Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-01T03:17:32.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicidal Activity of Fluazifop-Butyl, Haloxyfop-Methyl, and Sethoxydim in Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Douglas D. Buhler  and
Orvin C. Burnside
Douglas D. Buhler
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
Orvin C. Burnside
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Fluazifop-butyl {(±) butyl 2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl] oxy] phenoxy] propanoic acid}, haloxyfop-methyl {methyl-2-[4-[[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl-2-pyridinyl] oxy] phenoxy] propanoic acid}, and sethoxydim {2-[1-(ethoxyimino)-butyl]-5-[2-ethylthio)propyl-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-one}exhibited soil herbicidal activity to annual grass species in greenhouse and field experiments. Control of forage sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. ‘Rox Orange’] with all three herbicides was greater when seeds were planted at or near the soil surface than when planted 2, 4, or 6 cm deep. Imbibition of the herbicides by forage sorghum and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] seeds did not reduce germination at concentrations of 10-3 M or lower, but forage sorghum seedling survival and vigor were reduced by herbicide concentrations as low as 10-7 M. Fluazifop-butyl, haloxyfop-methyl, and sethoxydim were more phytotoxic when applied to the root zone than the shoot zone. Haloxyfop-methyl exhibited the longest soil residual control in the field followed by fluazifop-butyl and sethoxydim. Haloxyfop-methyl and fluazifop-butyl controlled simulated shattercane [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. ♯3 SORVU] in soybeans with preemergence and early postemergence applications, whereas control from similar applications of sethoxydim was limited and variable.

Keywords

BAS-90520HDowco 453 MEpostemergence herbicidesPP-009site of uptakesoil residuesSORVU
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 6 , November 1984 , pp. 824 - 831
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 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. Abernathy, J. R., Bean, B., and Gipson, J. R. 1983. Soil and foliar activity of selective grass herbicides. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Page 31.Google Scholar
2. Andersen, R. N. 1982. Comparisons of four herbicides for postemergence grass control. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:80–82.Google Scholar
3. Andersen, R. N. 1982. Evaluation of herbicides in a soybean weed nursery. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Res. Rep. 39:340–341.Google Scholar
4. Atwater, M. L. and Bauman, T. T. 1982. Postemergent control of annual grasses in soybeans. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:67–68.Google Scholar
5. Brewster, B. D., Appleby, A. P., and Spinney, R. L. 1977. Control of Italian ryegrass and wild oats in winter wheat with HOE-23408. Agron. J. 68:911–913.Google Scholar
6. Dekker, J. H., Meggitt, W. F., and Boldt, P. F. 1981. Soil herbicidal activity from HOE-29152 and diclofop applied postemergence. Weed Sci. 29:314–316.Google Scholar
7. Eshel, Y. and Prendeville, G. N. 1967. A technique for studying root vs. shoot uptake of soil-applied herbicides. Weed Res. 7:242–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hammond, L. E., Handly, J. V., Swann, R. L., Hanson, C. L., and Bauman, T. T. 1982. Soil residual activity of Dowco 453 ME herbicide. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:76.Google Scholar
9. Himmelstein, F. J. and Peters, R. A. 1983. Timing of postemergence grass herbicides for annual grass control in a new alfalfa seeding. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 37:57–60.Google Scholar
10. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. 347:1–32.Google Scholar
11. Nalewaja, J. D., Miller, S. D., and Dexter, A. G. 1982. Postemergence grass and broadleaf herbicide combinations. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:77–80.Google Scholar
12. Nishomoto, R. K. and Warren, G. F. 1971. Site of uptake, movement, and activity of DCPA. Weed Sci. 19:152–155.Google Scholar
13. Peters, E. J. and McKelvey, R. A. 1982. Control of weed grasses in small seeded forage legumes. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Res. Rep. 39:54–55.Google Scholar
14. Prendeville, G. N., Eshel, Y., Schreiber, M. M., and Warren, G. F. 1967. Site of uptake of soil-applied herbicides. Weed Res. 7:316–322.Google Scholar
15. Rafii, Z. E. and Ashton, F. M. 1979. Influence of site of uptake of fluridone on early development of soybean and cotton. Weed Sci. 27:321–327.Google Scholar
16. Smith, A. E. and Hsiao, A. I. 1983. Persistence studies with the herbicide sethoxydim in prairie soils. Weed Res. 23:253–257.Google Scholar
17. Vesecky, J. F., Feltner, K. C., and Vanderslip, R. L. 1973. Wild cane and forage sorghum competition in grain sorghum. Weed Sci. 21:28–32.Google Scholar