Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:11:08.921Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fluroxypyr Efficacy is Affected by Relative Humidity and Soil Moisture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Mark D. Lubbers ,
Phillip W. Stahlman  and
Kassim Al-Khatib
Mark D. Lubbers
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Phillip W. Stahlman*
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Center–Hays, Kansas State University, 1232 240th Avenue, Hays, KS 67601
Kassim Al-Khatib
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An experiment was conducted in controlled environments to evaluate the effects of relative humidity (RH) and soil moisture (SM) on fluroxypyr efficacy on kochia and Palmer amaranth. Plants were grown in growth chambers with constant RH of 35 or 90 ± 5% and 28/23 C day/night temperature. Within each growth chamber, plants were grown in SM regimes of either −20 or −40 kPa. When plants were 8 to 10 cm tall, fluroxypyr was applied at 26, 52, 78, or 104 g ae ha−1; a nontreated control was included. At 21 days after treatment, control of both species increased with increasing fluroxypyr rate. Kochia control was not affected by RH, but control was greater when plants were grown in moist soil (−20 kPa) than in dry soil (−40 kPa). Conversely, Palmer amaranth control was greater when plants were grown at 90% RH than at 35% RH, but control did not differ between moist and dry soils. This study showed that the influence of environmental factors on fluroxypyr efficacy on kochia and Palmer amaranth is species dependent.

Keywords

Fluroxypyrkochia, Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. KCHSCPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri (S.) Wats. AMAPAEnvironmentenvironmental factorsherbicide efficacyplant stress
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 55 , Issue 3 , June 2007 , pp. 260 - 263
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: Monsanto Company, 5912 North Meridan Avenue, Wichita, KS 67204.

References

Literature Cited

Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, E. P. 1992. Foliar absorption and translocation of herbicides from aqueous solution and treated soil. Weed Sci. 40:281–287.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. D. and Cardoso-Vilhena, J. 1996. Interactions between electromagnetic radiation and the plant cuticle. Pages 157–174. in Kersteins, G. ed. Plant Cuticles. Oxford BIOS Scientific Publishers Ltd.Google Scholar
Boydston, R. A. 1990. Soil water content affects the activity of four herbicides on green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Sci. 38:578–582.Google Scholar
Bridges, D.C. 1992. Crop losses due to weeds in the United States—1992. Champaign, IL Weed Science Society of America. 24.Google Scholar
Coetzer, E., Al-Khatib, K., and Loughin, T. M. 2001. Glufosinate efficacy, absorption, and translocation in amaranth as affected by relative humidity and temperature. Weed Sci. 49:8–13.Google Scholar
[EPA] Environmental Protection Agency 2002. Fluroxypyr 1-methylheptyl ester; pesticide tolerances for emergency exemptions. 40 CFR Part 180. Federal Register. 67 (186):60142–60146.Google Scholar
Graham, P. L., Steiner, J. L., and Wiese, A. F. 1988. Light absorption and competition in mixed sorghum–pigweed communities. Agron. J. 80:415–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holloway, P. J. 1970. Surface factors affecting the wetting of leaves. Pestic. Sci. 1:156–163.Google Scholar
Horak, M. J. and Peterson, D. E. 1995. Biotypes of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) are resistant to imazethapyr and thifensulfuron. Weed Technol. 9:192–195.Google Scholar
Hoss, N. E., Al-Khatib, K., Peterson, D. E., and Loughin, T. M. 2003. Efficacy of glyphosate, glufosinate, and imazethapyr on selected weed species. Weed Sci. 51:110–117.Google Scholar
Klute, A. 1986. Water retention: laboratory methods. Pages 647–648. in. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Madison, WI American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Lym, R. G. 1992. Fluroxypyr absorption and translocation in leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Weed Sci. 40:101–105.Google Scholar
MacDonald, R. T., Hall, J. C., O'Toole, J. J., and Swanton, C. J. 1993. Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) control with fluroxypyr. Weed Technol. 7:966–971.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Azlin, W. R. 1978. Effects of environment on the toxicity of glyphosate to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 26:605–608.Google Scholar
Muzik, T. J. 1976. Influence of Environmental Factors on Toxicity to Plants. Pages 203–247. in Audus, L.J. ed. Herbicides: Physiology, Biochemistry, and Ecology. London Academic.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D., Palczynski, J., and Manthey, F. A. 1990. Imazethapyr efficacy with adjuvants and environments. Weed Technol. 4:765–770.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D. and Woznica, Z. 1985. Environment and chlorsulfuron phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 33:395–399.Google Scholar
Orfandes, M. S. and Wax, L. M. 1991. Differential response of hemp dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum) to clopyralid, Dowco 433, and 2,4-D. Weed Technol. 5:782–788.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1995. Effects of environmental stress on weed/crop interactions. Weed Sci. 43:483–490.Google Scholar
Phillips, W. M. 1960. Weed Control in Sorghums. Manhattan, KS Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Circ. 360. 12.Google Scholar
Richardson, R. G. 1977. A review of foliar absorption and translocation of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Weed Res. 17:259–272.Google Scholar
Riggle, B., Bearmore, R., Mundt, G., Jachetta, J., and Redding, K. 1999. Fluroxypyr (Starane) for control of kochia and other broadleaf weeds in wheat and barley. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 52:126.Google Scholar
Sanders, G. E. and Pallett, K. E. 1987. Comparison of the uptake, movement, and metabolism of fluroxypyr in Stellaria media and Viola avensis . Weed Res. 27:159–166.Google Scholar
Stahlman, P. W. and Wicks, G. A. 2000. Weeds and their control in sorghum. Pages 535–590. in Smith, C.W., Frederiksen, R.A. eds. Sorghum: Origin, History, Technology, and Production. New York J. Wiley.Google Scholar
Vencill, W.K. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th ed. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 215–217.Google Scholar
Wanamarta, G. and Penner, D. 1989. Foliar absorption of herbicides. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:215–231.Google Scholar