Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:41:01.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Propanil Selectivity for Green Foxtail (Setaria viridis) in Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charlotte V. Eberlein  and
Richard Behrens
Charlotte V. Eberlein
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Richard Behrens
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Retention, absorption, translocation, and metabolism of propanil (3′,4′-dichloropropionanilide) in tolerant wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ‘Era’) and susceptible green foxtail [Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. ♯3 SETVI] were studied to determine the basis of selectivity. Green foxtail retained 7.7 times more spray on a mg/g fresh weight basis than did wheat. Absorption of 14C-propanil by green foxtail was greater than by wheat during most of the 48-h uptake period, but differences in absorption were not large enough for absorption to be a major selectivity factor. Translocation of foliar-applied 14C-propanil was limited in both species; after 48 h, 96.7% of absorbed 14C remained in the treated wheat leaf and 99.7% remained in the treated green foxtail leaf. Limited metabolism of 14C-propanil occurred in green foxtail, with only 6.4% of extractable 14C-propanil metabolized to dichlorolactanilide and unknown 14C-compounds during a 72-h period. Wheat metabolized 65.8% of the extractable 14C-propanil to dichloroaniline and unknown 14C compounds by 72 h after treatment. The results of this research indicate that spray retention and propanil metabolism are the major factors involved in wheat tolerance and green foxtail susceptibility to propanil.

Keywords

Spray retentionabsorptiontranslocationmetabolismSETVI
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 13 - 16
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. Ashton, F. M. and Crafts, A. S. 1981. Mode of action of herbicides. John Wiley and Sons, NY. 104 pp.Google Scholar
2. Blackman, G. E., Bruce, R. S., and Holly, K. 1958. Studies in the principles of phytotoxicity. V. Interrelationships between specific differences in spray retention and selective toxicity. J. Exp. Bot. 9:175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Bradshaw, R. E., Stobbe, E. H., and Sturko, A.R.W. 1981. Effect of seeding dates and densities of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) on the growth and productivity of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 29:212–217.Google Scholar
4. Brunskill, R. T. 1956. Physical factors affecting the retention of spray droplets on leaf surfaces. Proc. Brit. Weed Contr. Conf. 3:593–603.Google Scholar
5. El-Refai, A. R. and Mowafy, M. 1973. Interaction of propanil with insecticides absorbed from soil and translocated into rice plants. Weed Sci. 21:246–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Ennis, W. B. Jr., Williamson, R. E., and Dorschner, K. P. 1952. Studies on spray retention by leaves of different plants. Weeds 1:274–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Frear, D. S. and Still, G. G. 1968. The metabolism of 3,4-dichloropropionanilide in plants. Partial purification and properties of an aryl acylamidase from rice. Phytochemistry 7:913–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hawf, L. R. and Behrens, R. 1974. Selectivity factors in the response of plants to 2,4-DB. Weed Sci. 22:245–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hoagland, R. E., Graf, G., and Handel, E. D. 1974. Hydrolysis of 3′,4′-dichloropropionanilide by plant aryl acylamidases. Weed Res. 14:371–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Matsunaka, S. 1968. Propanil hydrolysis: Inhibition in rice plants by insecticides. Science 160:1360–1361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Nalewaja, J. D. and Miller, S. D. 1980. Response of insecticide treated wheat to propanil. North Cent. Weed Cont. Conf. Res. Rep. 37:90.Google Scholar
12. Still, C. C. and Kuzirian, O. 1967. Enzyme detoxification of 3′,4′-dichloropropionanilide in rice and barnyardgrass, a factor in herbicide selectivity. Nature 216:799–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Still, G. G. 1968. Metabolism of 3,4-dichloropropionanilide in plants: the metabolic fate of the 3,4-dichloroaniline moiety. Science 159:992–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Yih, R. Y., McRae, D. H., and Wilson, H. F. 1968. Mechanism of selective action of 3′,4′-dichloropropionanilide. Plant Physiol. 43:1291–1296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Yih, R. Y., McRae, D. H., and Wilson, H. F. 1968. Metabolism of 3′,4′-dichloropropionanilide: 3,4-dichloroaniline-lignin complex in rice plants. Science 161:376–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar