Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Evaluation of Wick-Applied Glyphosate for Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Control in Sweetpotato

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Stephen L. Meyers
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Katherine M. Jennings
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Jonathan R. Schultheis
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
David W. Monks
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Corresponding

Abstract

Studies were conducted in 2007 and 2008 at Clinton, NC to determine the effect of glyphosate applied POST via a Dixie wick applicator on Palmer amaranth control and sweetpotato yield and quality. In 2007, treatments consisted of glyphosate wicked sequentially 6 and 8 wk after transplanting (WAP) and glyphosate wicked sequentially 6 and 8 WAP followed by (fb) rotary mowing 9 WAP. In 2008, treatments consisted of glyphosate wicked once 4 or 7 WAP, wicked sequentially 4 and 7 WAP, mowed once 4 WAP, and mowed 4 WAP fb wicking 7 WAP. In 2008, Palmer amaranth control 6 WAP varied by location and averaged 10 and 58% for plots wicked 4 WAP. Palmer amaranth contacted by the wicking apparatus were controlled, but weeds shorter than the wicking height escaped treatment. Palmer amaranth control 9 WAP was greater than 90% for all treatments wicked 7 WAP. Competition prior to and between glyphosate treatments contributed to large sweetpotato yield losses. Treatments consisting of glyphosate 7 or 8 WAP (in 2007 and 2008, respectively) frequently had greater no. 1 and marketable yields compared to the weedy control. However, jumbo, no. 1, and marketable yields for all glyphosate and mowing treatments were generally less than half the hand-weeded check. Cracked sweetpotato roots were observed in glyphosate treatments and percent cracking (by weight) in those plots ranged from 1 to 12% for no. 1 roots, and 1 to 6% for marketable roots. Findings from this research suggest wicking might be useful in a salvage scenario, but only after currently registered preemergence herbicides and between-row cultivation have failed to control Palmer amaranth and other weed species below the sweetpotato canopy.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

Current address: Pontotoc Ridge-Flatwoods Branch Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Pontotoc, MS 38863
Associate Editor for this paper: Peter Dittmar, University of Florida.

References

Anonymous (2014) Dual Magnum® herbicide label. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. 50 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016) Valor® SX herbicide label. Walnut Creek, CA: Valent USA Corporation. 32 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2007) Roundup WeatherMax® herbicide label. St. Louis, MO: Monsanto Company. 54 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2008) Aim® EC herbicide label. Philadelphia, PA: FMC Corporation Google Scholar
Bensch, CN, Horak, MJ, Peterson, D (2003) Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), Palmer amaranth (A. palmeri), and common waterhemp (A. rudis) in soybean. Weed Sci 51: 3743 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, JA, Oliver, LR, Stephenson, DO IV (2006) Response of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to glyphosate, fomesafen, and pyrithiobac. Weed Technol 20: 885892 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, IC, Schroeder, M, Thomas, WE, Wilcut, JW (2007) Palmer amaranth interference and seed production in peanut. Weed Technol 21: 367371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, AS, Grey, TL, Vencill, WK, Kichler, JM, Webster, TM, Brown, SM, York, AC, Davis, JW, Hanna, WW (2006) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Sci 54: 620626 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, AS, York, AC (2000) Weed management in ultra narrow row cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 14: 1929 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, JE (1978) The rope-wick applicator—a new method of applying glyphosate. Page 332 in Proceedings of the 31st Southern Weed Science Society. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society [Abstract] Google Scholar
Fuchs, MA, Geiger, DR, Reynolds, TL, Bourque, JE (2002) Mechanisms of glyphosate toxicity in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medikus). Pestic Biochem and Physiol 74: 2739 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grekul, CW, Cole, DE, Bork, EW (2005) Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and pasture forage responses to wiping with various herbicides. Weed Technol 19: 298306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetherington, PR, Marshall, G, Kirkwood, RC, Warner, JM (1998) Absorption and efflux of glyphosate by cell suspensions. J Exp Bot 49: 527533 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, GJ, Kemble, JM, eds (2009) Vegetable Crop Handbook for the Southeastern United States 2009. Lincolnshire, IL: Vance Publishing Corp. Pp 9394 Google Scholar
Horak, MJ, Loughin, TM (2000) Growth and analysis of four Amaranthus species. Weed Sci 48: 347355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jha, P, Norsworthy, JK, Bridges, W Jr Riley, MB (2008) Influence of glyphosate timing and row width on Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and pusley (Richardia spp.) demographics in glyphosate-resistant soybean. Weed Sci 56: 408415 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keely, PE, Carter, CH, Thullen, RJ, Miller, JH (1984a) Comparison of ropewick applicators for control of Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) with glyphosate. Weed Sci 32: 431435 Google Scholar
Keely, PE, Thullen, RJ, Carter, CH, Miller, JH (1984b) Control of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) with glyphosate. Weed Sci 32: 306309 Google Scholar
Krueger-Mangold, J, Sheley, RL, Roos, BD (2002) Maintaining plant community diversity in a waterfowl production area by controlling Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) using glyphosate. Weed Technol 16: 457463 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaBonte, DR, Harrison, HF, Motsenbocker, CE (1999) Sweetpotato clone tolerance to weed interference. HortScience 34: 229232 Google Scholar
Massinga, RA, Currie, RS, Horak, MJ, Boyer, J Jr (2001) Interference of Palmer amaranth in corn. Weed Sci 49: 202208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Monks, DW (2010a) Interference of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in sweetpotato. Weed Sci 58: 199203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Monks, DW (2010b) Evaluation of flumioxazin and S-metolachlor rate and timing for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control in sweetpotato. Weed Technol 24: 495503 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monks, DW, Oliver, LR (1988) Interactions between soybean (Glycine max) cultivars and selected weeds. Weed Sci 36: 770774 Google Scholar
Monks, DW, Shankle, MW, Jennings, KM, Meyers, SL (2013) Herbicide injury. Pages 110119 in CA, Clark Ferrin, DM, Smith, TP, Holmes, GJ, eds. Compendium of Sweetpotato Diseases, Pests, and Disorders. St. Paul, MN: American Phytopathological Society Google Scholar
[NCDA and CS] North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (2015) North Carolina Agricultural Statistics 2015. Raleigh, NC: NC Department of Agriculture. 148 pGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Griffith, GM, Scott, RC, Smith, KL, Oliver, LR (2008a) Confirmation and control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Arkansas. Weed Technol 22: 108113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Oliveira, MJ, Jha, P, Malik, M, Buckelew, JK, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW (2008b) Palmer amaranth and large crabgrass growth with plasticulture-grown bell pepper. Weed Technol 22: 296302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, AJ, Koger, CH, Wilcut, JW, Miller, D, van Santen, E (2008) Efficacy of residual and non-residual herbicides used in cotton production systems when applied with glyphosate, glufosinate, or MSMA. Weed Technol 22: 459466 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schonbrunn, E, Eschenburg, S, Shuttleworth, WA, Schloss, JV, Amrhein, N, Evans, JNS, Kabsch, W (2001) Interaction of the herbicide glyphosate with its target enzyme 5-enolpuruvylshikimate 3-phosphate synthase in atomic detail. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 13761380 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seem, JE, Creamer, NG, Monks, DW (2003) Critical weed-free period for ‘Beauregard’ sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas). Weed Technol 17: 686695 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellers, BA, Smeda, RJ, Johnson, WG, Kendig, JA, Ellersieck, MR (2003) Comparative growth of six Amaranthus species in Missouri. Weed Sci 51: 329333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Main, CL, Ellis, AT, Mueller, TC (2008) Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Tennessee has low level glyphosate resistance. Weed Technol 22: 119123 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2005) United States Standards for Grades of Sweet Potatoes. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture. 4 pGoogle Scholar
Webster, TM (2014) Weed survey—southern states. Page 292 in Proceedings of the 67th Southern Weed Science Society. Birmingham, AL: Southern Weed Science Society [Abstract] Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 40 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 20th January 2017 - 28th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-6585876b8c-758rl Total loading time: 0.425 Render date: 2021-01-28T10:08:08.504Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Evaluation of Wick-Applied Glyphosate for Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Control in Sweetpotato
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Evaluation of Wick-Applied Glyphosate for Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Control in Sweetpotato
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Evaluation of Wick-Applied Glyphosate for Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Control in Sweetpotato
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *