Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-31T17:48:23.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response and Survival of Rosette-Stage Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) after Exposure to 2,4-D

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Greg R. Kruger ,
Vince M. Davis ,
Stephen C. Weller  and
William G. Johnson
Greg R. Kruger
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Vince M. Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Stephen C. Weller
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, 625 Agriculture Mall Dr., Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
William G. Johnson*
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wgj@purdue.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

2,4-D is often used as a preplant burndown herbicide to help control horseweed and other broadleaf weeds before planting in no-till corn and soybean production. Isolated instances of poor horseweed control have occurred in production fields. The objective of this research was to evaluate the response of various horseweed populations to 2,4-D. In the first study, 478 horseweed populations from Indiana were subjected to 280 g ae ha−1 of 2,4-D amine in the greenhouse. This rate of 2,4-D caused visible injury and prevented all biotypes from forming new leaves for 28 days. There were specific populations where all plants sprayed were alive at 28 days after treatment (DAT), and approximately 10% of all populations had a least one plant that survived 280 g ae ha−1 2,4-D, resumed growth, and produced seed. In a dose-response study, we observed populations with three-fold more tolerance to 2,4-D. The most tolerant population had a GR90 of 513 g ae ha−1 and the most susceptible population had a GR90 of 121 g ae ha−1 based on dry weights. Growth suppression with 2,4-D was not affected by rosette size for rosettes between 0.5 and 10 cm in width.

Keywords

2,4-Dhorseweed, Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. ERICAcorn, Zea mays L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.Surveydose response
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 56 , Issue 5 , October 2008 , pp. 748 - 752
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Barnes, J., Johnson, B., Gibson, K., and Weller, S. 2004. Crop rotation and tillage system influence late-season incidence of giant ragweed and horseweed in Indiana soybean. Crop Manag. doi.Google Scholar
Bell, A. R., Nalewaja, J. D., and Schooler, A. B. 1972. Response of kochia selections to 2,4-D, dicamba, and picloram. Weed Sci. 20:458–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhowmik, P. C. and Bekech, M. M. 1993. Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) seed production, emergence and distribution in no-till and conventional-tillage corn (Zea mays). Agron. Trends Agric. Sci. 1:67–71.Google Scholar
Brown, S. M. and Whitwell, T. 1988. Influence of tillage on horseweed, Conyza canadensis . Weed Technol. 2:269–270.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Owen, M. D. K. 1997. Emergence and survival of horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci. 45:98–101.Google Scholar
Carpenter, J. and Gianessi, L. 1999. Herbicide tolerant soybeans: why growers are adopting Roundup Ready varieties. Ag. Bio. Forum. 2:65–72.Google Scholar
CTIC 2004. 2004 soybeans—ranked by percentage of no-till acres. West Lafayette, IN. http://www.in.gov/isda/files/soybeanrankpercent.pdf. Accessed: September 24, 2007.Google Scholar
Davis, V. M., Gibson, K. D., and Johnson, W. G. 2008. A field survey to determine distribution and frequency of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) in Indiana. Weed Technol. 22:331–338.Google Scholar
Davis, V. M. and Johnson, W. G. 2008. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) emergence, survival, and fecundity in no-till soybean. Weed Sci. 56:231–236.Google Scholar
Dow AgroSciences 2007. Dow AgroSciences reveals progress on new herbicide tolerance trait. Decatur, IL. www.dowagro.com/newsroom/corporatenews/2007/20070828a.htm. August 28, 2007. Accessed: October 23, 2007.Google Scholar
Gibson, K. D., Johnson, W. G., and Hillger, D. E. 2006. Farmer perceptions of weed problems in corn and soybean rotation systems. Weed Technol. 20:751–755.Google Scholar
Gleason, H. A. and Cronquist, A. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. Bronx, NY New York Botanical Garden. 592.Google Scholar
Gressel, J. 1995. Creeping resistances: the outcome of using marginally-effective or reduced rates of herbicides. Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. Hampshire, UK BCPC. 587–589.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2008. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. www.weedscience.com. Accessed: January 24, 2008.Google Scholar
Howatt, K. A., Westra, P., and Nissen, S. J. 2006. Ethylene effect on kochia (Kochia scoparia) and emission following dicamba application. Weed Sci. 54:31–37.Google Scholar
Johnson, B., Barnes, J., Gibson, K., and Weller, S. 2004. Late-season weed escapes in Indiana soybean fields. Crop Manage. doi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z. and Streibig, J. 2007. Utilizing R software package for dose response studies: the concept and data analysis. Weed Technol. 21:840–848.Google Scholar
Kniss, A. R., Miller, S. D., Westra, P. H., and Wilson, R. G. 2007. Glyphosate susceptible in common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) is influenced by parental exposure. Weed Sci. 55:572–577.Google Scholar
Kohler, E. A., Throssell, C. S., and Reicher, Z. J. 2004. 2,4-D rate response, absorption, and translocation of two ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea) populations. Weed Technol. 18:917–923.Google Scholar
Lyon, D. J., Kniss, A., and Miller, S. D. 2007. Carfentrazone improves broadleaf weed control in prosso and foxtail millets. Weed Technol. 21:84–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Main, C. L., Steckel, L. E., Hayes, R. M., and Mueller, T. C. 2006. Biotic and abiotic factors influence horseweed emergence. Weed Sci. 54:1101–1105.Google Scholar
Mickelson, J. A., Bussan, A. J., Davis, E. S., Hulting, A. G., and Dyer, W. E. 2004. Postharvest kochia (Kochia scoparia) management with herbicides in small grains. Weed Technol. 18:426–431.Google Scholar
Nandula, V. K. and Manthey, F. A. 2002. Response of kochia (Kochia scoparia) inbreds to 2,4-D and dicamba. Weed Technol. 16:50–54.Google Scholar
Regehr, D. L. and Bazzazz, F. A. 1979. The population dynamics of Erigeron canadensis, a successional winter annual. J. Ecol. 67:923–933.Google Scholar
Sankula, S. 2006. Quantification of the impacts on U.S. agriculture of biotechnology-derived crops planted in 2005. National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy. www.ncfap.org/whatwedo/pdf/2005biotecimpacts-finalversion.pdf. Washington, DC: National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy. Accessed: June 27, 2007.Google Scholar
Sexsmith, J. J. 1964. Morphological and herbicide susceptibility differences among strains of hoary cress. Weeds. 12:19–22.Google Scholar
Smith, D. A. and Hallett, S. G. 2006. Variable response of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) populations and individuals to glyphosate. Weed Technol. 20:466–471.Google Scholar
Stachler, J. M., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 2000. Resistance of wild carrot (Daucus carota) to 2,4-D in Michigan. Weed Technol. 14:734–739.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. A., Steckel, L. E., Ellis, A. T., and Mueller, T. C. 2007. Soybean tolerance to early preplant applications of 2,4-D ester, 2,4-D amine, and dicamba. Weed Technol. 21:882–885.Google Scholar
Trainer, G. D., Loux, M. M., Harrison, S. K., and Regnier, E. 2005. Response of horseweed populations to foliar applications of cloransulam-methyl and glyphosate. Weed Technol. 19:231–236.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. J., Ayeni, A. O., and Majek, B. A. 2001. Glyphosate in full season no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean: role of preplant applications and residual herbicides. Weed Technol. 15:714–724.Google Scholar
Walsh, M. J., Powles, S. B., Beard, B. R., Parkin, B. T., and Porter, S. A. 2004. Multiple-herbicide resistance across four modes of action in wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum). Weed Sci. 52:8–13.Google Scholar
Weaver, S. E. 2001. The biology of Canadian weeds. 115. Conyza canadensis . Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:867–875.Google Scholar
Young, B. G. 2006. Changes in herbicide use patterns and production practices resulting from glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 20:301–307.Google Scholar