Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-2bdfx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-12T10:29:57.627Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition between wheat and canarygrass biotypes and their response to herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Catherine G. Afentouli  and
Ilias G. Eleftherohorinos
Catherine G. Afentouli
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in Thessaloniki, Greece, from 1991 to 1994 to study the competition of littleseed canarygrass and short-spiked canarygrass biotypes in wheat and to evaluate their response to diclofop, fenoxaprop, tralkoxydim, and CGA-184927. Competitive ability of all canarygrass biotypes was similar, though species differed in panicle numbers. All littleseed canarygrass biotypes showed faster growth rate than the short-spiked canarygrass biotypes. Wheat grain yield decreased as canarygrass density increased. For example, 152 and 304 canarygrass plants m–2 reduced wheat yield 32 and 42%, respectively. None of the canarygrass biotypes at any density had any effect on grain yield of wheat when cold and dry weather prevailed during the early stages of growth. CGA-184927 and tralkoxydim were more effective herbicides against all short-spiked canarygrass biotypes than fenoxaprop and diclofop. CGA-184927 and fenoxaprop provided > 98% control of all littleseed canarygrass biotypes; control with tralkoxydim was < 80%; and diclofop gave 82 to 96% control of this weed species. Herbicide control of canarygrass increased wheat yield relative to the weedy control, and only diclofop was phytotoxic to wheat.

Keywords

DiclofopfenoxaproptralkoxydimCGA-184927, 2-propynyl-(R)-2-[4-(5-chloro-3-fluoro-2-pyridyloxy)-phenoxy]-propionatelittleseed canarygrass, Phalaris minor Retz. PHAMIshort-spiked canarygrass, Phalaris brachystachys Link. PHABRwheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Yekora.’Competitioncanarygrass biotypesherbicide responsePHAMIPHABR

Information

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , February 1999 , pp. 55 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Afentouli, G. C. and Eleftherohorinos, I. G. 1996. Littleseed canarygrass (Phalaris minor) and short-spiked canarygrass (Phalaris brachystachys) interference in wheat and barley. Weed Sci. 44: 560–565.Google Scholar
Amrein, J., Nuffeler, A., and Nufener, J. 1989. CGA 184927 + 5: a new post-emergence grass killer for use in cereals. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.-Weeds 1: 71–76.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. P. and Howat, P. D. 1990. Puma—A New Post-emergence Selective Grass Herbicide for Use in Wheat. Pages 62–84 in Proceedings of the 9th Australian Weeds Conference. Melbourne, Australia: Weed Science Society of Victoria.Google Scholar
Bell, C. E. 1992. Littleseed Canarygrass Control in Cereal Grains. Research Report. Salt Lake City, UT: Western Society of Weed Science, pp. 232–233.Google Scholar
Bhatia, A. K., Das, N. L., Solanki, S. S., and Tiwari, J. P. 1981. Chemical control of Phalaris minor in irrigated wheat. Indian J. Weed Sci. 13: 95–102.Google Scholar
Bir, S. S. and Sidhu, M. 1979. Observations on the weed flora of cultivable lands in Punjab-wheat fields in Patiala District. New Bot. 6: 79–89.Google Scholar
Bough, M., Colosi, J. C., and Cavers, P. B. 1989. The major weedy biotypes of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) in Canada. Can. J. Bot. 64: 1188–1198.Google Scholar
Butler, M. D., Howell, D. R., and Tickes, B. R. 1993. Littleseed Canarygrass and London Rocket Control in Bok Choy with Benefin and DCPA. Research Report, Western Society of Weed Science, p. 115.Google Scholar
Catizone, P. and Viggiani, P. 1980. Un quadriennio di ricerche sulle Falaridi infestanti il grano. Atti Gi. Fitopatolog. 3: 257–311.Google Scholar
Cudney, D. W. and Hill, J. E. 1979. The response of wheat grown with three population levels of canarygrass to various herbicide treatments. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 32: 55–56.Google Scholar
Damanakis, M. E. 1983. Weed species in wheat fields of Greece—1982, 1983 survey. Zizaniology 1: 85–90.Google Scholar
Darmency, M. and Aujas, C. 1992. Genetic diversity for competitive and reproductive ability in wild oats (Avena fatua). Weed Sci. 40: 215–219.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Lurvey, E. L., Miller, T. L., and Michael, J. L. 1990. Growth and development of wild-proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) biotypes. Weed Technol. 4: 415–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia-Baudin, J. M. 1983. Importancia del genero Phalaris como adventicia en los cereales de invierno espanoles. Agricultura 52: 526–528.Google Scholar
Gill, H. S. and Brar, L. S. 1977. Chemical control of Phalaris minor and Avena ludoviciana in wheat. PANS 23: 293–296.Google Scholar
Godinho, J. and Costa, J.C.A. 1981. Concorencia da Phalaris minor Retz. na cultura de trigo. I Congresso Portugues de Fitiatria e de Fitofarmacologia e III Simposio Nacional de Herbologia. 1980. 3: 237–243.Google Scholar
Lush, W. H. 1989. Adaptation and differentiation of golf course populations of annual bluegrass (Poa annua). Weed Sci. 37: 54–59.Google Scholar
Mehra, S. P. and Gill, H. S. 1988. Effect of temperature on germination of Phalaris minor Retz. and its competition in wheat. Punjab Agric. Univ. Res. J. 25: 529–533.Google Scholar
Mirkamali, H. 1987. Control of Phalaris brachystachys and Ph. minor in wheat grown in northern Iran. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.-Weeds 1: 407–412.Google Scholar
Mirkamali, H. 1993. Chemical control of grasses in wheat. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.-Weeds 2: 579–584.Google Scholar
Panwar, R. S., Malik, R. K., and Malik, R. S. 1990. Influence of tank mixture of herbicides on weed control in wheat. Haryana Agric. Univ. J. Res. 20: 191–194.Google Scholar
Rapparini, G. 1990. Il diserbo chimico dei cereali autunno-vernini: i trattamenti di postemergenza hanno sempre maggiore importanza. Inf. Agrario 46: 77–89.Google Scholar
Rubin, B., Yaacoby, T., and Schonfeld, M. 1985. Triazine resistant grass weeds: cross resistance with wheat herbicide, as possible threat to cereal crops. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.-Weeds 3: 1171–1178.Google Scholar
Ryan, G. F. 1970. Resistance of common groundsel to simazine and atrazine. Weed Sci. 18: 614–616.Google Scholar
Singh, R. D. and Randhawa, A. S. 1980. Broad spectrum herbicides for weed control in wheat. Pesticides 14: 30–31.Google Scholar
Singh, S. and Malik, R. K. 1992. Evaluation of tralkoxydim against weeds in wheat. Tests Agrochem. Cultiv. 13: 60–61.Google Scholar
Somody, C. N., Nalewaja, J. D., and Miller, S. D. 1984. Wild oat (Avena fatua) and (Avena sterilis) morphological characteristics and response to herbicides. Weed Sci. 32: 353–359.Google Scholar
Tickes, B. R. and Heathman, E. S. 1991. Littleseed Canarygrass (Phalaris minor) Has Become an Increasingly Widespread Weed in Wheat Grown in Central and Southwestern Arizona. Research Report, Western Society of Weed Science, pp. 238–239.Google Scholar
Warwick, S. S. and Thompson, B. K. 1987. Differential response to competition in weedy biotypes of proso millet. Can. J. Bot. 65: 1403–1409.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J. and Wright, K. J. 1987. Variability in the growth of cleavers (Galium aparine) and their effect on wheat yield. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.-Weeds 3: 1051–1058.Google Scholar
Yadav, S. K., Bhan, V. M., and Singh, S. P. 1984. Post emergence herbicides for control of Phalaris minor in wheat. Trap. Pest Manag. 30: 467–469.Google Scholar
Yaduraju, N. I., Ahuja, K. N., and Gautam, K. C. 1992. Bioefficacy and selectivity of tralkoxydim with and without 2,4-D and fluroxypyr. Pestic. Res. J. 4: 159–163.Google Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T., and Konzak, C. F. 1974. A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res. 14: 415–421.Google Scholar