Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T07:19:40.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Egyptian Broomrape (Orobanche aegyptiaca) Control in Tomato with Sulfonylurea Herbicides—Greenhouse Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Hanan Eizenberg ,
Yaakov Goldwasser ,
Shmuel Golan ,
Dina Plakhine  and
Joseph Hershenhorn
Hanan Eizenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Research, Agriculture Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Research Center, P.O. Box 1021, Ramat Yishay 30095, Israel
Yaakov Goldwasser
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Research, Agriculture Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Research Center, P.O. Box 1021, Ramat Yishay 30095, Israel
Shmuel Golan
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Research, Agriculture Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Research Center, P.O. Box 1021, Ramat Yishay 30095, Israel
Dina Plakhine
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Research, Agriculture Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Research Center, P.O. Box 1021, Ramat Yishay 30095, Israel
Joseph Hershenhorn
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Research, Agriculture Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Research Center, P.O. Box 1021, Ramat Yishay 30095, Israel
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: eizenber@volcani.agri.gov.il
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Broomrapes (Orobanche spp.) are root holoparasitic plants that cause severe damage to economically important crops, especially in Mediterranean countries. Egyptian broomrape is the most troublesome weed on tomatoes grown for processing in Israel. In the present study, we tested the efficacy and selectivity of four sulfonylurea herbicides in controlling Egyptian broomrape on tomatoes grown in pots under greenhouse conditions. MON 37500, rimsulfuron, HOE 404 and SL-160 were applied postemergence (POST) and preplant incorporated (PPI) followed by POST applications. MON 37500 and rimsulfuron were more selective to tomato and controlled the parasite more effectively than HOE 404 and SL-160. MON 37500 and rimsulfuron at 50 and 100 g ai/ha and at 100, 150, and 200 g ai/ha, respectively, applied on tomato foliage 14, 28, and 42 d after planting (DAP) and followed by sprinkler irrigation to field capacity, resulted in complete control of the parasite. However, a significant reduction in control efficacy was observed when the experiment was repeated with charcoal-topped pots, suggesting that the herbicides act mainly through the soil. Except for rimsulfuron, the PPI followed by two POST treatments was more phytotoxic to tomato plants than the POST treatments. The PPI plus POST applications controlled Egyptian broomrape effectively, but tomato plants were injured by HOE 404 at all PPI application rates and by MON 37500 at the high rate at 150 g/ha. The present study determined that three POST applications or a PPI application followed by two POST applications of MON 37500 at 50 or 100 g/ha, or rimsulfuron at 100, 150, or 200 g/ha were effective and selective in controlling Egyptian broomrape on tomato, under greenhouse conditions.

Keywords

HOE 404, 2-ethoxyphenyl [[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl) amino]carbonyl]sulfamateMON 37500, N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl) amino] carbonyl]-2-(ethylsulfonyl)imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-sulfonamiderimsulfuronSL-160, N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino] carbonyl]-3-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinesulfonamideEgyptian broomrape, Orobanche aegyptiaca Pers. # ORAAEtomato, Lycopersicon esculentum MillActivated charcoalOrobanche controlparasitic weedsDAP, days after plantingPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporated
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , September 2004 , pp. 490 - 496
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

