Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-31T19:18:32.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Seed Protectants Safen Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) Against Chloroacetamide Herbicide Injury

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Chester L. Foy
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol., Physiol., Weed Sci., Va. Polytech. Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061
Harold L. Witt
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol., Physiol., Weed Sci., Va. Polytech. Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061

Abstract

Alachlor at 3.4 and 6.7 kg ha-1, metolachlor at 2.8 and 5.6 kg ha-1, and propachlor at 4.5 and 9.0 kg ha-1 were applied to grain sorghum in field experiments conducted in 1981 and 1982. ‘Dekalb E-59’ and ‘Pioneer 8311’ grain sorghum were tested with and without the seed protectants cyometrinil and flurazole in both experiments. ‘Funk's G-1350’ was tested with and without cyometrinil and CGA-92194 in one experiment. Alachlor and metolachlor caused serious injury (stunting and, in some instances, reductions in stand and yield) to grain sorghum without the seed protectants. Less severe injury to grain sorghum occurred with alachlor and metolachlor at high rates even in the presence of the seed protectants. The three seed protectants were equally effective in preventing crop injury. Only minor injury to grain sorghum, with or without the seed protectants, occurred with propachlor at both rates. Overall, early-season weed control was 81 to 100%; however, propachlor at the rates tested was noticeably weaker than alachlor and metolachlor against some annual grasses.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Cheng, T. S., and Merkle, M. G. 1982. Oximes as seed safeners for grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to herbicides. Weed Sci. 30:7073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Devlin, D. L., Moshier, L. J., Russ, O. G., and Stahlman, P. W. 1983. Antidotes reduce injury to grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from acetanilide herbicides. Weed Sci. 31:790795.Google Scholar
3. Ellis, J. F., Peek, J. W., Boehle, J. Jr., and Muller, G. 1980. Effectiveness of a new safener for protecting sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from metolachlor injury. Weed Sci. 28:15.Google Scholar
4. Hatzios, K. K. 1983. Herbicide antidotes: development, chemistry, and mode of action. Adv. Agron. 36:265316.Google Scholar
5. Hatzios, K. K., and Hoagland, R. E. 1989. Herbicide safeners: progress and prospects. p. 355365 in Hatzios, K. K. and Hoagland, R. E., eds. Crop Safeners for Herbicides. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
6. Ketchersid, M. L., Norton, K., and Merkle, M. G. 1981. Influence of soil moisture on the safening effect of CGA-43089 in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Sci. 29:281287.Google Scholar
7. Leif, J. W. III, Burnside, O. C., and Martin, A. R. 1987. Efficacy of CGA-92194 and flurazole in protecting grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from herbicide injury. Weed Sci. 35:547553.Google Scholar
8. Nyffeler, A., Gerber, H. R., and Hensley, J. R. 1980. Laboratory studies on the behavior of the herbicide safener CGA-43089. Weed Sci. 28:610.Google Scholar
9. Roeth, F. W., Burnside, O. C., and Wicks, G. A. 1983. Protection of grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from chloroacetanilide herbicide injury. Weed Sci. 31:373379.Google Scholar
10. Simkins, G. S., Moshier, L. J., and Russ, O. G. 1980. Influence of acetamide herbicide applications on efficacy of the protectant CGA-43089 in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Sci. 28:646649.Google Scholar
11. Wicks, G. A., and Grabouski, P. H. 1986. Weed control in no-till sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Sci. 34:577581.Google Scholar
12. Winkle, M. E., Leavitt, J.R.C., and Burnside, O. C. 1980. Acetanilide-antidote combinations for weed control in corn (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Sci. 28:699704.Google Scholar