Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T19:34:51.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Soil Moisture on the Safening Effect of CGA-43089 in Grain Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

M. L. Ketchersid ,
K. Norton  and
M. G. Merkle
M. L. Ketchersid
Affiliation:
Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
K. Norton
Affiliation:
Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
M. G. Merkle
Affiliation:
Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field and growth chamber experiments were conducted to determine the effects of surface soil moisture on the phytotoxicity of alachlor [2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide] and metolachlor [2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide] to grain sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. ‘Funk 623 GBR’], which was unprotected or protected with CGA-43089 {α-[(cyanomethoxy)imino] benzeneacetonitrile}. In field tests, neither alachlor nor metolachlor was phytotoxic to unprotected grain sorghum when the surface soil remained dry until the sorghum had emerged. CGA-43089 protected sorghum emerging from moist soil that had been treated with alachlor or metolachlor at rates of 2.24 or 3.36 kg/ha. Growth chamber tests showed that CGA-43089 was less effective in protecting sorghum from herbicide injury when Ships clay was continuously wet [110% field capacity (FC)] from time of planting to emergence (3 to 5 days) than when soil was wet for only 1 or 2 days prior to emergence. In contrast, if the surface soil remained dry until the coleoptile reached the soil surface, alachlor and metolachlor had little effect on sorghum even when no protectant was present. When sorghum was planted in Arenosa sand containing 5% organic matter, protected sorghum grew as well as the control even under continuous high moisture conditions. Metolachlor incorporated into the root zone at a rate of 20 ppm had no effect on either protected or unprotected sorghum. Alachlor and metolachlor were most phytotoxic when placed in the surface 1.25 cm of moist soil or when incorporated. The coleoptile was the most susceptible plant part. Thus, the key to grain sorghum response to these herbicides was in herbicide placement and availability to the coleoptile. Under conditions normally leading to phytotoxic effects from alachlor or metolachlor, grain sorghum growth was significantly better from seed protected with CGA-43089 than from unprotected seed.

Keywords

Alachlormetolachlorchloroacetanilidesleachingplacement
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , May 1981 , pp. 281 - 287
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

1. Armstrong, T. F., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1973. Yellow nutsedge control with alachlor. Weed Sci. 21:354–357.Google Scholar
2. Armstrong, T. F., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1973. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of alachlor by yellow nutsedge. Weed Sci. 21:357–359.Google Scholar
3. Ashton, F. M. and Sheets, T. J. 1959. The relationship of soil adsorption of EPTC to oats injury in various soil types. Weeds 7:88–90.Google Scholar
4. Belote, J. N. III and Monaco, T. J. 1977. Factors involved in alachlor injury to potato. Weed Sci. 25:482–486.Google Scholar
5. Blair, A. M., Parker, C., and Kasasian, L. 1976. Herbicide protectants and antidotes – a review. PANS 22:65–74.Google Scholar
6. Bouse, L. F. and Bovey, R. W. 1967. A laboratory sprayer for potted plants. Weeds 15:89–91.Google Scholar
7. Boyd, J. W., Mason, J. F., and Murray, D. S. 1979. The influence of CGA-43089 on the performance of metolachlor. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:56.Google Scholar
8. Chandler, J. M., Basler, E., and Santelmann, P. W. 1974. Uptake and translocation of alachlor in soybeans and wheat. Weed Sci. 22:253–258.Google Scholar
9. CIBA-GEIGY. 1979. Chemical and physical properties of new herbicides (CGA-43089.). Res. Rep. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:109.Google Scholar
10. Diner, A. M., Davis, D. E., and Truelove, B. 1977. Absorption and translocation of root and foliar-applied 14C-metolachlor in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:358.Google Scholar
11. Eshel, Y. and Prendeville, G. N. 1967. A technique for studying root vs shoot uptake of soil-applied herbicides. Weed Res. 7:242–245.Google Scholar
12. Hardcastle, W. S. 1979. Safening effect of CGA-43089 in herbicide treated sorghum. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:386.Google Scholar
13. Jordan, G. L. and Harvey, R. G. 1978. Response of processing peas (Pisum sativum) and annual weeds to acetanilide herbicides. Weed Sci. 26:313–317.Google Scholar
14. Knake, E. L., Appleby, A. P., and Furtick, W. R. 1967. Soil incorporation and site of uptake of preemergence herbicides. Weeds 15:228–232.Google Scholar
15. Knake, E. L. and Wax, L. M. 1968. The importance of the shoot of giant foxtail for uptake of preemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 16:393–395.Google Scholar
16. Murray, J. S., Schreiber, M. M., and Guard, A. T. 1967. Anatomy of the first internode of giant foxtail. Weeds 15:347–351.Google Scholar
17. Nyffler, A., Gerber, H. R., and Hensley, J. 1980. Laboratory studies on the behavior of the herbicide safener CGA-43089. Weed Sci. 28:6–10.Google Scholar
18. Parochetti, J. V. 1973. Soil organic matter effect on activity of acetanilides, CDAA, and atrazine. Weed Sci. 21:157–160.Google Scholar
19. Pillai, C. G. P., Davis, D. E., and Truelove, B. 1977. Site of uptake and mode of action of metolachlor. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:367.Google Scholar
20. Rhodes, G. N. and Jeffery, L. S. 1979. Evaluation of CGA-43089 to protect grain sorghum from alachlor and metolachlor injury. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:310.Google Scholar
21. Skipper, H. D., Gossett, B. J., and Smith, G. W. 1976. Field evaluation and soil residual characteristics of CGA-24705 and alachlor. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 29:418–422.Google Scholar
22. Stickler, R. L., Knake, E. L., and Hinesly, T. D. 1969. Soil moisture and effectiveness of preemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 17: 257–259.Google Scholar
23. Timmons, F. D. and Coble, H. D. 1972. Performance of two acetanilide herbicides in organic soil in North Carolina. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 25:446–451.Google Scholar
24. Turner, W. E., Holt, B. E., McMahon, A., and Thomas, J. M. III. 1979. Metolachlor for weed control in grain sorghum treated with seed protectant. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:124.Google Scholar
25. Weber, J. B. 1971. Interaction of organic pesticides with particulate matter in aquatic and soil systems. Advan. Chem. Ser. 3:55–120.Google Scholar
26. Weed Science Society of America. 1979. Herbicide Handbook, 4th ed. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, Illinois. 479 pp.Google Scholar