Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:39:27.584Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shoot Zone Activity of Trifluralin and Nitralin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

W. L. Barrentine  and
G. F. Warren
W. L. Barrentine
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture
G. F. Warren
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When localized treatments of α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-di-nitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine (trifluralin) and 4-(methylsulfonyl)-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropylaniline (nitralin) were applied to the shoot zone of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench, var. RS-610) and cucumber (Cucumis sativus L., var. Wis. SMR-15) before seedling emergence, the most susceptible sites were the sorghum coleoptilar node and the cucumber hypocotyl hook. The longer before emergence that the sorghum shoot was exposed to the herbicides, the greater was the injury. However, if herbicide concentration was sufficient, the growing point just above the sorghum coleoptilar node was inhibited by both herbicides when applied after seedling emergence. Maximum uptake of 14C-trifluralin and 14C-nitralin occurred through the coleoptilar node and hypocotyI hook of sorghum and cucumber, respectively. Rate of entry, uptake, and translocation of 14C-trifluralin was greater than that of 14C-nitralin in sorghum and cucumber shoots.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , January 1971 , pp. 37 - 41
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. Anderson, W. P., Richards, A. B., and Whitworth, J. W. 1967. Trifluralin effects on cotton seedlings. Weeds 15:224–227.Google Scholar
2. Barrentine, W. L. and Warren, G. F. 1971. Differential phyto toxicity of trifluralin and nitralin. Weed Sci. 19:31–37.Google Scholar
3. Burnside, O. C. 1968. Preplant, preemergence, and postemergence herbicides for soybeans. North Centr. Weed Contr. Conf. Res. Rept. 25:111–112.Google Scholar
4. Condray, J. L. and Russ, O. R. 1967. Emergence of velvetleaf and of wild cane from different seed depths and the site of uptake of various chemicals. Proc. North Centr. Weed Contr. Conf. 22:44.Google Scholar
5. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, Shogo. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. California Agr. Exp. Sta. Manual 35. 143 p.Google Scholar
6. Knake, E. L., Appleby, A. P., and Furtick, W. R. 1967. Soil incorporation and site of uptake of preemergence herbicides. Weeds 15:228–232.Google Scholar
7. Knake, E. L. and Wax, Loyd M. 1968. The importance of the shoot of giant foxtail for uptake of preemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 16:393–395.Google Scholar
8. Nishimoto, R. K., Appleby, A. P., and Furtick, W. R. 1967. Site of uptake of preemergence herbicides. West Weed Contr. Conf. Res. Prog. Rept. p. 121–122.Google Scholar
9. Oliver, L. R. and Frans, R. E. 1968. Inhibition of cotton and soybean roots from incorporated trifluralin and persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 16:199–203.Google Scholar
10. Parker, C. 1963. Factors affecting the selectivity of 2,3-dichloroallyldiisopropylthiolcarbamate (Di-allate) against Avena spp. in wheat and barley. Weed Res. 3:259–276.Google Scholar
11. Parker, C. 1966. The importance of shoot entry in the action of herbicides applied to the soil. Weeds 14:117–121.Google Scholar
12. Prendeville, G. N. 1968. Shoot zone uptake of soil-applied herbicides. Weed Res. 8:106–114.Google Scholar
13. 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
14. Standifer, Leon C. and Thomas, Carl H. 1965. Response of johnsongrass to soil-incorporated trifluralin. Weeds 13:302–306.Google Scholar