Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T22:26:27.927Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seed Depth Influence on Mexican Sunflower (Tithonia diversifolia) Emergence and Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Albert O. Ayeni ,
Samuel O. Agbato  and
Bradley A. Majek
Albert O. Ayeni
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Ibadan, Nigeria
Samuel O. Agbato
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Ibadan, Nigeria
Bradley A. Majek
Affiliation:
Rutgers University, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in pots and in the field to determine the influence of seed depth on seedling emergence pattern and control of Mexican sunflower with or without imazethapyr plus pendimethalin. Mexican sunflower seeds were placed at 0-, 2.5-, 5-, 7.5-, and 10-cm soil depths, and imazethapyr–pendimethalin mixture was applied PRE at 0, 0.05 + 0.65, 0.09 + 1.31, and 0.18 + 2.62 kg ae (+ ai)/ha. Mexican sunflower emergence was 57, 30, 14, 3, and 2% from 0-, 2.5-, 5-, 7.5-, and 10-cm seed depths, respectively. Seedling emergence started 2 to 3 d after planting and continued for 4 to 5 d. At 0- to 5-cm seed depths, 84 to 100% of total seedling emergence occurred within 3 d after the first seedling emerged, but emergence rate was less from 7.5- and 10-cm seed depths. Imazethapyr plus pendimethalin at 0.05 + 0.65 and 0.09 + 1.31 kg/ha had no effect on seedling emergence in Mexican sunflower, but subsequent growth was severely inhibited regardless of seed depth. The herbicide treatments were more injurious to Mexican sunflower seedlings that emerged from 5- to 10-cm depths than to those that emerged from 0 and 2.5 cm. Burying seeds 7.5 cm deep or more is a potential control measure for Mexican sunflower, and the deeper the emergence depth, the more susceptible the seedling is to imazethapyr plus pendimethalin.

Keywords

Imazethapyr, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidpendimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamineMexican sunflower, Tithonia diversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray.Cultural weed controlimazethapyrpendimethalinsmall scale farmingNigeriaWest AfricaWAP, weeks after planting
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 1997 , pp. 417 - 427
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Adeyemi, O. R. 1989. Preemergence and early postemergence weed control in soybean (Glycine max) using imazaquin, imazethapyr, and their mixture with pendimethalin. . University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, pp. 43–45.Google Scholar
Ahrens, H. W., ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed., Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. pp. 167, 232.Google Scholar
Akintelure, A. 1992. Response of soybean to different populations of Mexican sunflower (Tithonia diversifolia). . University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. 65 p.Google Scholar
Akobundu, I. O. 1987. Weed Science in the Tropics. Principles and Practice. London: Wiley Interscience. 522 p.Google Scholar
Akobundu, I. O. and Agyakwa, C. W. 1987. A Handbook of West African Weeds. Ibadan, Nigeria: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. 194 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1975. Diagnosis and Prevention of Herbicide Injury. Extension Bull. E-809. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. 19 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1987. Imazethapyr herbicide (AC 263,499). Princeton, NJ: American Cyanamid. 17 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1991. Pursuit. Princeton, NJ: American Cyanamid. 30 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1994. Weed Control Recommendations for Nigeria. Series No. 3. Nat. Advisory Committee on Weed Control. Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Department of Agriculture. 99 p.Google Scholar
Ayeni, A. O. 1990. Herbicide Screening in Arable Crops (Soybean, Rice, Cowpea). Weed Science Technical Report Series No. 1 (1983–1989). Ibadan, Nigeria: University of Ibadan. 34 p.Google Scholar
Ayeni, A. O. 1991. Herbicide Screening in Arable Crops (Maize/Cassava, Maize, Soybean, Cowpea). Weed Science Technical Report Series No. 2 (1990). Ibadan, Nigeria: University of Ibadan. 39 p.Google Scholar
Ayeni, A. O. 1992. Herbicide Screening in Arabic Crops (Maize, Rice, Soybean, Groundnut, Crop mixtures). Weed Science Technical Report Series No. 3 (1991). Ibadan, Nigeria: University of Ibadan. 58 p.Google Scholar
Ayeni, A. O. and Oyekan, P. O. 1992. Weed control in soybeans in Nigeria. Trop. Oilseeds J. 1:43–52.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E. 1990. Influence of soil temperature, soil moisture, and seed burial depth on the emergence of round-leaved mallow (Malva pusilla). Weed Sci. 38:518–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Composite List of Weeds. 1989. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 112 p.Google Scholar
Eastin, E. F. 1984. Drummond rattlebox (Sesbania drummondii) germination as influenced by scarification, temperature, and seeding depth. Weed Sci. 32:223–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, D. L. and Shaner, D. L. 1991. Absorption and translocation of the imidazolinone herbicides. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. London: CRC Press. pp. 53–69.Google Scholar
Lordbanjou, D. T. 1991. Studies on Mexican sunflower (Tithonia diversifolia) in southwestern Nigeria. . University of Ibadan, Ibadan Nigeria, pp. 50–52.Google Scholar
Mangels, G. 1991. Behaviour of the imidazolinone herbicides in soil—a review of the literature. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. London: CRC Press. pp. 192–208.Google Scholar
Vitolo, D., Ilnicki, R. D., and Horng, L. C. 1983. Combinations of chloramben with trifluralin, pendimethalin, and UBI-S734 for weed control in sunflower. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 37:13–16.Google Scholar