Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:45:49.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Environment Affects Cotton and Velvetleaf Response to Pyrithiobac

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

M. Angela Harrison ,
Robert M. Hayes  and
Thomas C. Mueller
M. Angela Harrison
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Robert M. Hayes
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
Thomas C. Mueller*
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
*
Address correspondence to: Tom Mueller, Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., P. O. Box 1071, Knoxville. TN 37901.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Growth chamber experiments evaluated the influence of ambient temperature and soil moisture on cotton and velvetleaf response to pyrithiobac. Additional studies determined the basis for observed plant responses to 14C pyrithiobac. Cotton injury from six times the normal dosage was < 20% at 2 wk for all temperatures and soil moistures. Pyrithiobac injured velvetleaf less at lower soil moistures. Both species absorbed more 14C-pyrithiobac at 30/28 or 35/33 C than at 25/23 C. Cotton absorbed more herbicide than velvetleaf at all temperatures and soil moistures. Velvetleaf translocated < 16% of absorbed 14C out of the treated leaf while cotton translocated < 3% of absorbed material. At warmer temperatures, velvetleaf translocated less 14C when soil was dry (–1.0 MPa) than when plants were watered to field capacity (–0.03 MPa). This decreased absorption and translocation may affect pyrithiobac activity on velvetleaf growing in dry soil. Translocation differences did not fully explain whole plant effects. The metabolism difference may account for cotton tolerance.

Keywords

Pyrithiobac, sodium 2-chloro-6-(4,5-dimethoxy-pyrimidin-2-ylthio)-benzoatevelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medic♯ ABUTHcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L ‘Deltapine 50.’AbsorptiontranslocationmetabolismDPX-PE350
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 1996 , pp. 241 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 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. Allen, R. L., Snipes, C. E., and Crowder, S. H. 1993. Fruiting Response of Cotton Following Applications of Pyrithiobac. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46: 68.Google Scholar
2. Altom, J. V., Baysinger, J. A., Jacobson, B. D., and Murray, D. S. 1991. Evaluation of DPX-PE350 for weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44: 74 Google Scholar
3. Baker, E. A., and Procopiou, J. 1980. Effect of soil moisture status on leaf surface wax yield of some drought-resistant species. Hort. Sci. 55: 85–87.Google Scholar
4. Bovey, R. W. and Diaz-Colon, J.D. 1969. Effect of simulated rainfall on herbicide performance. Weed Sci. 17: 154–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bukovac, M. J., Petracek, P. D., Fader, R. G., and Morse, R. D. 1990. Sorption of organic compounds by plant cuticles. Weed Sci. 38: 289–298.Google Scholar
6. Bryson, C. T. 1988. Effects of rainfall on foliar herbicides applied to seedling johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Technol. 2: 153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Dortenzio, W. A. and Norris, R. F. 1980. The influence of soil moisture on the foliar activity of diclofop. Weed Sci. 28: 534–539.Google Scholar
8. Duke, S. O. 1990. Overview of herbicide mechanisms of action. Env. Health Perspectives. 87: 263–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Edmund, Richard M. Jr. and York, A. C. 1987. Effects of rainfall and temperature on postemergence control of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) with imazaquin and DPX-F6025. Weed Sci. 35: 231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Hammerton, J. L. 1967. Environmental factors and susceptibility to herbicides. Weeds. 15: 330–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Hayes, R. M., Shankle, M. W., and Shelby, P. P. 1993. Documentation and control of DSMA/MSMA resistant common cocklebur. 1993 Proc. Beltwide Cotton conf. 3: 1526.Google Scholar
12. Hsaio, T. C. 1973. Plant response to water stress. Plant Physiol. 24: 519–570.Google Scholar
13. Holshauser, D. L. and Chandler, J. M. 1991. Susceptibility of eight morningglory species to DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44: 78.Google Scholar
14. Hull, H. M., Morton, H. L., and Wharrie, J. R. 1975. Environmental influences on cuticle development and resultant foliar penetration. Bot. Rev. 41: 421–452.Google Scholar
15. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. DPX-PE350 does not interact with early-season insecticides in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 7: 92–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7: 159–162.Google Scholar
17. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Total postemergent herbicide programs in cotton with sethoxydim and DPX-PE350. Weed Technol. 7: 196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Influence of application rate and timing on efficacy of DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7: 216–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Interactions of DPX-PE350 with fluazifop-P, sethoxydim, clethodim, and quizalofop-P. Weed Technol. 7: 605–610.Google Scholar
20. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Influence of application variables on efficacy of POST applications of DPX-PE350. Weed Technol. 7: 619–624.Google Scholar
21. Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1993. Effects of DPX PE350 on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) growth, yield, and fiber quality. Weed Technol. 7: 930–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Lauridson, T. C., Wilson, R. G., and Haderlie, L. C. 1983. Effect of moisture stress on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) control. Weed Sci. 31: 674–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. McWhorter, C. G. and Bryson, C. T. 1992. Herbicide use trends in cotton. pp. 233–294 in Weeds of Cotton: Characterization and Control. McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathey, J. R., eds. The Cotton Foundation, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
24. Snipes, C. E., Allen, R. L., Shaw, D. R., Guy, C. B., Wells, R., and Crowder, S. H. 1992. Influence of DPX-PE350, fluometuron and MSMA on fruiting response of cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. vol 3: 1315.Google Scholar
25. Snipes, C. E. and Allen, R. L. 1992. Broadleaf weed control in cotton with DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45: 26.Google Scholar
26. Sunderland, S. L. and Coble, H. D. 1994. Differential tolerance of several morningglory species (Ipomoea sp.) to DPX-PE350. Weed Sci. 42: 227–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Sunderland, S. L., Burton, J. D., Coble, H. D., and Maness, E. P. 1995. Physiological mechanism for tall morningglory (Ipomoea purpurea) resistance to DPX-PE350. Weed Sci. 43: 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Upchurch, R. P., Coble, H. D., and Keaton, J. A. 1969. Rainfall effects following herbicidal treatment of woody plants. Weed Sci. 17: 94–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Waldecker, M. A. and Wyse, D. L. 1985. Soil moisture effects on glyphosate absorption and translocation in common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca). Weed Sci. 33: 299–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar