Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wlg5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T09:43:18.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential Responses of Soybean Cultivars to Propanil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

R. J. Smith Jr.  and
C. E. Caviness
R. J. Smith Jr.
Affiliation:
Agr. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. of Agr., Stuttgart, AR. 72160
C. E. Caviness
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Univ. of Ark., Fayetteville, AR. 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ten commercial soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] cultivars were evaluated for reaction to over-the-top applications of two rates of 3′,4′-dichloropropionanilide (propanil) at the growth stage when three nodes on the main stem had completely unrolled leaves. Propanil, a herbicide commonly applied to rice [Oryza sativa L.] for control of grass weeds, was applied at 0.56 and 3.36 kg/ha; the higher rate is commonly used for control of weeds in rice. ‘Davis’, ‘Hood’, and ‘York’ soybean cultivars were damaged more by propanil than ‘Hill’, ‘Lee’, ‘Lee 68’, ‘Pickett’, ‘Semmes’, ‘Bragg’, or ‘Dare’ when damage was measured by reductions in seed yield and stand and by leaf injury.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , July 1973 , pp. 279 - 281
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Andersen, R. N. 1964. Differential response of corn inbreds to simazine and atrazine. Weeds 12:60–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Engel, R. E., Funk, C. R., and Kinney, D. A. 1968. Effect of varied rates of atrazine and simazine on establishment of several zoysia strains. Agron. J. 60:261–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Fehr, W. R., Caviness, C. E., Burmood, D. T., and Pennington, J. S. 1971. Stage of development descriptions for soybeans, Glycine max (L.) Merrill. Crop Sci. 11:929–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Fribourg, H. A. and Johnson, I. J. 1955. Response of soybean strains to 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Agron. J. 47:171–174.Google Scholar
5. Grogan, C. O., Eastin, E. F., and Palmer, R. D. 1963. Inheritance of susceptibility of a line of maize to simazine and atrazine. Crop Sci. 3:451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Johnson, B. J. 1969. Influence of herbicides on plant growth and agronomic characteristics of soybean varieties. Agron. J. 61:791–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Johnson, B. J. and Jellum, M. D. 1969. Effect of pesticides on chemical composition of soybean seed [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]. Agron. J. 61:379–380.Google Scholar
8. Scifres, C. J. and Bovey, R. W. 1970. Differential responses of sorghum varieties to picloram. Agron. J. 62:775–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Smith, R. J. Jr. 1970. Weed control methods, losses and cost due to weeds, and benefits of weed control in rice. Pages 24–37 in Tech. Papers FAO. Int. Conf. on Weed Control. Weed Sci. Soc. Amer., Urbana, Illinois.Google Scholar
10. Smith, R. J. Jr. and Shaw, W. C. 1966. Weeds and their control in rice production. U.S. Dep. Agr. Handbook 292. U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 64 p.Google Scholar
11. Walters, H. J. and Caviness, C. E. 1968. Response of phytophthora resistant and susceptible soybean varieties to 2,4-DB. Plant Dis. Rep. 52:355–357.Google Scholar
12. Wright, C. E. 1966. Some implications of genotype-herbicide interactions in the breeding of Lolium perenne . Euphytica 15:229–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar