Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T17:48:47.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uptake, Translocation, and Metabolism of 14C-MSMA in Organic Arsenical-Resistant and -Susceptible Mississippi Biotypes of Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Chandrashekhar I. Nimbal ,
Gene D. Wills ,
Stephen O. Duke  and
David R. Shaw
Chandrashekhar I. Nimbal
Affiliation:
Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Gene D. Wills
Affiliation:
South. Weed Sci. Lab., USDA, ARS, Stoneville, MS 38776
Stephen O. Duke
Affiliation:
Delta Branch Exp. Stn.
David R. Shaw
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The uptake, translocation, and metabolism of 14C-MSMA in organic arsenical-resistant (R) and -susceptible (S) Mississippi biotypes of common cocklebur were investigated. The two biotypes did not differ significantly with respect to either uptake, total translocation, or translocation pattern of 14C-MSMA plus its radiolabeled metabolites regardless of whether plants were pre-treated with 1.12 kg ai ha−1 of unlabeled MSMA or treated only with radiolabeled material. Absorption of 14C-MSMA was greater in unlabeled MSMA-pretreated plants than untreated plants, whereas the percent of total absorbed 14C-MSMA that was translocated out of the 14C-MSMA-treated leaf was almost the same in MSMA-pretreated and untreated plants. Qualitative detection of 14C-MSMA distribution by autoradiographs confirmed quantitative results obtained with radioassays. Herbicide metabolism in the 14C-treated leaf showed that MSMA was not readily broken down in both biotypes and the extractable 14C was the same. Uptake, translocation, and metabolic degradation were not involved in the mechanism of resistance of the resistant-Mississippi biotype common cocklebur to MSMA.

Keywords

MSMA, Monosodium salt of methylarsonic acidcommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #3 XANSTAbsorptiondegradationmechanism of resistanceXANST
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , December 1995 , pp. 549 - 554
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. Anonymous. 1994. 1994 Weed control guidelines for Mississippi. Publ. 1532, Miss. Coop. Ext Ser., Miss. State Univ., Mississippi State, MS.Google Scholar
2. Bloomberg, J. R., Kirkpatrick, B. L., and Wax, L. M., 1982. Competition of common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum) with soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 30:507–513.Google Scholar
3. Coupland, D., Lutman, P. J. W., and Heath, C. 1990. Uptake, translocation and metabolism of mecoprop in a sensitive and resistant biotype of Stellaria media . Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 36:61–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. and Ext. Ser. Manual 35:143.Google Scholar
5. Duble, R. L., Holt, E. C., and McBee, G. G. 1968. The translocation of two organic arsenicals in purple nutsedge. Weed Sci. 16:421–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Duble, R. L., Holt, E. C., and McBee, G. G. 1969. Translocation and breakdown of disodium methanearsonate (DSMA) in coastal bermudagrass. J. Agr. Food Chem. 17:1247–1250.Google Scholar
7. Duke, S. O. 1992. Modes of action of herbicides used in cotton. Pages 403–437 in McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. L. eds. Weeds of Cotton. The Cotton Foundation, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
8. Haigler, W. E., Gossett, B. J., Harris, J. R., and Toler, J. E. 1988. Resistance of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) to the organic arsenical herbicides. Weed Sci. 36:24–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hiltbold, A. E. 1975. Behavior of organoarsenicals in plants and soils. Pages 53–69 in Woolson, E. A., ed. Arsenical Pesticides. ACS Symposium series No. 7. Am. Chem. Soc., Washington, DC. 1975.Google Scholar
10. Keeley, P. E. and Thullen, R. J. 1971. Cotton response to temperature and organic arsenicals. Weed Sci. 19:297–300.Google Scholar
11. Keese, R. J. and Camper, N. D. 1992. Translocation studies in MSMA-resistant and susceptible cocklebur and cotton using 14C-MSMA. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abst. 32:88.Google Scholar
12. McWhorter, C. G., Wills, G. D., and Wauchope, R. D. 1987. Efficacy of bentazon and MSMA as affected by humic acid-type polymeric polyhydroxy acid adjuvant. Weed Sci. 35:237–242.Google Scholar
13. Nimbal, C. I., Shaw, D. R., Byrd, J. D., Wills, G. D., Heitholt, J. J., and Duke, S. O. 1993. Physiological differences in wild-type and arsenical herbicide-resistant common cocklebur. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46:381.Google Scholar
14. Sachs, R. M. and Michael, J. L. 1971. Comparative phytotoxicity among four arsenical herbicides. Weed Sci. 19:558–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Snipes, C. E., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1982. Competition of common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 30:553–556.Google Scholar
16. Wauchope, R. D. 1983. Uptake, translocation and phytotoxicity of arsenic in plants. Pages 348–375 in Lederer, W. H. and Fenstrerheim, R. J., eds. Arsenic: Industrial, Biomedical, Environmental Perspectives. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York.Google Scholar
17. Wills, G. D., Byrd, J. D. Jr., and Hurst, H. R. 1992. Herbicide resistant and tolerant weeds. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:43.Google Scholar
18. Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1985. Effect of inorganic salts on the toxicity and translocation of glyphosate and MSMA in purple nutsedge. Weed Sci. 33:755–761.Google Scholar
19. Woolson, E. A. 1976. Organoarsenical herbicides. Pages 741–776 in Kerney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D. eds. Herbicides—Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. vol. II. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York.Google Scholar