Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T11:48:08.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tolerance of Sweet Corn (Zea mays) Cultivars to Rimsulfuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John O'sullivan ,
Robert J. Thomas  and
William J. Bouw
John O'sullivan
Affiliation:
Horticultural Research Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Simcoe, ON, Canada N3Y 4N5
Robert J. Thomas
Affiliation:
Horticultural Research Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Simcoe, ON, Canada N3Y 4N5
William J. Bouw
Affiliation:
Horticultural Research Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Simcoe, ON, Canada N3Y 4N5
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1993 and 1994 to evaluate the tolerance of 16 sweet corn cultivars, representing a range of genotypes, to rimsulfuron applied postemergence (POST) at 12.5 and 25 g ai/ha. There was a significant cultivar by herbicide interaction for visual plant injury, plant height, and yield. ‘Merit’ and ‘Silver Extra Sweet’ were the most sensitive cultivars, with rimsulfuron resulting in complete plant mortality regardless of application dose. ‘Golden Jubilee,’ ‘King Arthur,’ ‘Ivanhoe,’ and ‘Zenith’ were less sensitive. Ten cultivars were tolerant to applications of rimsulfuron at 12.5 g/ha. Sensitivity to rimsulfuron increased as application dose increased.

Keywords

Rimsulfuron, N[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]-3-(ethylsulfonyl)-2-pyridinesulfonamidesweet corn, Zea mays L.Plant height reductionherbicide injurypostemergencesulfonylureayield reductionDAP, days after plantingDAT, days after treatmentPOST, postemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 258 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Beyer, E. M., Duffy, M. J., Hay, J. V., and Schleuter, D. D. 1988. Sulfonylurea herbicides. In Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation and Mode of Action. Volume 3. New York: Marcel Dekker. pp. 117–189.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Rosow, K. M., Greadelmann, J. L., and Openshaw, S. J. 1989. Differential tolerance of corn genotypes in DPX-M6316. Weed Sci. 37:651–657.Google Scholar
Green, J. M. and Ulrich, J. F. 1994. Response of maize (Zea mays) inbreds and hybrids to rimsulfuron. Pestic. Sci. 40:187–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mekki, M. and Leroux, G. D. 1994. Activity of nicosulfuron and rimsulfuron and their mixtures on field corn (Zea mays), soybean (Glycine max) and seven weed species. Weed Technol. 8:436–440.Google Scholar
Monks, D. W., Mullins, C. A., and Johnson, K. E. 1992. Response of sweet corn (Zea mays) to nicosulfuron and rimsulfuron. Weed Technol. 6:280–283.Google Scholar
Morton, C. A. and Harvey, R. G. 1992. Sweet corn (Zea mays) hybrid tolerance to nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 6:91–96.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, J., Brammall, R. A., and Bouw, W. J. 1995. Response of sweet corn (Zea mays) cultivars to nicosulfuron plus rimsulfuron. Weed Technol. 9:58–62.Google Scholar
Palm, H. L., Liang, P. H., Fuesler, T. P., Leek, G. L., Strachan, S. D., and Wittenhach, V. A. 1989. New low-rate sulfonylureas for postemergence weed control in corn. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf.: Weeds 1:23–28.Google Scholar
Robinson, D. K., Monks, D. W., Schulthesis, J. R., and Worsham, A. D. 1993. Sweet corn (Zea mays) cultivar tolerance to application timing of nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 7:840–843.Google Scholar
Stall, W. M. and Bewick, T. A. 1992. Sweet corn cultivars respond differently to the herbicide nicosulfuron. HortScience 27:131–133.Google Scholar
Styer, R. C. and Cantliffe, D. J. 1983. Changes in seed structure and composition during development and their effects on leakage in two endosperm mutants of sweet corn. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 108:721–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar