Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T10:38:25.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Identification, Distribution, and Control of Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) Ecotypes with Varying Levels of Sensitivity to Triasulfuron in Texas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kevin P. Tucker ,
Gaylon D. Morgan ,
Scott A. Senseman ,
Travis D. Miller  and
Paul A. Baumann
Kevin P. Tucker
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
Gaylon D. Morgan*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
Scott A. Senseman
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
Travis D. Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
Paul A. Baumann
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: gmorgan@ag.tamu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Texas wheat producers have observed reduced efficacy and failure to control Italian ryegrass with registered rates of sulfonylurea herbicides that were previously effective. Growth chamber studies were conducted to quantify the sensitivity and distribution of Italian ryegrass ecotypes in Texas to triasulfuron and to determine alternative herbicide management options. Italian ryegrass seed samples were collected from over 40 wheat fields in 13 central and north Texas counties where declining Italian ryegrass control was reported by farmers following sulfonylurea herbicide application(s). Two-leaf Italian ryegrass was screened with an application of 150 g ai/ha triasulfuron, a rate five times the registered herbicide use rate. Sensitivity was determined by the response of an ecotype to that of a known susceptible population. Of the 48 Italian ryegrass ecotypes sampled, nine were comparable to susceptible standard, while the remaining 39 ecotypes were less sensitive to triasulfuron. Four of the least sensitive ecotypes to triasulfuron plus the susceptible standard were selected for a subsequent study. Diclofop, clodinafop, and metribuzin reduced fresh weights by at least 69, 71, and 62% across all ecotypes. No imazamox or triasulfuron treatment reduced fresh weights more than 60%.

Keywords

ClodinafopdiclofopimazamoxmetribuzintriasulfuronItalian ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum L. #3 LOLMUwheat, Triticum aestivum L.ALS inhibitorcross-resistanceherbicide resistanceimidazolinoneresistance surveysulfonylureaALS, acetolactate synthaseACCase, acetyl-CoA carboxylaseDAT, days after treatmentLTSE, low triasulfuron-sensitivity ecotypes
Type
Note
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , September 2006 , pp. 745 - 750
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. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Ahrens, W. H. ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 352 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2003. Crop Protection Reference. 18th ed. New York: C&P.Google Scholar
Appleby, A. P., Olsen, P. D., and Colbert, D. R. 1976. Winter wheat yield reduction from interference by Italian ryegrass. Agron. J. 68:463–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, D. M., Hoveland, C. S., and Lacefield, G. D. 1996. Cool season grasses. in Ball, D. M., Hoveland, C. S., and Lacefield, G. D., eds. Southern Forages. Atlanta, GA: Williams Printing. Pp. 45.Google Scholar
Beckie, H. J., Hall, L. M., Meers, S., Laslo, J. J., and Stevenson, F. C. 2004. Management practices influencing herbicide resistance in wild oat. Weed Technol. 18:853–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, K. H., Cralle, N. T., Chandler, J. M., Miller, T. D., Bovey, R. W., Senseman, S. A., and Stone, M. J. 1999. Triticum aestivum and Lolium multiflorum interaction during drought. Weed Sci. 47:440–445.Google Scholar
Christopher, J. T., Powles, S. B., and Holtum, J. A. M. 1992. Resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibiting herbicides in annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) involves at least two mechanisms. Plant Physiol. 100:1909–1913.Google Scholar
Cocker, K. M., Northcroft, D. S., Coleman, J. O. D., and Moss, S. R. 2001. Resistance to ACCase-inhibiting herbicides and isoproturon in UK populations of Lolium multiflorum: mechanisms of resistance and implications for control. Pest Manage. Sci. 57:587–597.Google Scholar
De Prado, R., Gonzalez-Gutierrez, J., Menendez, J., Gasquez, J., Gronwald, J. W., and Gimenez-Espinosa, R. 2000. Resistance to acetyl CoA carboxylase-inhibiting herbicides in Lolium multiflorum . Weed Sci. 48:311–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, M. D., Duke, S. O., and Fedtke, C. 1993. Inhibition of branched-chain amino acid biosynthesis. in Devine, M. D., Duke, S. O., and Fedtke, C., eds. Physiology of Herbicide Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PTR Prentice Hall. Pp. 263–273.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. L. 1986. Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 34:98–100.Google Scholar
Hashem, A., Radosevich, S. R., and Roush, M. L. 1998. Effect of proximity factors on competition between winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) & Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Weed Sci. 46:181–190.Google Scholar
Kuk, Y. I., Burgos, N. R., and Talbert, R. E. 2000. Cross- and multiple resistance of diclofop-resistant Lolium spp. Weed Sci. 48:412–419.Google Scholar
Mengistu, L. W., Messersmith, C. G., and Christoffers, M. J. 2003. Diversity of herbicide resistace amoung wild oat sampled 36 yr apart. Weed Sci. 51:764–773.Google Scholar
Moss, S. R., Horswell, J., Williams, R. J. F., and Ndoping, M. M. 1993. Implications of herbicide resistant Lolium multiflorum (Italian rye-grass). Asp. Appl. Biol. 35:53–60.Google Scholar
Ray, T. B. 1984. Site of action of chlorsulfuron. Plant Physiol. 75:827–831.Google Scholar
Ross, M. A. and Lembi, C. A. 1999. Herbicide resistance. in Stewart, C., Stagman, J., and Carnis, M., eds. Applied Weed Science. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Pp. 144–150.Google Scholar
Saari, L. L., Cotterman, J. C., and Thill, D. C. 1994. Resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibiting herbicides. in Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J.A.M., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis. Pp. 83–139.Google Scholar
Stanger, C. E. and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) accessions tolerant to diclofop. Weed Sci. 37:350–352.Google Scholar
Stone, M. J., Cralle, H. T., Chandler, J. M., Miller, T. D., and Carson, K. H. 1998. Above and belowground interference of wheat (Triticum aestivum) by Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Weed Sci. 46:438–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. M. and Coats, G. E. 1996. Identification of sulfometuron-resistant Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) selections. Weed Technol. 10:943–946.Google Scholar
Terrel, E. E. 1968. A Taxonomic Revision of the Genus Lolium. USDA-ARS Technical Bulletin No. 1392. Washington D.C.: U.S. Print Office. 65 p.Google Scholar