Aly, R., Goldwasser, Y., Eizenberg, H., Hershenhorn, J., Golan, S., and Kleifeld, Y. 2001. Broomrape (Orobanche cumana) control in sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in fields. Weed Technol. 15:306–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eizenberg, H., Goldwasser, Y., Achdary, G., and Hershenhorn, J. 2003. The potential of sulfosulfuron to control troublesome weeds in tomato. Weed Technol. 17:133–137.Google Scholar
Eizenberg, H., Goldwasser, Y., Golan, S., Hershenhorn, J., and Kleifeld, Y. 2001. Orobanche aegyptiaca control in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) with chlorsulfuron. in Fer, A., Thalouran, P., Joel, D. M., Musselman, L. J., Parker, C., and Verkleij, J.A.C., eds. Proceedings of the 7th International Parasitic Weed Symposium, Nantes, France. P. 233.Google Scholar
Eizenberg, H. and Joel, D. M. 2001. Orobanche in Israeli agriculture. Web page: http://cost849.ba.cnr.it/BARI%20ABSTRACTS.pdf. Accessed: March 29, 2004.Google Scholar
Foy, C. L., Jain, R., and Jacobsohn, R. 1989. Recent approaches for chemical control of broomrape (Orobanche spp.)—a review. Rev. Weed Sci 4:123–152.Google Scholar
Garcia-Torres, L. and Lopez-Granados, F. 1991. Control of broomrape (Orobanche crenata Forsk.) in broad bean (Vicia faba L.) with imidazolinones and other herbicides. Weed Res 31:227–235.Google Scholar
Garcia-Torres, L., Lopez-Granados, F., and Jurado-Exposito, M. 1995. Imazapyr applied post emergence in sunflower (Helianthus annuus). Weed Res 34:395–402.Google Scholar
Goldwasser, Y., Eizenberg, H., Golan, S., and Kleifeld, Y. 2002. Control of Orobanche crenata and O. aegyptiaca in parsley. Crop Prot 22:295–305.Google Scholar
Goldwasser, Y., Eizenberg, H., Hershenhorn, J., Plakhine, D., Blumenfeld, T., Buxbaum, H., Golan, S., and Kleifeld, Y. 2001. Control of Orobanche aegyptiaca and O. ramosa in potato. Crop Prot 20:403–410.Google Scholar
Goldwasser, Y., Kleifeld, Y., Golan, S., Bargutti, A., and Rubin, B. 1995. Dissipation of metham-sodium from soil and its effect on the control of Orobanche aegyptiaca . Weed Res 35:445–452.Google Scholar
Hershenhorn, J., Goldwasser, Y., and Plakhine, D. et al. 1998a. Orobanche aegyptiaca control in tomato fields with sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Res 38:343–349.Google Scholar
Hershenhorn, J., Goldwasser, Y., Plakhine, D., Lavan, Y., Herzlinger, G., Golan, S., Chilf, T., and Kleifeld, Y. 1998b. Effect of sulfonylurea herbicides on Egyptian broomrape (Orobanche aegyptiaca) in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) under greenhouse conditions. Weed Technol. 12:115–120.Google Scholar
Hershenhorn, J., Plakhine, D., Goldwasser, Y., Westwood, J. H., Foy, C. L., and Kleifeld, Y. 1998c. Effect of sulfonylurea herbicides on early development of Egyptian broomrape (Orobanche aegyptiaca) in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Technol. 12:108–114.Google Scholar
Jacobsohn, R., Dor, Z., Tanaami, Z., and Ovdat, N. 1998. Crenate broomrape control in garden and field peas with foliarly applied imazethapyr. in Wegmann, K., Musselman, L. J., and Joel, D. M., eds. Current Problems of Orobanche Research. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Orobanche Research, Albena, Bulgaria: Institute for Wheat and Sunflower Dobrovdja. Pp. 331–336.Google Scholar
Jacobsohn, R., Tanaami, Z., and Eizenberg, H. 2001. May plant growth regulators be used to widen the margin of safety of herbicides?. in Fer, A., Thalouran, P., Joel, D. M., Musselman, L. J., Parker, C., and Verkleij, J.A.C., eds. Proceedings of the 7th International Parasitic Weed Symposium, Nantes, France: University of Nantes. Pp. 252–253.Google Scholar
Kleifeld, Y., Goldwasser, Y., Plakhine, D., Eizenberg, H., Herzlinger, G., and Golan, S. 1998. Selective control of Orobanche spp. in various crops with sulfonylurea and imidazolinones herbicides. in Joint Action to Control Orobanche in the WANA-Region: Experiences from Morocco. Proceeding, Regional Workshop, Rabat, Morocco, 1998. Rabat, Morocco: GTZ GmbH. P. 26.Google Scholar
Kogan, M. and Ureta, C. 1996. Efficacy and selectivity of glyphosate controlling Orobanche cernua in Virginia tobacco. in Cubero, J. I., Berner, D., Joel, D. M., Musselman, L. J., and Parker, C., eds. Advances in Parasitic Plant Research. Proceedings of the 6th International Parasitic Weed Symposium. Cordoba, Spain, Junta Andalusia: Junta de-Andalvcia. Pp. 747–753.Google Scholar
Parker, C. and Riches, C. R. 1993. Parasitic Weeds of the World: Biology and Control. Wallingford, Great Britain: CAB International. Pp. 111–164.Google Scholar
Plakhine, D., Eizenberg, H., Hershenhorn, J., Goldwasser, Y., and Kleifeld, Y. 2001. Control of Orobanche aegyptiaca with sulfonylurea herbicides in tomato—polyethylene bag studies. in Fer, A., Thalouran, P., Joel, D. M., Musselman, L. J., Parker, C., and Verkleij, J. A. C., eds. Proceedings of the 7th International Parasitic Weed Symposium, Nantes, France: University of Nantes. Pp. 294–295.Google Scholar
Raju, C. A. 1996. Studies on chemical control of Orobanche cernua in tobacco fields. in Cubero, J. I., Berner, D., Joel, D. M., Musselman, L. J., and Parker, C., eds. Advances in Parasitic Plant Research. Proceedings of the 6th International Parasitic Weed Symposium. Cordoba, Spain: Junta Andalusia: Junta de-Andalvcia. Pp. 739–745.Google Scholar
Sauerborn, J., Saxena, M. C., and Mayer, M. 1989. Broomrape control in faba bean (Vicia faba L.) with glyphosate and imazaquin. Weed Res 29:97–102.Google Scholar