Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T09:11:15.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Differential Tolerance of Morningglory Species (Ipomoea Sp.) to DPX-PE350

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Shay L. Sunderland
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Harold D. Coble
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695-7620

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in the greenhouse and field to investigate differential tolerance among tall, pitted, red, entireleaf, and ivyleaf morningglory species to DPX-PE350. Tall morningglory in the greenhouse was more tolerant of DPX-PE350 at 7 and 14 g ai ha-1 applied POST than were other species of morningglory. Increased tolerance of tall morningglory also was observed under field conditions with DPX-PE350 applied PRE and POST. Adjuvants did not increase biomass reduction of tall morningglory by DPX-PE350 applied POST.

Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Altom, J. V., Baysinger, J. A., Jacobson, B. D., and Murray, D. S. 1991. Evaluation of DPX-PE350 for weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:74.Google Scholar
2. Beyer, E. M. Jr., Duffy, M. J., Hays, J. V., and Schlueter, D. D. 1988. Sulfonylureas. Page 180 in Kearny, P. C. and Daufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Vol. 3. Marcel-Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
3. Byrd, J. D. Jr. and York, A. C. 1987. Interaction of fluometuron and MSMA with sethoxydim and fluazifop. Weed Sci. 35:270276.Google Scholar
4. Frans, R. E., Morris, G., and Appleberry, M. 1971. Effect of topical herbicide applications on growth and yield of cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:92.Google Scholar
5. Guthrie, D. S. and York, A. C. 1989. Cotton development and yield following fluometuron postemergence applied. Weed Technol. 3:501504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Henniger, C. G., Keeling, J. W., and Abernathy, J. R. 1992. Influence of DPX-PE350 application rate and method on cotton yield and fiber quality. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:28.Google Scholar
7. Hogue, C. W. 1971. Directed versus topical application of herbicide combinations in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:9398.Google Scholar
8. Holshouser, D. L. and Chandler, J. M. 1991. Susceptibility of eight morningglory species to DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:78.Google Scholar
9. Mitchell, W. H. 1991. Cotton weed control with DPX-PE350 “a southern prospective.” Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:383.Google Scholar
10. Patterson, M. G., Norris, B. E. Jr., and Everest, J. W. 1991. Evaluation of DPX-PE350 for weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:76.Google Scholar
11. Sims, B. D., Guethle, D. R., House, J. L., and Muyonga, C. K. 1991. Effects of DPX-PE350 on weed control, cotton yield, and lint quality. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:75.Google Scholar
12. Snipes, C. E. and Allen, R. L. 1992. Broadleaf weed control in cotton with DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:26.Google Scholar
13. Sunderland, S. L. and Coble, H. D. 1992. Differential tolerance of several morningglory species (Ipomoea sp.) to DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:47.Google Scholar