Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-npwhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-03T03:25:25.833Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Total Postemergence Weed Control in Imidazolinone-Resistant Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ronald F. Krausz  and
George Kapusta
Ronald F. Krausz
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Science, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901
George Kapusta
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Science, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to evaluate weed control in imidazolinone-resistant corn with postemergence applications of imidazolinone and sulfonylurea herbicides. Imazethapyr controlled 100% of redroot pigweed, jimsonweed, and eastern black nightshade. Control of fall panicum with imazethapyr was inconsistent, with control ranging from 42 to 85%. Imazethapyr provided less than 55% control of common lambsquarters and 43% of large crabgrass. Imazethapyr plus either atrazine, 2,4-D, or dicamba increased control of common lambsquarters compared to imazethapyr alone. Fall panicum control was > 95% with nicosufluron. CGA-152005 and MON 12000 did not control eastern black nightshade. In 1995, corn yield was greater with the hand-weeded check compared to all herbicide treatments. The greatest return over herbicide cost with imazethapyr was obtained with imazethapyr plus atrazine. Nicosulfuron plus CGA-152005 provided the greatest return over herbicide cost when averaged across years.

Keywords

dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid2,4-D, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acidcommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALeastern black nightshade, Solanum ptycanthum Dun # SOLPTfall panicum, Panicum dichotomiflorum # PANDI Michxjimsonweed, Datura stramonium L. # DATSTlarge crabgrass, Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. # DIGSAredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREcorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3245IR.’Postemergence herbicidesAmaranthus retroflexusChenopodium albumDatura stramoniumDigitaria sanguinalisPanicum dichotomiflorumSolanum ptycanthumAMARECHEALDATSTDIGSAPANDISOLPTALS, acetolactate synthaseIR, imidazolinone-resistant

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 1998 , pp. 151 - 156
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous. 1996a. Aatrex® product label. Greensboro, NC: Ciba Crop Protection. p. 7.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1996b. Accent® product label. Wilmington, DE: DuPont. p. 9.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. A., and Kapusta, G. 1993. Soil insecticide and placement influence corn (<i>Zea mays</i>) tolerance to nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 8:598–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjelk, L. A., and Monaco, T. J. 1992. Effect of chlorimuron and quizalofop on fatty acid biosynthesis. Weed Sci. 40:1–6.Google Scholar
Camacho, R. F., and Moshier, L. 1991. Absorption, translocation, and activity of CGA-136872, DPX-V9360, and glyphosate in rhizome johnsongrass (<i>Sorghum halepense</i>). Weed Sci. 39:354–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camacho, R. F., Moshier, L. J., Morishita, D. W., and Devlin, D. L. 1991. Rhizome johnsongrass (<i>Sorghum halepense</i>) control in corn (<i>Zea mays</i>) with primisulfuron and nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 5:789–794.Google Scholar
Currie, R. S., Kwon, C. S., and Penner, D. 1995. Magnitude of imazethapyr resistance of corn (<i>Zea mays</i>) hybrids with altered acetolactate synthase. Weed Sci. 43:578–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, R. S., and Regehr, D. L. 1995. Methods of measuring the impact of the XA17 gene on imazethapyr injury in corn (<i>Zea mays</i>). Weed Technol. 9:676–681.Google Scholar
Diehl, K. E., and Stoller, E. W. 1995. Effect of simulated rainfall, insecticide formulation, and insecticide application method on the interaction between nicosulfuron and terbufos in corn (<i>Zea mays</i>). Weed Technol. 9:80–85.Google Scholar
Dobbels, A. F., and Kapusta, G. 1993. Postemergence weed control in corn (<i>Zea mays</i>) with nicosulfuron combinations. Weed Technol. 7:844–850.Google Scholar
Green, J. M., and Ulrich, J. F. 1993. Response of corn (<i>Zea mays</i>) inbreds and hybrids to sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Sci. 41:508–516.Google Scholar
Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (<i>Zea mays</i>). Weed Sci. 40:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, S. E., and Wax, L. M. 1996. Dicamba antagonizes grass weed control with imazethapyr by reducing foliar absorption. Weed Technol. 10:828–834.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., 1995. Influence of adjuvants on the antagonism of graminicides by broadleaf herbicides. Weed Technol. 9:741–747.Google Scholar
Kapusta, G., and Krausz, R. F. 1992. Interaction of terbufos and nicosulfuron on corn (<i>Zea mays</i>). Weed Technol. 6:999–1003.Google Scholar
Kapusta, G., and Krausz, R. F. 1993. Weed control and yield arc equal in conventional, reduced-, and no-tillage soybean (<i>Glycine max</i>) after 11 years. Weed Technol. 7:443–451.Google Scholar
Klingaman, T. E., King, C. A., and Oliver, L. R. 1992. Effect of application rate, weed species, and weed stage of growth on imazethapyr activity. Weed Sci. 40:227–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knake, E. L., and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of <i>Setaria faberi</i> with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.Google Scholar
Lueschen, W. E., and Hoverstad, T. R. 1991. Imazethapyr for weed control in no-till soybean (<i>Glycine max</i>). Weed Technol. 5:845–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, T. C., Witt, W. W., and Barrett, M. 1989. Antagonism of johnsongrass (<i>Sorghum halepense</i>) control with fenoxaprop, haloxyfop, and sethoxydim by 2,4-D. Weed Technol. 3:86–89.Google Scholar
Myers, P. F., and Coble, H. D. 1992. Antagonism of graminicide activity on annual grass species by imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 6:333–338.Google Scholar
Newhouse, K., Wang, T., and Anderson, P. 1991. Imadazolinone-tolerant crops. <i>In</i> Shatter, D. L. and O'Conner, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 139–150.Google ScholarPubMed
Obrigawitch, T. T., Kenyon, W. H., and Kuratle, H. 1990. Effect of application timing on rhizome johnsongrass (<i>Sorghum halepense</i>) control with DPXV9360. Weed Sci. 38:45–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Risley, M. A., and Oliver, L. R. 1991. Efficacy of imazaquin on various weed species. Weed Sci. 39:243–250.Google Scholar
Rudyanski, W. J., Fawcett, R. S., and McAllister, R. S. 1987. Effect of prior pesticide use on thiocarbamate herbicide persistence and giant foxtail (<i>Setaria faberi</i>) control. Weed Sci. 35:68–74.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R., and Wixson, M. B. 1991. Postemergence combinations of imazaquin or imazethapyr with AC 263,222 for weed control in soybean (<i>Glycine max</i>). Weed Sci. 39:644–649.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W., Wax, L. M., and Alm, D. M. 1993. Survey results on environmental issues and weed science research priorities within the corn belt. Weed Technol. 7:763–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wanamarta, G., Penner, D., and Kells, J. J. 1989. The basis of bentazon antagonism on sethoxydim absorption and activity. Weed Sci. 37:400–404.Google Scholar