Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T17:54:27.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of MT-101 and NOP on germination and seedling growth of hemp sesbania and rice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kangetsu Hirase  and
William T. Molin
William T. Molin
Affiliation:
Southern Weed Science Research Unit, USDA-ARS, 141 Experiment Station Road, Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effects of MT-101 and its herbicidally active form, NOP, on the germination and seedling growth of hemp sesbania and rice were investigated. MT-101 decreased the germination of hemp sesbania by 57 and 90% at 0.05 and 0.5 mM, respectively, 1 d after treatment (DAT) in petri dishes. The germination, however, recovered such that there was no significant difference between treatments 4 to 6 DAT. NOP completely inhibited the germination of hemp sesbania at both 0.05 and 0.5 mM 1 DAT. However, germination also similarly recovered, and there was no difference between treatments 4 to 6 DAT. Neither MT-101 nor NOP decreased the germination of rice 3 to 6 DAT. In greenhouse trials preemergence (PRE) application of MT-101 at 2.25 kg ai ha−1 decreased the density (number of plants pot−1), plant height, and dry weight of hemp sesbania by 85, 67, and 91%, respectively. When applied postemergence (POST), MT-101 at 2.25 kg ha−1 decreased the density, plant height, and dry weight by a maximum of 58, 61, and 82%, respectively, indicating that MT-101 may have greater activity when applied PRE. NOP had greater activity than MT-101 on hemp sesbania. NOP at 2.25 kg ai ha−1 decreased the density, plant height, and dry weight of hemp sesbania 99, 78, and 97%, respectively, with PRE application. A POST application of NOP at 2.25 kg ha−1 decreased the dry weight of hemp sesbania 91 to 94%. A PRE application of NOP at 2.25 kg ha−1 decreased the dry weight of rice by 58%. Rice was not affected by POST applications of MT-101 but was affected slightly by NOP. These results suggest that MT-101 is a possible weed control agent in rice.

Keywords

MT-101, (naproanilide—common name approved by the Japanese Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries), 2-(2-naphthyloxy)propionanilideNOP, 2-(2-naphthyloxy) propionic acidhemp sesbania, Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex A. W. Hill SEBEXrice, Oryza sativa L. ‘Lemont’cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Deltapine 5415’Herbicidal efficacycrop injurydry weightdensityplant height
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , June 2002 , pp. 386 - 391
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

Akkari, K. H., Talbert, R. E., Ferguson, J. A., and Gilmour, J. T. 1982. Weed control systems in sprinkler-irrigated rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 35:67.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1999. Delta Agricultural Digest. Clarksdale, MS: Intertec Publishing. pp. 149–176.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2000. Pesticide Dictionary. Farm Chemicals Handbook 2000. Willoughby, OH: Meister Publishing. 403 p.Google Scholar
Hirase, K. and Kishi, D. 1997. Diffusion of naproanilide from 1 kg granules containing a floating carrier and its herbicidal efficacy. J. Weed Sci. Tech. 42:250–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirase, K., Kishi, D., and Koda, S. 1999. Naproanilide disappearance under flooded conditions in some granule types and their herbicidal efficacy. J. Weed Sci. Tech. 44:29–36.Google Scholar
Johnston, S. K., Walker, R. H., and Murray, D. S. 1979. Germination and emergence of hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata). Weed Sci. 27:290–293.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, K. and Ichinose, K. 1985. Effects of naproanilide, gibberellin and BAP on tuberization of Cyperus serotinus and Eleocharis kuroguwai, perennial paddy weeds. Pages 49–54 In Proceedings of the 10th Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Congress. Chiangmai, Thailand.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, K., Ichinose, K., Hyakutake, H., and Ishizuka, K. 1983. Effect of naproanilide on tuberization and RNA synthesis of Cyperus serotinus Rottb. Weed Res. Japan 28:43–50.Google Scholar
Lorenzi, H. J. and Jeffery, L. S. 1987. Weeds of the United States and their Control. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 180 p.Google Scholar
Oyamada, M. and Kuwatsuka, S. 1982. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of the herbicide naproanilide, 2-(2-naphthoxy)propionanilide in rice plant. J. Pestic. Sci. 7:9–14.Google Scholar
Oyamada, M. and Kuwatsuka, S. 1986. Photodegradation of the herbicide naproanilide in aqueous solution and in surface water of flooded soil. J. Pestic. Sci. 11:179–187.Google Scholar
Oyamada, M. and Kuwatsuka, S. 1990. Degradation of the herbicide naproanilide and its hydrolyzed product in perfused soil and by a bacterium isolated from soil. J. Pestic. Sci. 15:81–87.Google Scholar
Oyamada, M., Tanaka, T., Takasawa, Y., and Takematsu, T. 1985. Selectivity and absorption of the herbicide naproanilide in rice plants (Oryza sativa L.) and Sagittaria pygmaea Miq. J. Pestic. Sci. 10:469–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oyamada, M., Tanaka, T., Takasawa, Y., and Takematsu, T. 1986a. Absorption of naproanilide by several plants and effects of other herbicides on its absorption. Weed Res. Japan 31:124–129.Google Scholar
Oyamada, M., Tanaka, T., Takasawa, Y., and Takematsu, T. 1986b. Enzyme hydrolysis of naproanilide in leaf discs of rice plants and Sagittaria pygmaea Miq. Weed Res. Japan 31:130–135.Google Scholar
Oyamada, M., Tanaka, T., Takasawa, Y., and Takematsu, T. 1986c. Metabolic fate of the herbicide naproanilide in rice plants (Oryza sativa L.) and Sagittaria pygmaea Miq. J. Pestic. Sci. 11:197–203.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1968. Weed competition in rice. Weed Sci. 16:252–255.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1982. Effect of acifluorfen and mixtures with propanil on rice. Proc. Rice Tech. Working Group 19:80–81.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1988. Weed thresholds in southern U.S. rice, Oryza sativa . Weed Technol. 2:232–241.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr., Flinchum, W. T., and Seaman, D. E. 1977. Weed Control in U.S. Rice Production. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 497. 78 p.Google Scholar
Street, J. E. and Mueller, T. C. 1993. Rice (Oryza sativa) weed control with soil applications of quinclorac. Weed Technol. 7:600–604.Google Scholar
Takasawa, Y., Igarashi, K., and Takematsu, T. 1975. MT-101, a selective herbicide for rice. Pages 96–98 In Proceedings of the 5th Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference. Toyko, Japan.Google Scholar
Takasawa, Y., Tanaka, T., Oyamada, M., Igarashi, K., and Yoshimoto, T. 1982. Selective activity of 2-(2-naphthoxy)propionanilide (naproanilide). Pages IVd-10 In Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Pesticide Chemistry. Kyoto, Japan.Google Scholar
Tanaka, T., Oyamada, M., Igarashi, K., and Takasawa, Y. 1991. Plant growth-regulating activity, and photolytic and microbial decomposition of optical isomers of naproanilide. Weed Res. Japan 36:50–57.Google Scholar
VanDevender, K. W., Costello, T. A., and Smith, R. J. Jr. 1997. Model of rice (Oryza sativa) yield reduction as a function of weed interference. Weed Sci. 45:218–224.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2000. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:247–274.Google Scholar