Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T03:10:39.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glyphosate-Resistant Cotton Response to Glyphosate Applied in Irrigated and Nonirrigated Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

C. Dale Monks ,
Glenn Wehtje ,
Charles Burmester ,
Andrew J. Price ,
Michael G. Patterson ,
Dennis P. Delaney ,
Wilson Faircloth  and
Marshall R. Woods
C. Dale Monks
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University
Glenn Wehtje
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University
Charles Burmester
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University
Andrew J. Price*
Affiliation:
National Soil Dynamics Laboratory, Agriculture Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Auburn, AL 36832
Michael G. Patterson
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
Dennis P. Delaney
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
Wilson Faircloth
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
Marshall R. Woods
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in Alabama during 1999 and 2000 to test the hypothesis that any glyphosate-induced yield suppression in glyphosate-resistant cotton would be less with irrigation than without irrigation. Yield compensation was monitored by observing alterations in plant growth and fruiting patterns. Glyphosate treatments included a nontreated control, 1.12 kg ai/ha applied POST at the 4-leaf stage, 1.12 kg/ha applied DIR at the prebloom stage, and 1.12 kg/ha applied POST at 4-leaf and postemergence directed (DIR) at the prebloom cotton stages. The second variable, irrigation treatment, was established by irrigating plots individually with overhead sprinklers or maintaining them under dryland, nonirrigated conditions. Cotton yield and all measured parameters including lint quality were positively affected by irrigation. Irrigation increased yield 52% compared to nonirrigated cotton. Yield and fiber quality effects were independent of glyphosate treatments. Neither yield nor any of the measured variables that reflected whole plant response were influenced by glyphosate treatment or by a glyphosate by irrigation interaction.

Keywords

Glyphosatecotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.‘Delta and Pine Land 458 BGRR’Environmental stressglyphosate-resistant cottonherbicide-tolerant cottonirrigationwater stress
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 915 - 921
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

Ahmadi, M. S., Haderlie, L. C., and Wicks, G. A. 1980. Effect of growth stage and water stress on barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control and on glyphosate absorption and translocation. Weed Sci. 28:277–282.Google Scholar
Balkcom, K. S., Reeves, D. W., Shaw, J. N., Burmester, C. H., and Curtis, L. M. 2006. Cotton yield and fiber quality from irrigated tillage systems in the Tennessee Valley. Agron. J. 98:596–602.Google Scholar
Bednarz, C. W., Bridges, D. C., and Brown, S. M. 2000. Analysis of cotton yield stability across population densities. Agron. J. 92:128–135.Google Scholar
Bednarz, C. W. and Roberts, P. M. 2001. Spatial yield distribution in cotton following early-season floral bud removal. Crop Sci. 41:1800–1808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackley, R. H., Reynolds, D. B., Rowland, C. D. Jr, and File, S. L. 1999. Roundup Ready cotton tolerance to topical applications of Roundup Ultra. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 1999:252–253.Google Scholar
Bradow, J. M. and Davidonis, G. H. 2000. Quantification of fiber quality and the cotton production–processing interface: a physiologist's perspective. J. Cotton Sci. 4:34–64.Google Scholar
Brown, S. M. and Bednarz, C. W. 1998. Tolerance of Roundup Ready® cotton to mid- and late-post application of Roundup. Pages 849–850. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Bourland, F. M. and Watson, C. E. 1990. COTMAP, a technique for evaluating structure and yield of cotton plants. Crop Sci. 30:224–226.Google Scholar
Campbell, B. T. and Bauer, P. J. 2006. Investigating variability for genotype response to supplemental irrigation in cotton [abstract]. ASA–CSSA–SSSA 2006 International Meetings, November 12–16, 2006, Indianapolis, IN.Google Scholar
Cook, D. R. and Kennedy, C. W. 2000. Early flower bud loss and mepiquat chloride effects on cotton yield distribution. Crop Sci. 40:1678–1684.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1998. Weed management in glyphosate-tolerant cotton. J. Cotton Sci. 2:174–185.Google Scholar
Edenfield, M. W., Brecke, B. J., Colvin, D. L., and Shilling, D. G. 2000. The effect of glyphosate (Roundup) application timing on weed control and boll development in glyphosate-tolerant (Roundup Ready®) cotton. Pages 1478–1479. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Faircloth, W. H., Patterson, M. G., Monks, C. D., and Goodman, W. R. 2001. Weed management programs for glyphosate-tolerant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 15:544–551.Google Scholar
File, S. L., Reynolds, D. B., Reddy, K. N., and Arnold, J. C. 2000. Field and laboratory tolerance of Roundup Ready® cotton to glyphosate. Pages 608–609. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Gaskin, R. E. and Holloway, P. J. 1992. Some physicochemical factors influencing foliar uptake enhancement of glyphosate-mono(isopropylammonium) by polyoxyethylene surfactants. Pesticide Sci. 34:195–206.Google Scholar
Guinn, G. 1998. Causes of square and boll shedding. Pages 1355–1364 in Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Guinn, G., Mauney, J. R., and Fry, K. E. 1981. Irrigation scheduling and plant population effects on growth, bloom rates, boll abscission, and yield of cotton. Agron. J. 73:529–534.Google Scholar
Horak, M. J., Rosenbaum, E. W., and Woodrum, C. L. et al. 2007. Characterization of Roundup Ready Flex Cotton, ‘MON 88913’, for use in ecological risk assessment: evaluation of seed germination, vegetative and reproductive growth, and ecological interactions. Crop Sci. 47:268–277.Google Scholar
Jones, M. A. and Snipes, C. E. 1999. Tolerance of transgenic cotton to topical applications of glyphosate. J. Cotton Sci. 3:19–26.Google Scholar
Kalaitzandonakes, N. G. and Suntornpithug, P. 2001. Why do farmers adopt biotech cotton? 179–183. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
Light, G. G., Baughman, T. A., Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., and Wester, D. B. 2003. Yield of glyphosate-tolerant cotton as affected by topical glyphosate applications on the Texas high plains and rolling plains. J. Cotton Sci. 7:231–235.Google Scholar
Marois, J. J., Wright, D. L., Wiatrak, P. J., and Vargas, M. A. 2004. Effect of row width and nitrogen on cotton morphology and canopy microclimate. Crop Sci. 44:870–877.Google Scholar
Meredith, W. R. Jr and Bridge, R. R. 1972. Heterosis and gene action in cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Crop Sci. 12:304–310.Google Scholar
Murdock, E. C. and Sherrick, S. L. 2000. Tolerance of Roundup Ready® (glyphosate-tolerant) cotton to postemergence and postemergence-directed applications of Roundup Ultra (glyphosate). Pages 1477. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
NASS 2006. Agricultural chemical usage 2005 field crops summary. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/AgriChemUsFC//2000s/2006/AgriChemUsFC-05-17-2006.pdf. Accessed: January 18, 2007.Google Scholar
Oosterhuis, D. M., Bourland, F. M., Tugwell, N. P., and Cochran, M. J. 1993. Terminology and concepts related to crop monitoring, maturity, and defoliation. Pages 239–249. in Oosterhuis, D.M., ed Fayetteville, AR University of Arkansas, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Special Report 162 Proceedings of the 1993 Cotton Research Meeting.Google Scholar
Patterson, L. L., Buxton, D. R., and Briggs, R. E. 1978. Fruiting in cotton as affected by controlled boll set. Agron. J. 70:118–122.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, W. T. 2004a. Moisture deficit effects on cotton lint yield, yield components, and boll distribution. Agron. J. 96:377–383.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, W. T. 2004b. Physiological consequences of moisture deficit stress in cotton. Crop Sci. 44:1265–1272.Google Scholar
Pline, W., Edmisten, K., Wilcut, J., and Wells, R. 2001b. Effect of glyphosate (Roundup Ultra®) on pollen viability and pollination in Roundup Ready® cotton. Pages 446–447. in Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Viator, R., Wilcut, J. W., Edmisten, K. L., Thomas, J., and Wells, R. 2002. Reproductive abnormalities in glyphosate-resistant cotton caused by lower CP4-EPSPS levels in the male reproductive tissue. J. Cotton Sci. 50:438–447.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Wells, R., Little, G., Edmisten, K. L., and Wilcut, J. W. 2003. Glyphosate and water stress effects on fruiting and carbohydrates in glyphosate-resistant cotton. J. Cotton Sci. 43:879–885.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Wilcut, J. W., Edmisten, K. L., and Wells, R. 2001a. Absorption and translocation of glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant cotton as influenced by application method and growth stage. Weed Sci. 49:460–467.Google Scholar
Pline-Srnic, W. A., Edmisten, K. L., Wilcut, J. W., Wells, R., and Thomas, J. L. 2004. Effect of glyphosate on fruit retention, yield, and fiber quality of glyphosate resistant cotton. J. Cotton Sci. 8:1.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N. 2000. Factors affecting toxicity, absorption, and translocation of glyphosate in redvine (Brunnichia ovata). Weed Technol. 14:457–462.Google Scholar
Reddy, V. R., Baker, D. N., Whisler, F. D., and McKinion, J. M. 1990. Analysis of the effects of herbicides on cotton yield trends. Agricultural Systems 33:347–359.Google Scholar
Sadras, V. O. 1995. Compensatory growth in cotton after loss of reproductive organs. Field Crops Res. 40:1–18.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L. 2000. The impact of glyphosate-tolerant crops on the use of other herbicides and on resistance management. Pesticide Management Sci. 56:320–326.Google Scholar
Sherrick, S. L., Holt, H. A., and Hess, F. D. 1986. Effects of adjuvants and environment during plant development on glyphosate absorption and translocation in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Weed Sci. 34:811–816.Google Scholar
Stringer, S. J., Wells, V. D., Tugwell, N. P., Phillips, J. R., Cochran, M. J., and Carter, F. L. 1989. Evaluation of uppermost white bloom node interval and heat unit accumulation for crop termination timing. Pages 233–238. in Brown, J.M., ed Menphis, TN National Cotton Council Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Producers Research Conference, Nashville, TN. January 2–7, 1989.Google Scholar
Viator, R. P., Underbrink, S. M., Jost, P. H., Witten, T. K., and Cothren, J. T. 2000. Factors affecting Roundup Ready® cotton fruit retention and yields. Pages 689–691. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference. San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Victor, R. P., Jost, P. H., Senseman, S. A., and Cothren, J. T. 2004. Effect of glyphosate application timing and methods on glyphosate-resistant cotton. Weed Sci. 52:147–151.Google Scholar
Vories, E. D. and Glover, R. E. 2006. Comparison of growth and yield components of conventional and ultra-narrow row cotton. J. Cotton Sci. 10:235–243.Google Scholar
Waldecker, M. A. and Wyse, D. L. 1985. Soil moisture effects on glyphosate absorption and translocation in common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca). Weed Sci. 33:299–305.Google Scholar
Wills, G. D. 1978. Factors affecting toxicity and translocation of glyphosate in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 26:509–513.Google Scholar
Yasuor, H., Sibony, M., Rubin, B., Litvak, M., Negba, K., Flash, I., and Gat, E. 2000. Influence of glyphosate (Roundup Ultra®) rate and time of application on weed control and performance of DP5415RR cotton in Israel: field and laboratory experiments. Pages 1480–1483. in. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference 2. San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar