6 results
Bell Pepper and Weed Response to Dimethyl Disulfide plus Chloropicrin and Herbicide Systems
- Peter M. Eure, A. Stanley Culpepper
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 31 / Issue 5 / October 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 September 2017, pp. 694-700
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Bell pepper producers are faced with the challenge of controlling weeds following the phase-out of methyl bromide (MBr). Numerous attempts have been made to find a single fumigant or herbicide to control a broad spectrum of weeds. Adequate weed control in bell pepper will likely require weed management systems utilizing both fumigant and herbicide options. A weed management system including the fumigant dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) plus chloropicrin (Pic) plus the herbicide napropamide prior to transplant followed by S-metolachlor POST may be necessary to replace MBr. Field experiments were conducted during 2010 and 2011 near Ty Ty, Georgia to determine bell pepper and weed response to DMDS plus Pic or in systems with napropamide and/or S-metolachlor. Bell pepper were not significantly injured by DMDS plus Pic or napropamide. Injury caused by S-metolachlor was transient and plants fully recovered by 4 weeks after treatment (WAT). Yellow nutsedge control 6 WAT using DMDS plus Pic applied at 468 or 560 L ha−1 controlled yellow nutsedge 91 to 95%. Large crabgrass control 6 WAT was 92 to 100% when DMDS plus Pic was applied at 468 or 560 L ha−1 with or without a(n) herbicide (S-metolachlor or napropamide). Palmer Amaranth control prior to harvest was 21, 64, and 85% using DMDS plus Pic at 374, 468, or 560 L ha−1, respectively. DMDS plus Pic applied at 468 or 560 L ha-1 with napropamide followed by S-metolachlor POST gave 95 to 99% control of Palmer amaranth 6 WAT. Consistent weed control and optimum yields were obtained when DMDS plus Pic was used at 468 L ha−1 plus napropamide beneath plastic mulch followed by S-metolachlor POST.
Time of Application Influences Translocation of Auxinic Herbicides in Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)
- Christopher R. Johnston, Peter M. Eure, Timothy L. Grey, A. Stanley Culpepper, William K. Vencill
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 66 / Issue 1 / January 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 22 August 2017, pp. 4-14
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The efficacy of WSSA Group 4 herbicides has been reported to vary with dependence on the time of day the application is made, which may affect the value of this mechanism of action as a control option and resistance management tool for Palmer amaranth. The objectives of this research were to evaluate the effect of time of day for application on 2,4-D and dicamba translocation and whether or not altering translocation affected any existing variation in phytotoxicity seen across application time of day. Maximum translocation (Tmax) of [14C]2,4-D and [14C]dicamba out of the treated leaf was significantly increased 52% and 29% to 34% in one of two repeated experiments for each herbicide, respectively, with application at 7:00 AM compared with applications at 2:00 PM and/or 12:00 AM. Applications at 7:00 AM increased [14C]2,4-D distribution to roots and increased [14C]dicamba distribution above the treated leaf compared with other application timings. In phytotoxicity experiments, dicamba application at 8 h after exposure to darkness (HAED) resulted in significantly lower dry root biomass than dicamba application at 8 h after exposure to light (HAEL). Contrasts indicated that injury resulting from dicamba application at 8 HAEL, corresponding to midday, was significantly reduced with a root treatment of 5-[N-(3,4-dimethoxyphenylethyl)methylamino]-2-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-2-isopropylvaleronitrile hydrochloride (verapamil) compared with injury observed with dicamba application and a root treatment of verapamil at 8 HAED, which corresponded to dawn. Overall, time of application appears to potentially influence translocation of 2,4-D and dicamba. Furthermore, inhibition of translocation appears to somewhat influence variation in phytotoxicity across times of application. Therefore, translocation may be involved in the varying efficacy of WSSA Group 4 herbicides due to application time of day, which has implications for the use of this mechanism of action for effective control and resistance management of Palmer amaranth.
Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Management in Dicamba-Resistant Cotton
- Charles W. Cahoon, Alan C. York, David L. Jordan, Wesley J. Everman, Richard W. Seagroves, A. Stanley Culpepper, Peter M. Eure
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 29 / Issue 4 / December 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 758-770
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Cotton growers rely heavily upon glufosinate and various residual herbicides applied preplant, PRE, and POST to control Palmer amaranth resistant to glyphosate and acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides. Recently deregulated in the United States, cotton resistant to dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate (B2XF cotton) offers a new platform for controlling herbicide-resistant Palmer amaranth. A field experiment was conducted in North Carolina and Georgia to determine B2XF cotton tolerance to dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate and to compare Palmer amaranth control by dicamba to a currently used, nondicamba program in both glufosinate- and glyphosate-based systems. Treatments consisted of glyphosate or glufosinate applied early POST (EPOST) and mid-POST (MPOST) in a factorial arrangement of treatments with seven dicamba options (no dicamba, PRE, EPOST, MPOST, PRE followed by [fb] EPOST, PRE fb MPOST, and EPOST fb MPOST) and a nondicamba standard. The nondicamba standard consisted of fomesafen PRE, pyrithiobac EPOST, and acetochlor MPOST. Dicamba caused no injury when applied PRE and only minor, transient injury when applied POST. At time of EPOST application, Palmer amaranth control by dicamba or fomesafen applied PRE, in combination with acetochlor, was similar and 13 to 17% greater than acetochlor alone. Dicamba was generally more effective on Palmer amaranth applied POST rather than PRE, and two applications were usually more effective than one. In glyphosate-based systems, greater Palmer amaranth control and cotton yield were obtained with dicamba applied EPOST, MPOST, or EPOST fb MPOST compared with the standard herbicides in North Carolina. In contrast, dicamba was no more effective than the standard herbicides in the glufosinate-based systems. In Georgia, dicamba was as effective as the standard herbicides in a glyphosate-based system only when dicamba was applied EPOST fb MPOST. In glufosinate-based systems in Georgia, dicamba was as effective as standard herbicides only when dicamba was applied twice.
Controlling Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Cotton with Resistance to Glyphosate, 2,4-D, and Glufosinate
- Rand M. Merchant, A. Stanley Culpepper, Peter M. Eure, John S. Richburg, L. Bo Braxton
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 28 / Issue 2 / June 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 291-297
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments were conducted in Macon County, Georgia, during 2010 and 2011 to determine the impact of new herbicide-resistant cotton and respective herbicide systems on the control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. Sequential POST applications of 2,4-D or glufosinate followed by diuron plus MSMA directed at layby (late POST-directed) controlled Palmer amaranth 62 to 79% and 46 to 49% at harvest when the initial application was made to 8- or 18–cm-tall Palmer amaranth, in separate trials, respectively. Mixtures of glufosinate plus 2,4-D applied sequentially followed by the layby controlled Palmer amaranth 95 to 97% regardless of Palmer amaranth height. Mixing glyphosate with 2,4-D improved control beyond that observed with 2,4-D alone, but control was still only 79 to 86% at harvest depending on 2,4-D rate. Sequential applications of glyphosate plus 2,4-D controlled Palmer amaranth 95 to 96% following the use of either pendimethalin or fomesafen. Seed cotton yield was at least 30% higher with 2,4-D plus glufosinate systems compared to systems with either herbicide alone. The addition of pendimethalin and/or fomesafen PRE did not improve Palmer amaranth control or yields when glufosinate plus 2,4-D were applied sequentially followed by the layby. The addition of these residual herbicides improved at harvest control (87 to 96%) when followed by sequential applications of 2,4-D or 2,4-D plus glyphosate; yields from these systems were similar to those with glufosinate plus 2,4-D. Comparison of 2,4-D and 2,4-DB treatments confirmed that 2,4-D is a more effective option for the control of Palmer amaranth. Results from these experiments suggest cotton with resistance to glufosinate, glyphosate, and 2,4-D will improve Palmer amaranth management. At-plant residual herbicides should be recommended for consistent performance of all 2,4-D systems across environments, although cotton with resistance to glyphosate, glufosinate, and 2,4-D will allow greater flexibility in selecting PRE herbicide(s), which should reduce input costs, carryover concerns, and crop injury when compared to current systems.
