Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T07:17:08.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Basis for Variability in the Cucumber for Tolerance to Chloramben Methyl Ester

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. C. Miller Jr. ,
Donald Penner  and
L. R. Baker
J. C. Miller Jr.
Affiliation:
Michigan State University, E. Lansing, Mi. 48823
Donald Penner
Affiliation:
Michigan State University, E. Lansing, Mi. 48823
L. R. Baker
Affiliation:
Michigan State University, E. Lansing, Mi. 48823
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The physiological basis for tolerance and susceptibility of four lines of cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) to the methyl ester of 3-amino-2,5-dichlorobenzoic acid (chloramben) was investigated. ‘MSU 3207’ and ‘MSU 0612’ were tolerant (T), whereas ‘MSU 3159’ and ‘MSU 0866’ were susceptible (S). Intraspecific variability was related to higher concentrations of chloramben in the roots of the susceptible lines, resulting from metabolic differences in these lines and rapid absorption of the herbicide by the roots of ‘S-MSU 3159’. Tolerance of ‘T-MSU 3207’ resulted primarily from low uptake and reduced translocation of the herbicide, while tolerance of ‘T-MSU 0612’ was related to, but not necessarily explained by, a peculiar 14C-label distribution pattern in the leaves. Thin-layer chromatographic analysis of methanol-soluble extracts from the lines studied 3 days after 14C-chloramben methyl ester treatment separated six 14C-metabolites in the roots and five in the shoots. After a 4-hr treatment, 14C-chloramben methyl ester was absorbed and translocated more rapidly than 14C-chloramben by all four lines. Tolerance or susceptibility did not always correlate with the total concentration of radioactivity in methanol-soluble shoot and root extracts.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 1973 , pp. 207 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © 1973 Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Ashton, F. M. 1966. Fate of amiben-C14 in carrots. Weeds 14:55–57.Google Scholar
2. Baker, R. S. and Warren, G. F. 1962. Selective herbicidal action of amiben on cucumber and squash. Weeds 10:219–224.Google Scholar
3. de Boer, T. J. and Backer, H. J. 1956. Diazomethane. Org. syn. 36:16–19.Google Scholar
4. Colby, S. R. 1965. Herbicide metabolism: N-glycoside of amiben isolated from soybean plants. Science 150:619–620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Colby, S. R. 1966. Fate of the amide and methyl ester of amiben in soybean plants and soil. Proc. Northeast. Weed Contr. Conf. 20:619–626.Google Scholar
6. Colby, S. R. 1966. The mechanism of selectivity of amiben. Weeds 14:197–201.Google Scholar
7. Colby, S. R., Warren, G. F., and Baker, R. S. 1964. Fate of amiben in tomato plants. J. Agr. Food Chem. 12:320–321.Google Scholar
8. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. California Agr. Exp. Sta. Man. 35. 143 p.Google Scholar
9. Frear, D. S., Swanson, C. R., and Kadunce, R. E. 1967. The biosynthesis of N-(3-carboxy-2,5-dichlorophenyl)-glucosylamine in plant tissue sections. Weeds 15:101–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Hammerton, J. L. 1967. Intra-specific variations in susceptibility to herbicides. Meded. Rijksfac. Landbouwwetensch. Gent 1967:999–1012.Google Scholar
11. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. California Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 347. 32 p.Google Scholar
12. Lui, T. Y., Oppenheim, A., and Castelfranco, P. 1965. Ethyl alcohol metabolism in leguminous seedlings. Plant Physiol. 40:1261–1268.Google Scholar
13. Miller, J. C. Jr. and Baker, L. R. 1971. Differential phytotoxicity of amiben methyl ester to Cucumis sativus lines. HortScience 6:276.Google Scholar
14. Penner, D. and Meggitt, W. F. 1970. Herbicide effects on soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill) seed lipids. Crop Sci. 10:553–555.Google Scholar
15. Raison, J. K. and Lyons, J. M. 1970. The influence of mitochondrial concentration and storage on the respiratory control of isolated plant mitochondria. Plant physiol. 45:382–385.Google Scholar
16. de Stigter, H. C. M. 1956. Studies on the nature of the incompatibility in a cucurbitaceous graft. Meded. Landbouwhogesch. Wageningen 56(8):1–51.Google Scholar
17. Stoller, E. W. 1968. Differential phytotoxicity of an amiben metabolite. Weed Sci. 16:384–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Stoller, E. W. 1969. The kinetics of amiben absorption and metabolism as related to species sensitivity. Plant Physiol. 44:854–860.Google Scholar
19. Stoller, E. W. 1970. Mechanism for the differential translocation of amiben in plants. Plant Physiol. 46:732–737.Google Scholar
20. Stoller, E. W. and Max, L. M. 1968. Amiben metabolism and selectivity. Weed Sci. 16:283–288.Google Scholar
21. Swan, D. G. and Slife, F. W. 1965. The absorption, translocation, and fate of amiben in soybeans. Weeds 13:133–138.Google Scholar
22. Swanson, C. R., Hodgson, R. H., Kadunce, R. E., and Swanson, H. R. 1966. Amiben metabolism in plants. II. Physiological factors in N-glucosyl amiben formation. Weeds 14:323–327.Google Scholar
23. Swanson, C. R., Kadunce, R. E., Hodgson, R. H., and Frear, D. S. 1966. Amiben metabolism in plants. I. Isolation and identification of an N-glucosyl complex. Weeds 14:319–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Wang, C. H. and Willis, D. L. 1965. Radiotracer methodology in biological science. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J. 363 p.Google Scholar