studied all but three programs provided ≥88% Palmer amaranth control at corn harvest. Herbicide programs that did not control Palmer amaranth relied on only one effective herbicide site of action and in one case did not include a residual herbicide POST for late-season Palmer amaranth control. Some of the EPOS treatments were effective for season-long Palmer amaranth control; however, application timing and the inclusion of a residual herbicide component will be critical for controlling Palmer amaranth. The programs that consistently provided the highest levels of season-long Palmer amaranth control were PRE followed by POST herbicide programs that relied on a minimum of two effective herbicide sites of action and usually included a residual herbicide for late-season control.

scholarly journals Results of the weed control in onion (Allium Cepa L.) field

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
O. Ariunaa ◽  
T. Erdenenzorig ◽  
B. Dondov
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Seed Production ◽  
Experimental Research ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Domestic Production ◽  
Allium Cepa L ◽  
Production Demand

Our country has provided about 52% of vegetables from domestic production, the rest part imported others from outside. Thus, imports of potatoes and vegetables have been reduced last year, for this reason, main vegetable seeds, were produced domestically and provided over 80 percent of the country’s demand. In the future domestic production demand of vegetable goal set working to provide by 100 percent from government our country in this connection issues urgent need to solve sowing seeds, variety supply, seed production, and plant protection. According to our research, during the growing season, 150-350 weeds growing per 1m2 of rounded onions shows that the amount of crop damage is relatively high. For the purpose of control against weeds in the onion field with 3 repetitions of 7 variants of 2 types of herbicides are conducted experimental research. These include; pre-emergent Estamp (Stomp) herbicide applied in doses 2.5; 3.5 l/ha that controls all types of weeds, but showed results of 65.2-72.4%. The growing season during a selective post-emergent of Gaur herbicide in doses 0.7; 0.9l/ ha used against broadleaf and grassy weeds that became clear of weed species density reduced by 92.7-93.4%. It was tested in this study Pendimethalin, 33% + Oxyfluorfen 24 % mixture herbicides have reduced the number of weeds by 92.4-94.1%.

Weed Management with Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Based Systems in PHY 485 WRF Cotton

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared R. Whitaker ◽  
Alan C. York ◽  
David L. Jordan ◽  
A. Stanley Culpepper
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Fiber Quality ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Crop Tolerance ◽  
The North ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Resistance Trait ◽  
Cotton Belt

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth has become a serious pest in parts of the Cotton Belt. Some GR cotton cultivars also contain the WideStrike™ insect resistance trait, which confers tolerance to glufosinate. Use of glufosinate-based management systems in such cultivars could be an option for managing GR Palmer amaranth. The objective of this study was to evaluate crop tolerance and weed control with glyphosate-based and glufosinate-based systems in PHY 485 WRF cotton. The North Carolina field experiment compared glyphosate and glufosinate alone and in mixtures applied twice before four- to six-leaf cotton. Additional treatments included glyphosate and glufosinate mixed withS-metolachlor or pyrithiobac applied to one- to two-leaf cotton followed by glyphosate or glufosinate alone on four- to six-leaf cotton. All treatments received a residual lay-by application. Excellent weed control was observed from all treatments on most weed species. Glyphosate was more effective than glufosinate on glyphosate-susceptible (GS) Palmer amaranth and annual grasses, while glufosinate was more effective on GR Palmer amaranth. Annual grass and GS Palmer amaranth control by glyphosate plus glufosinate was often less than control by glyphosate alone but similar to or greater than control by glufosinate alone, while mixtures were more effective than either herbicide alone on GR Palmer amaranth. Glufosinate caused minor and transient injury to the crop, but no differences in cotton yield or fiber quality were noted. This research demonstrates glufosinate can be applied early in the season to PHY 485 WRF cotton without concern for significant adverse effects on the crop. Although glufosinate is often less effective than glyphosate on GS Palmer amaranth, GR Palmer amaranth can be controlled with well-timed applications of glufosinate. Use of glufosinate in cultivars with the WideStrike trait could fill a significant void in current weed management programs for GR Palmer amaranth in cotton.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document