Influence of Water Quality and Coapplied Agrochemicals on Efficacy of Glyphosate
- Gurinderbir S. Chahal, David L. Jordan, James D. Burton, David Danehower, Alan C. York, Peter M. Eure, Bart Clewis
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 26 / Issue 2 / June 2012
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 167-176
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Experiments were conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010 to determine the influence of water source as carrier and other agrochemicals on glyphosate efficacy and physicochemical compatibility. Glyphosate efficacy was not affected by most water sources, when compared with deionized water, although response was not consistent across all weed species, including cereal rye, common lambsquarters, common ragweed, goosegrass, Italian ryegrass, large crabgrass, Palmer amaranth, tall morningglory, and wheat. Control by glyphosate was not negatively affected when coapplied with cloransulam-methyl, dicamba, flumioxazin, pyrithiobac-sodium, thifensulfuron-methyl plus tribenuron-methyl, trifloxysulfuron-sodium, and 2,4-D but was affected by acifluorfen and glufosinate. Calcium, manganese, and zinc solutions consistently reduced weed control by glyphosate, whereas boron seldom affected efficacy. Compared with deionized water, Italian ryegrass control was affected by water sources when applied at seedling and jointing stages more so than at tillering and heading growth stages. Calcium, manganese, and zinc reduced control regardless of growth stage. Precipitates were not produced when glyphosate was applied with the water sources or fertilizer solutions. However, transient precipitates developed when glyphosate was coapplied with cloransulam-methyl, flumioxazin, thifensulfuron-methyl plus tribenuron-methyl, and trifloxysulfuron-sodium but not when coapplied with acifluorfen, dicamba, glufosinate, pyrithiobac-sodium, and 2,4-D. Solution pH ranged from 4.11 to 5.60 after glyphosate was added, regardless of solution pH before glyphosate addition.
Weed Control, Crop Response, and Profitability When Intercropping Cantaloupe and Cotton
- Peter M. Eure, A. Stanley Culpepper, Rand M. Merchant, Phillip M. Roberts, Guy C. Collins
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 29 / Issue 2 / June 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 217-225
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Intercropping cantaloupe and cotton can improve grower profits over traditional monoculture practices because crops share resources and production costs. However, developing effective programs to control weeds with herbicides that are safe to both crops can be challenging. Research was conducted to (1) identify herbicide systems to manage Palmer amaranth in cantaloupe–cotton intercropping production while minimizing crop injury, and (2) determine the profitability of cantaloupe–cotton intercropping. Ethalfluralin applied preplant did not injure cantaloupe or cotton, but Palmer amaranth was not controlled. The addition of fomesafen preplant improved Palmer amaranth control to at least 92% without injuring cotton, but cantaloupe necrosis and chlorosis of up to 20% was recorded. Halosulfuron-methyl was safely applied over cantaloupe, but its residual activity reduced cotton growth by 12% at 4 wk after planting; halosulfuron-methyl did not improve Palmer amaranth control beyond that noted with ethalfluralin plus fomesafen preplant. Intercropping systems that controlled Palmer amaranth at least 92% produced cantaloupe yields (25,760 to 25,890 fruit ha−1) similar to the weed-free monoculture system (24,120 fruit ha−1) but produced lint cotton yields that were 170 to 275 kg ha−1 less than the weed-free monoculture cotton system. Although cotton production was less in the intercropping system, the returns over variable costs with intercropping systems ($21,670 to 21,920 ha−1) exceeded those of cantaloupe monoculture ($18,070 ha−1) or cotton monoculture ($1,890 to $1,955 ha−1), as long as Palmer amaranth was controlled. Intercropping cantaloupe and cotton is an effective approach to share land resources and production inputs as well as to improve grower profitability and is being rapidly adopted by Georgia growers.