Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:38:09.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Absorption and Translocation of Tetrafluron in Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), Jimsonweed (Datura stramonium), Peanut (Arachis hypogaea), and Prickly Sida (Sida spinosa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

H. Pinto  and
F. T. Corbin
H. Pinto
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27650
F. T. Corbin
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27650
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Roots of 10- and 14-day-old seedlings and excised leaves of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Coker 310’), jimsonweed (Datura stramonium L.), peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L. ‘Florigiant’), and prickly sida (Sida spinosa L.) were treated with ring-labeled 14C-tetrafluron {N,N-dimethyl-N′-[3-(1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethoxy)phenyl] urea} in liquid culture. Herbicide absorption and subsequent translocation were limited in peanuts, intermediate in cotton, and very high in jimsonweed and prickly sida. Absorption of 14C-tetrafluron increased with time in 10- and 14-day-old seedlings. After 6 h, 10-day-old jimsonweed had absorbed as much as 50% of the initial 10-μg dose, whereas peanuts absorbed only 10%. Almost 100% uptake was observed after 48 h with 14-day-old seedlings of jimsonweed and prickly sida. Methanol-extracted 14C increased with time, and was higher for the weeds than for the crops. Only a small fraction of methanol-insoluble radioactive material was obtained, with the largest value in 14-day-old cotton at 48 h (3.0%). Autoradiographs demonstrated more rapid translocation of radioactivity from roots to shoots in jimsonweed and prickly sida than in cotton and peanuts. Limited absorption and translocation of tetrafluron in seedlings of peanut and cotton, and the rapid absorption and subsequent accumulation of high concentrations in seedlings of jimsonweed and prickly sida, are proposed to explain the selective action observed.

Keywords

Urea herbicidesHOE-2991
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 28 , Issue 5 , September 1980 , pp. 557 - 565
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

1. Ashton, F. M. and Crafts, A. S. 1973. Mode of Action of Herbicides. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. 504 pp.Google Scholar
2. Baker, R. S. 1975. Preemergence control of velvetleaf in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 28:128–131.Google Scholar
3. Baker, R. S. 1977. Preemergence control of spotted spurge in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:97–100.Google Scholar
4. Blankendal, M., Hodgson, R. H., Davis, D. G., Hoerauf, R. A., and Shimabukuro, R. H. 1972. Growing plants without soil for experimental use. U.S. Dep. Agric. Misc. Publ. 1251, Washington, D.C. 17 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. Autoradiography of plant materials. California Agric. Exp. Stn. Manual 35. 143 pp.Google Scholar
6. Frans, R. S. and Blythe, T. O. 1974. Herbicide field evaluation trials on field crops, 1973. Arkansas Agric. Exp. Stn. Mimeogr. Ser. 218, 28 pp.Google Scholar
7. Geissbuhler, H., Martin, H., and Voss, G. 1975. The substituted ureas. Pages 209–221, in Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., ed. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Vol. 1. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
8. Langeluddeke, P. and Schulze, E. F. 1972. HOE-2991, a new selective urea herbicide. Proc. Br. Weed Control Conf. 2:830–834.Google Scholar
9. Marrese, R. J. 1972. HOE-2991 (3-tetrafluroethoxyphenyl-N,N-dimethylurea) a new flexible broad spectrum herbicide for cotton. Proc. Br. Weed Control Conf. 2:835–840.Google Scholar
10. Patterson, M. S. and Greene, R. C. 1965. Measurement of low energy beta-emitters by liquid scintillation counting of emulsions. Anal. Chem. 37:854–857.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Pinto, H. and Corbin, F. T. 1980. Metabolism of tetrafluron in cotton, jimsonweed, peanuts, and prickly sida. Pestic. Biochem. and Physiol. (In press).Google Scholar
12. Reasons, D. L., Jeffery, L. S., and McCutchen, T. 1976. Tolerance of soybeans and grain sorghum to tetrafluron. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 29:400.Google Scholar
13. Rogers, R. L. and Funderburk, H. H. 1968. Physiological aspects of fluometuron. J. Agric. Food Chem. 16:434–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Rubin, B. and Eshel, Y. 1976. Uptake and translocation of fluometuron and terbutryne in cotton and beans. Phytoparasitica 4:141.Google Scholar
15. Sargent, J. A. 1976. Relationship of selectivity to uptake and movement. Pages 303–312 in Audus, L. J., ed. Herbicides Physiology, Biochemistry, Ecology. Vol. 2. Academic Press, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
16. Smith, J. W. and Sheets, T. J. 1967. Uptake, distribution, and metabolism of monuron and diruon by several plants. J. Agric. Food Chem. 15:577–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Voss, G. and Geissbuhler, H. 1966. The uptake, translocation, and metabolism of fluometuron and metobromuron in plants. Proc. Br. Weed Control Conf. 8:266–268.Google Scholar
18. Woeller, F. H. 1961. Liquid scintillation counting of C14O2 with phenethylamine. Anal. Biochem. 2:508–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar