Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T05:43:40.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of POST-Harvest Herbicide Applications for Seed Prevention of Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Whitney D. Crow ,
Lawrence E. Steckel ,
Robert M. Hayes  and
Thomas C. Mueller
Whitney D. Crow
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, 605 Airways Boulevard, Jackson, TN 38301
Lawrence E. Steckel*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, 605 Airways Boulevard, Jackson, TN 38301
Robert M. Hayes
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, 605 Airways Boulevard, Jackson, TN 38301
Thomas C. Mueller
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Tennessee, 2431 Joe Johnson Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: lsteckel@utk.edu.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m−2 or approximately 12 million seed ha−1 to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application.

Aumentos recientes en la prevalencia de Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) requiere que nuevas estrategias de control sean desarrolladas para optimizar el control de malezas y el desempeño de los cultivos. Se realizó un estudio de campo en 2012 y 2013, en Jackson, Tennessee, y en 2013 en Knoxville, Tennessee, para evaluar programas de manejo de malezas POST aplicados después de la cosecha (POST-cosecha) para la prevención de la producción de semilla de A. palmeri GR y para evaluar la residualidad de los herbicidas durante el trigo de invierno. Los tratamientos fueron aplicados POST-cosecha a campos después de la cosecha del maíz, con tres aplicaciones seguidas por un herbicida PRE aplicado al momento de la siembra del trigo. Paraquat solo o en mezcla con S-metolachlor controló 91% del A. palmeri existente 14 d después del tratamiento, pero no controló el rebrote de la maleza. La mezcla en tanque de paraquat con un herbicida residual ya sea metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone más flumioxazin, o pyroxasulfone más fluthiacet mejoró el control de rebrotes o nueva emergencia de plántulas al compararse con paraquat solo. Mediante la implementación de aplicaciones de herbicidas POST-cosecha se previno la adición al banco de semillas de 1,200 semillas m−2 o aproximadamente 12 millones de semillas ha−1. En general, la adición de un herbicida residual brindó solamente 4 a 7% más control de A. palmeri GR que paraquat solo. El daño al trigo fue vidente (<10%) con las aplicaciones PRE en 2012, pero no en 2013. El rendimiento de grano del trigo no fue afectado adversamente por ninguna de las aplicaciones de herbicidas.

Keywords

Pyroxasulfone, 5-(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyrazol-4-ylmethyl 4,5-dihydro-5,5-dimethyl-1,2-oxazol-3-yl sulfonePalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Watscorn, Zea mays L.wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Glyphosate resistanceherbicide resistanceweed control
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 405 - 411
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous. 2015. Supplemental Zidua herbicide label. Page 2. www.agproducts.basf.us/products/label-and-msds/zidua-herbicide-supp-label-3.pdf. Accessed February 25, 2015Google Scholar
Bagavathiannan, MV, Norsworthy, JK (2012) Late-season seed production in arable weed communities: management implications. Weed Sci 60:325–334 Google Scholar
Brewer, CE, Oliver, LR (2007) Reducing weed seed rain with late-season glyphosate applications. Weed Technol 21:753–758 Google Scholar
Buhler, DD (1995) Influence of tillage systems on weed population dynamics and management in corn and soybean in the central USA. Crop Sci 35:1247–1258.Google Scholar
Carmer, SG, Nyquist, WE, Walker, WM (1989) Least significant differences for combined analysis of experiments with two or three-factor treatment designs. Agron J 81:665–672 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, PA, Griffin, JL (2000) Weed seed production and seedling emergence responses to late-season glyphosate applications. Weed Sci 48:481–486 Google Scholar
Coffman, CB, Frank, JR (1991) Weed–crop responses to weed management systems in conservation tillage corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 5:76–81 Google Scholar
Culpepper, SA, Sosnoskie, LM (2011) Palmer amaranth management for 2011 begins now. Georgia Cotton Newsletter. The University of Georgia Cooperative Extension. http://commodities.caes.uga.edu/fieldcrops/cotton/cnl070910.pdf. Accessed: June 13, 2014Google Scholar
Hulting, AG, Dauer, JT, Hind-Cook, B, Cutis, D, Koepke-Hill, RM, Mallory-Smith, C (2012) Management of Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne ssp. multiflorum) in western Oregon with preemergence applications of pyroxasulfone in winter wheat. Weed Technol 26:230–235 Google Scholar
Jones, RE, Medd, RW (2005) A methodology for evaluating risk and efficacy of weed management technologies. Weed Sci 53:505–514 Google Scholar
Keeley, PE, Carter, CH, Thullen, RM (1987) Influence of planting date on growth of Palmer amaranth ( Amaranthus palmeri) . Weed Sci 35:199–204 Google Scholar
Koepke-Hill, RM, Armel, GR, Bradley, KW, Bailey, WA, Wilson, HP, Hines, TE (2011) Evaluation of flufenacet plus metribuzin mixtures for control of Italian ryegrass in winter wheat. Weed Technol 25:563–567 Google Scholar
Koskinen, WC, McWhorter, CG (1986) Weed control in conservation tillage. J Soil Water Conserv 41:365–370 Google Scholar
Menges, RM (1987) Weed seed population dynamics during six years of weed management systems in crop rotations on irrigated soil. Weed Sci 35:328–332 Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llwellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR, Witt, WW, Barrett, M (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci 60 (Special Issue):31–62 Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Griffin, G, Griffin, T, Bagavathianan, , Gbur, EE (2014) In-field movement of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and its impact on cotton lint yield: evidence supporting a zero-threshold strategy. Weed Sci 62:237–249 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowak, JP (1983) Obstacles to adoption of conservation tillage. J Soil Water Conserv 38:162–165 Google Scholar
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service (2007) Soil Erosion on Cropland 2007. U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/technical/?cid=stelprdb1041887. Accessed August 11, 2014Google Scholar
Price, AJ, Balkcom, KS, Culpepper, SA, Kelton, JA, Nichols, RL, Schomberg, H (2011) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth: a threat to conservation tillage. J Soil Water Conserv 66:265–275 Google Scholar
Raper, TB (2014) Managing Wheat for Top Yields and Grain Quality. UT Extension Pub. W321. http://www.utcrops.com/wheat/Presentations/2015Raper_grain_conf_comp.pdf. Accessed December 12, 2014Google Scholar
Schweizer, EE, Zimdahl, RL (1984) Weed seed decline in irrigated soil after six years of continuous corn (Zea mays) and herbicides. Weed Sci 32:76–83 Google Scholar
Sosnoskie, LM, Webster, TM, Grey, TL, Culpepper, AS (2014) Severed stems of Amaranthus palmeri are capable of regrowth and seed production in Gossypium hirsutum . Ann Appl Biol 165:147–154 Google Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL, Simmons, FW, Bollero, G (2003) Effect of shading on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) growth and development. Weed Sci 51:898–903 Google Scholar
Taylor, SE, Oliver, LR (1997) Sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) seed production and viability as influenced by late-season postemergence herbicide applications. Weed Sci 45:497–501 Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013) 2012 Tillage Systems. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Tennessee/Quick_Facts/tillage.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2014Google Scholar
VanGessel, MJ (2001) Glyphosate-resistant horseweed in Delaware. Weed Sci 49:703–705 Google Scholar