Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T08:25:33.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corn (Zea mays) Injury Following Use of Clomazone, Chlorimuron, Imazaquin, and Imazethapyr

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

William S. Curran ,
Ellery L. Knake  and
Rex A. Liebl
William S. Curran
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ill., 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
Ellery L. Knake
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ill., 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
Rex A. Liebl
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ill., 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the response of corn to clomazone, chlorimuron, imazaquin, and imazethapyr the year following their application to soybeans. Herbicides were surface-applied from one-half to three times the labeled application rates. Soybeans were planted the year of application and crop tolerance was evaluated. Corn was planted in rotation the following season. Soybeans were tolerant of all four herbicides. The highest rates of clomazone, chlorimuron, and imazaquin injured the corn early in the season. Imazethapyr did not influence corn growth. Visual estimates of clomazone injury were as high as 39% chlorosis. Seedling dry weight reductions at the highest chlorimuron and imazaquin rates were 32% and 24%, respectively. Although corn was injured by higher rates of clomazone, imazaquin, and chlorimuron at the 3-leaf stage, none of the herbicides significantly reduced grain yield. This study suggests that these herbicides can carry over and injure corn, especially if labeled application rates are exceeded. However, low to moderate early season injury to corn may not affect grain yield.

Keywords

Clomazone, 2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinonechlorimuron, 2-[[[[(4-chloro-6-methoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]-carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidimazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1 H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acidimazethapyr, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidcorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3377’soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Williams'Dissipationcarryovercrop injury
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 539 - 544
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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. Anonymous. 1988. Pursuit Product Label. American Cyanamid Co., Wayne, NJ 07470.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1988. Scepter Product Label. American Cyanamid Co., Wayne, NJ 07470.Google Scholar
3. Anonymous. 1988. Command Product Label. FMC Corp., Philadelphia, PA 19103.Google Scholar
4. Anonymous. 1990. Canopy, Classic, and Preview Product Labels. E. I. Dupont de Nemours, Wilmington, DE 19898.Google Scholar
5. Basham, G. W., and Lavy, T. L. 1987. Microbial and photolytic dissipation of imazaquin in soil Weed Sci. 35:865–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Beyer, E. M., Duffy, M. J., Hay, J. V., and Schlueter, D. D. 1987. Sulfonylurea Herbicides. Chap. 3 in Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides, Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Vol 3. Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
7. Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gbur, E. E. Jr. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:421–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Goetz, A. J., Walker, R. H., Wehtje, G., and Hajek, B. F. 1989. Sorption and mobility of chlorimuron in Alabama soils. Weed Sci. 37:428–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Gunsolus, J. L., Behrens, R. H., Lueschen, W. E., Warnes, D. D., and Wiersma, J. V. 1986. Carryover potential of AC-263,499, DPX-F6025, FMC-57020, and imazaquin in Minnesota. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 41:52.Google Scholar
10. Halstead, S. J., and Harvey, R. G. 1986. Off-site movement of FMC-57020: 1986 trials. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 41:42.Google Scholar
11. Hurle, K., and Walker, A. 1980. Persistence and its prediction. p. 84–122 in Hance, R. J., ed. Interactions Between Herbicides and the Soil. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
12. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone in soil. Weed Sci. 37:259–267.Google Scholar
13. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of clomazone on soils, sediments, and clays. Weed Sci. 37:440–444.Google Scholar
14. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on soils, sediments, and selected adsorbents. Weed Sci. 37:712–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Messersmith, C. G., Burnside, O. C., and Lavy, T. L. 1971. Biological and non-biological dissipation of trifluralin from soil. Weed Sci. 19: 285–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Leavitt, R. A. 1988. Influence of rate, method of application, and tillage on imazaquin persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 36:90–95.Google Scholar
17. Thelen, K. D., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 1988. Comparison of application methods and tillage practices on volatilization of clomazone. Weed Technol. 2:323–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar