Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-18T14:11:23.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Cultivar Responses to Trifluralin and Postemergence Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Sharon A. Clay ,
Jim F. Gaffney  and
Leon J. Wrage
Sharon A. Clay
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Sci., South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007
Jim F. Gaffney
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Sci., South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007
Leon J. Wrage
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Sci., South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Trifluralin is used for weed control in wheat but may reduce vegetative growth and yield. Postemergence (POST) herbicides may cause additional plant stress to trifluralin-stressed wheat. Field studies at Groton, SD in 1991 and 1992 and at Highmore, SD in 1992 evaluated the effects of 2,4-D-amine, difenzoquat, metsulfuron, and a combination of fenoxaprop-ethyl + 2,4-D-ester + MCPA-ester on hard red spring wheat cultivars ‘2375,’ ‘Prospect,’ and ‘Butte 86’ seeded in areas treated with preplant incorporated trifluralin either in the spring before seeding (0.56 kg ai/ha) or the previous year (1.12 or 2.24 kg ai/ha). Trifluralin applied alone in the spring, and followed by some POST herbicides, reduced shoot dry weight and grain yield. Trifluralin reduced the yield of Prospect the most and the yield of 2375 the least. Yields of trifluralin-treated wheat were reduced 23% by metsulfuron and 14% by fenoxaprop-ethyl + 2,4-D + MCPA compared to yields of wheat treated with only the respective POST herbicide. Yields were not reduced with any trifluralin-POST herbicide combination when trifluralin was applied a year prior to seeding wheat.

Keywords

Difenzoquat, 1,2-dimethyl-3,5-diphenyl-1H-pyrazoliumfenoxaprop-ethyl, (±)-2-[4-[(6-chloro-2-benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoic acidMCPA, (4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acidmetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidtrifluralin, 2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine2,4-D, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acidwheat, Triticum aestivum L.Trifluralin injurycrop injuryyield loss
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 1995 , pp. 352 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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

1. Bardsley, C. E., Savage, K. E., and Childers, V. O. 1967. Trifluralin behavior in soil. I. Toxicity and persistence as related to organic matter. Agron. J. 59:159–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Darwent, A. L. 1980. Effects of soil temperature on the phytoxicity of trifluralin to wild oats. Can. J. Plant Sci. 60:929–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Elliot, B. R., Lumb, J. M., Reeves, T. G., and Telford, T. E. 1974. Yield losses in weed-free wheat and barley due to postemergence herbicides. Weed Res. 15:107–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Friesen, H. A., O'Sullivan, P. A., and Vanden Born, W. H. 1976. HOE-23408, a new selective herbicide for wild oats and green foxtail in wheat and barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 56:567–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Garcia-Torres, L. and Appleby, A. P. 1988. Response of wheat genotypes to trifluralin, triallate, and ethazin. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. p. 313–315.Google Scholar
6. Gianessi, L. P. and Puffer, C. A. The use of herbicides in U.S. crop production: use coefficients listed by active ingredient by state. Dec. 1990; revised Apr. 1991. Quality of Environment for the Future, Inc. Washington, D.C. 20036. p. 128.Google Scholar
7. Grover, A. J., Banting, J. D., and Morse, P. M. 1978. Adsorption and bioactivity of di-allate, tri-allate, and trifluralin. Weed Res. 19:363–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Grover, R., Smith, A. E., Schowchuk, S. R., Cessna, A. J., and Hunter, J. H. 1988. Fate of trifluralin and triallate applied as a mixture to a wheat field. J. Environ. Qual. 17:543–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hollist, R. L. and Foy, C. L. 1971. Trifluralin interactions with soil constituents. Weed Sci. 19:11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Horowitz, M., Hulin, N., and Blumenfeld, T. 1974. Behaviour and persistence of trifluralin in soil. Weed Res. 14:213–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Lish, J. M. and Thill, D. C. 1986. Tolerance of spring wheat and spring barley varieties to sulfonyl urea herbicides. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. p. 202–203.Google Scholar
12. Morrison, I. N., Nawolsky, K. M., Entz, M. H., and Smith, A. E. 1991. Differences among certified wheat seedlots in response to trifluralin. Agron. J. 83:119–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Morrison, I. N., Nawolsky, K. M., Marshall, G. M., and Smith, A. E. 1989. Recovery of spring wheat injured by trifluralin. Weed Sci. 37:784–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Olson, B. M. and McKercher, R. B. 1985. Wheat and triticale root development as affected by trifluralin. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65:723–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. O'Sullivan, P. A., Weiss, G. M., and Friesen, D. 1985. Tolerance of spring wheat to trifluralin deep incorporated in the autumn or spring. Weed Res. 25:275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Peter, C. J. and Weber, J. B. 1985. Adsorption and efficacy of trifluralin and butralin as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:861–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Rahman, A. 1973. Effects of temperature and soil type on the phytotoxicity of trifluralin. Weed Res. 13:267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. SAS Institute, Inc. 1985. SAS User's Guide: Statistics, 5th ed. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
19. Savage, K. E. 1973. Nitralin and trifluralin persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 21:285–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. South Dakota Weekly Crop Weather Report. 1991. South Dakota Statistics Service, USDA, 35286 S. Western Ave. P.O. Box 5068, Sioux Falls, SD.Google Scholar
21. Spratling, D. L. and Whiteside, R. E. 1986. Differential tolerance of spring wheat and spring barley cultivars to three sulfonylurea herbicides. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. p. 204–206.Google Scholar
22. Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, a Biometrical Approach, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc. Google Scholar