Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-72crv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T05:38:30.898Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Interaction between tolpyralate and atrazine for the control of annual weed species in corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2022

John C. Fluttert
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Nader Soltani*
Affiliation:
Adjunct Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Mariano Galla
Affiliation:
Product Development and Technical Service Representative, ISK Biosciences Inc., Concord, OH, USA
David C. Hooker
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Darren E. Robinson
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Nader Soltani, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, 120 Main Street East, Ridgetown, ON N0P 2C0, Canada. Email: soltanin@uoguelph.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many studies have documented the interaction between 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibiting and photosystem II (PSII)-inhibiting herbicides. Most have focused on the interaction between mesotrione and atrazine, with only a few studies characterizing the nature of the interaction between tolpyralate and atrazine. Therefore, five field experiments were conducted in Ontario, Canada, over a 3-yr period (2019 to 2021) to characterize the interaction between three rates of tolpyralate (15, 30, and 45 g ai ha−1) and three rates of atrazine (140, 280, and 560 g ai ha−1) for the control of seven annual weed species in corn (Zea mays L.). Tolpyralate at 30 or 45 g ha−1 applied with atrazine at 280 or 560 g ha−1 controlled velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik.), redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.), common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.), and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) >90% at 8 wk after application (WAA). Tolpyralate and atrazine were synergistic at each rate combination for the control of A. theophrasti at 8 WAA. In contrast, A. retroflexus and S. arvensis control at 8 WAA was additive with each rate combination. At 8 WAA, C. album control was generally additive, but one rate combination was synergistic. Ambrosia artemisiifolia control at 8 WAA was synergistic with five rate combinations and additive with the other four. Barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.] control at 8 WAA was additive with seven of the rate combinations and synergistic with two. Setaria spp. control at 8 WAA was synergistic with one more rate combination compared with E. crus-galli, but the two weed species shared the same synergistic rate combinations. This study concludes that extrapolation or broad classifications of the interaction between tolpyralate and atrazine would be inappropriate, as the interaction can vary due to herbicide rate, weed species, and the response parameter analyzed.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Table 1. Location, year, soil characteristics, corn planting and harvest dates, herbicide application dates, and corn development stages at application for five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 1

Table 2. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Abutilon theophrasti control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across two field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2020 and 2021.

Figure 2

Table 3. Abutilon theophrasti control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across two field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2020 and 2021.a

Figure 3

Table 4. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Amaranthus retroflexus control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across four field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 4

Table 5. Amaranthus retroflexus control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across four field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.a

Figure 5

Table 6. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Ambrosia artemisiifolia control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 6

Table 7. Ambrosia artemisiifolia control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.a

Figure 7

Table 8. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Chenopodium album control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 8

Table 9. C. album (Chenopodium album) control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.a

Figure 9

Table 10. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Sinapis arvensis control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across three field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 10

Table 11. Sinapis arvensis control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across three field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.a

Figure 11

Table 12. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Echinochloa crus-galli control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 12

Table 13. Echinochloa crus-galli control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.a

Figure 13

Table 14. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for Setaria spp. control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

Figure 14

Table 15. Setaria spp. control at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), density, and dry biomass in corn after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across five field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2019, 2020, and 2021.a

Figure 15

Table 16. Least-square means and significance of main effects and interaction for corn grain yield after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across four field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2020 and 2021.

Figure 16

Table 17. Corn grain yield after the application of tolpyralate, atrazine, and tolpyralate + atrazine across four field trials in Ontario, Canada, in 2020 and 2021.