Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T21:11:13.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nitrogen application after plant growth regulator herbicide drift reduces soybean growth and yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2019

Brian Van de Stroet ,
Graig Reicks ,
Deepak Joshi ,
Sen Subramanian ,
David Clay  and
Sharon A. Clay Open the ORCID record for Sharon A. Clay [Opens in a new window]
Brian Van de Stroet
Affiliation:
Former Graduate Student, Department of Agronomy, Horticulture, & Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Graig Reicks
Affiliation:
Research Associate, Department of Agronomy, Horticulture & Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Deepak Joshi
Affiliation:
Research Associate, Department of Agronomy, Horticulture & Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Sen Subramanian
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy, Horticulture & Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
David Clay
Affiliation:
Distinguished Professor, Department of Agronomy, Horticulture & Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Sharon A. Clay*
Affiliation:
Distinguished Professor, Department of Agronomy, Horticulture & Plant Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Sharon A. Clay, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The success of dicamba-tolerant soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] has revived concerns about plant growth regulator (PGR) herbicide exposure to conventional soybean. In laboratory studies, soybean root nodulation is inhibited by excess auxin, which is the mechanism of action of PGR herbicides. Soybean exposed to PGRs in a field environment may have a similar response, and if nodulation is compromised, nitrogen (N) fixation may be reduced, with subsequent seed yield or protein content decreases. Many soybean–N studies report minimal impact to soybean yield. However, if soybeans show foliar PGR injury symptoms, could N application compensate for a potential nodulation inhibition response? This study examined the response of non–PGR tolerant soybean to N after exposure to low doses of 2,4-D and dicamba applied once (at soybean growth stages V1, V3, and early reproduction [R1 or R2]) or twice (V1 + V3 or V3 + R). N was either foliar or soil applied at early (∼5 d after PGR application) or late (10 d after PGR application) timings. Nodulation and plant growth were evaluated at R3, and grain yield and seed protein and oil content were quantified at maturity. Plant biomass and nodulation were reduced by 10% with some PGR treatments, and early foliar N application after PGR injury resulted in reduction up to 25%. N applications to non–PGR treated soybean did not increase yield. Soybean treated with PGR at V1 or V3, with or without N, had yields similar to control treatments. However, yield reductions of up to 20% were observed when PGRs were applied at V5 or R stages or when double PGR applications were followed by early foliar N application. Seed protein and oil content were not affected by PGR or N treatment.

Keywords

Vijay Nandula, USDA-ARSAuxin injuryPGR herbicidesyield response
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 67 , Issue 3 , May 2019 , pp. 346 - 353
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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

Abendroth, LJ, Elmore, RW, Ferguson, RB (2006) G06-1621 Soybean Inoculation: Understanding the Soil and Plant Mechanisms Involved (Part One of a Two-Part Series). Historical Materials from University of Nebraska–Lincoln Extension. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/extensionhist. Accessed: July 15, 2018Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K, Peterson, D (1999) Soybean (Glycine max) response to simulated drift from selected sulfonylurea herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Weed Technol 13:264–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, SM, Clay, SA, Wrage, LJ, Matthees, D (2004) Soybean foliage residues of dicamba and 2,4-D and correlation to application rates and yield. Agron J 96:750–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auch, DE, Arnold, WE (1978) Dicamba use and injury on soybeans (Glycine max) in South Dakota. Weed Sci 26:471–475Google Scholar
Bellaloui, N, Bruns, HA, Abbas, HK, Mengistu, A, Fisher, DK, Reddy, KN (2015) Agricultural practices altered soybean seed protein, oil, fatty acids, sugars, and minerals in the Midsouth USA. Front Plant Sci 6:31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broadhurst, NA, Montgomery, ML, Freed, VH (1966) Metabolism of 2-methoxy-3, 4-dichloro-benzoic acid (dicamba) by wheat and bluegrass plants. J Agric Food Chem 14:585–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, DG, Anderson, DS (1998) Evaluation of the Minolta SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter for nitrogen management in corn. J Plant Nutrition 21:741–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, FY, Vanden Born, WH (1971) Dicamba uptake, translocation, metabolism and selectivity. Weed Sci 19:113–117Google Scholar
Cundiff, GT, Reynolds, DB, Mueller, TC (2017) Evaluation of dicamba persistence among various agricultural hose types and cleanout procedures using soybean (Glycine max) as a bio-indicator. Weed Sci 65:305–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D (2014) Nitrogen on soybeans: to use or not to use. No-Till Farmer. https://www.no-tillfarmer.com/articles/3945-nitrogen-on-soybeans-to-use-or-not-to-use. Accessed: April 30, 2018Google Scholar
De Mendiburu, F (2009) Agricolae: Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. R Package v. 1.0–7. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/agricolae/index.html. Accessed: April 27, 2018Google Scholar
Feung, C-S, Hamilton, RH, Witham, FH (1971) Metabolism of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid by soybean cotyledon callus tissue in cultures. J Agric Food Chem 19:475–479Google Scholar
Hardarson, G, Golbs, M, Danso, SKA (1989) Nitrogen fixation in soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill) as affected by nodulation patterns. Soil Biol Biochem 21:783–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y, Yuan, L, Reddy, KN, Zhang, J (2016) In-situ plant hyperspectral sensing for early detection of soybean injury from dicamba. Biosyst Eng 149:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hummel, L, Mayer, A, Clay, SA (2005) The fate of 2,4-D in intact soybean (Glycine max). SDSU J Undergrad Res 3:39–48Google Scholar
LaMenza, NC, Monzon, JP, Specht, JE, Grassini, P (2017) Is soybean yield limited by nitrogen supply? Field Crops Res 213:204–212Google Scholar
Lofton, J, Arnall, B (2017) Understanding Soybean Nodulation and Inoculation. Stillwater: Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service PSS 2169. http://factsheets.okstate.edu/documents/pss-2169-understanding-soybean-nodulation-and-inoculationGoogle Scholar
Mourtzinis, S, Gurpreet, K, Orlowski, JM, Shipiro, CA, Lee, CD, Wortmann, C, Holshouser, D, Nafziger, ED, Kandel, H, Niekamp, J, Ross, J, Lofton, J, Vonk, J, Roozeboom, KL, Thelan, KD, Lindsey, LE, Staton, M, Naeve, SL, Casteel, SN, Wiebold, WJ, Conley, SP (2018) Soybean response to nitrogen application across the United States: a synthesis-analysis. Field Crop Res 215:74–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nizampatnam, NR, Schreier, SJ, Damodaran, S, Adhikari, S, Subramanian, S (2015) microRNA160 dictates stage-specific auxin and cytokinin sensitivities and directs soybean nodule development. Plant J 84:140–153CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Overvoorde, P, Fukaki, H, Beeckman, T (2010) Auxin control of root development. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2. 16 p, doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a001537CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersen, PJ, Haderlie, LC, Hoefer, RH, McAllister, RS (1985) Dicamba absorption and translocation as influenced by formulation and surfactant. Weed Sci 33:717–720Google Scholar
Piotrowska-Niczyporuk, A, Bajguz, A (2014) The effect of natural and synthetic auxins on the growth, metabolite content and antioxidant response of green alga Chlorella vulgaris (Trebouxiophyceae). Plant Growth Regul 73:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2017) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://222.R-project.org. Accessed: June 20, 2018Google Scholar
Robinson, AP, Simpson, DM, Johnson, WG (2013) Response of glyphosate-tolerant soybean yield components to dicamba exposure. Weed Sci 61:526–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, JP Nitrogen Fertilizer for Soybean? Crop Insights. www.pioneer.com/home/site/us/agronomy/library/nitrogen-fertilizer-for-soybean. Accessed: April 20, 2018Google Scholar
Shapiro, C (2017) Nitrogen on Soybeans—The Hope Never Dies. Cropwatch. https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2017/nitrogen-soybeans-hope-never-dies. Accessed: April 23, 2018Google Scholar
South Dakota Mesonet (2018) South Dakota State University. https://mesonet.sdstate.edu. Accessed: June 21, 2018Google Scholar
Steckel, L, Chism, C, Thompson, A (2005) Cleaning Plant Growth Regulator (PGR) Herbicides Out of Field Sprayers. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service W071. 3 pGoogle Scholar
Steel, RGD, Torrie, JH (1980) Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 633 pGoogle Scholar
Strachan, SD, Casini, MS, Heldreth, KM, Scocas, JA (2010) Vapor movement of synthetic auxin herbicides: aminocyclopyrachlor, aminocyclopyrachlor-methyl ester, dicamba, and aminopyralid. Weed Sci 58:103–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, M, Nizampatnam, NR, Baron, M, Coppin, S, Damodaran, S, Adhikari, S, Arunachalam, SP, Yu, O, Subramanian, S (2013) Ectopic expression of miR160 results in auxin hypersensitivity, cytokinin hyposensitivity, and inhibition of symbiotic nodule development in soybean. Plant Physiol 162:2042–2055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Soybean Board. Average Protein and Oil at 13 Percent Moisture: Crop Year 2016. https://unitedsoybean.org/wp-content/uploads/3-USB-USSM-2016-Avg-Protein-and-Oil-at-13-percent-Moisture_31518.pdf. Accessed: July 16 2018Google Scholar
Wang, Y, Li, K, Chen, L, Zou, Y, Liu, H, Tian, Y, Li, D, Wang, R, Zhao, F, Ferguson, BJ, Gresshoff, PM, Li, X (2015) MicroRNA167-directed regulation of the auxin response factors GmARF8a and GmARF8b is required for soybean nodulation and lateral root development. Plant Physiol 168:984–999CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wax, LM, Knuth, LA, Slife, FW (1969) Response of soybeans to 2,4-D, dicamba, and picloram. Weed Sci 17:388–393Google Scholar
Weidenhamer, JD, Triplett, GB, Sobotka, FE (1988) Dicamba injury to soybean. Agron J 81:637–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar