Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T22:33:57.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of food and forage crops to soil-applied imazapyr

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Rodney W. Bovey  and
Scott A. Senseman
Scott A. Senseman
Affiliation:
Department of Soil & Crop Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse experiments were conducted to determine the persistence of imazapyr and the tolerance of a wide variety of bioassay plants to imazapyr residues in central Texas soils. Eleven bioassay crops were planted in pots 1 d before and 2, 6, and 12 mo after imazapyr application at rates of 0, 0.02, 0.04, 0.07, 0.14, 0.28, 0.56, and 1.12 kg ai ha−1. Imazapyr was phytotoxic 12 mo after treatment to all crop plants in at least one rate. Forage grasses and herbs were highly susceptible to imazapyr residual carryover damage, as was corn and cabbage. Bean and squash were tolerant of imazapyr residues. No statistical differences occurred in imazapyr phytotoxicity to corn grown in leached vs. nonleached pots.

Keywords

Imazapyrcoronivia grass, Brachiaria dictyoneura Stafpalisade grass, Brachiaria brizantha (Hochst.) Stafcapitata, Stylosanthes capitata Vog.butterflypea, Centrosema macrocarpum Benth. and Centrosema acutifolium Benthperennial peanut, Arachis pintoi Krap.corn, Zea mays L.bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.cabbage, Brassica oleracea L.squash, Cucurbita pepo L.Imazapyr residueplant bioassaypreemergence applicationherbicide toleranceherbicide susceptibility
Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 46 , Issue 5 , October 1998 , pp. 614 - 617
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Anonymous. 1994. Imazapyr. Pages 161-163 in Ahrens, W. H., ed. WSSA Herbicide Handbook. Champaign, IL: Weed Sci. Soc. Amer.Google Scholar
Beardmore, R. A., Hart, R., Iverson, R., Risley, M. A., and Trimmer, M. 1991. Imazapyr herbicide. Pages 211-227 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Bouse, L. F. and Bovey, R. W. 1967. A laboratory sprayer for potted plants. Weeds 15: 89–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coffman, C. B., Frank, J. R., and Potts, W. E. 1993. Crop responses to hexazinone, imazapyr tebuthiuron and triclopyr. Weed Technol. 7: 140–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ismail, B. S. and Ahmad, A. R. 1994. Attenuation of the herbicidal activities of glufosinate-ammonium and imazapyr in two soils. Agric., Ecosystems and Environ, 47: 279–285.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of imazapyr and imazethapyr on soils, sediments, and selected adsorbents. Weed Sci. 37: 712–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mangels, G. 1991. Behavior of the imidazolinone herbicides in soil—a review of the literature. Pages 191-209 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L. and Mallipudi, N. M. 1991. Mechanisms of selectivity of the imidazolinones. Pages 91-102 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Vigantinopoulos, S. and Lolos, P. 1994. Persistence and leaching of the herbicide imazapyr in soil. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 53: 404–410.Google Scholar
Wehtje, G., Dickens, R., Wilcut, J. W., and Hajek, B. F. 1987. Sorption and mobility of sulfometuron and imazapyr in five Alabama soils. Weed Sci. 35: 858–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar