Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T21:19:22.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) Control and Rainfastness with Glyphosate and Adjuvants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Donnie K. Miller ,
James L. Griffin  and
Edward P. Richard JR.
Donnie K. Miller
Affiliation:
Northeast Research Station, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, P.O. Box 438, St. Joseph, LA 71366
James L. Griffin
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, Louisiana Slate University Agricultural Center, 302 Life Sciences Building, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Edward P. Richard JR.
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Southern Regional Research Center, Sugarcane Research Unit, P.O. Box 470, Houma, LA 70361
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glyphosate and adjuvant combinations were applied to rhizome johnsongrass at vegetative and reproductive growth stages to evaluate control and rainfastness in field studies. Using a rainfall simulator delivering 1.3 cm of water in 15 min, plots received either no rainfall or rainfall 15 or 60 min after glyphosate was applied at 2.1 kg ai/ha in combination with the nonionic surfactants Kinetic® HV at 0.25% (v/v) or Induce® at 1.0% (v/v) or the silicone surfactant Break-Thru® at 0.125% (v/v). Regardless of adjuvant, rainfall 15 or 60 min after application reduced johnsongrass control compared with no rainfall. Johnsongrass control 14 d after treatment at the reproductive stage was at least 89% with no rainfall, but no more than 53 and 65% with rainfall at 15 and 60 min, respectively. Based on initial weed control, adjuvants did not consistently improve rainfastness. Johnsongrass regrowth did not occur when glyphosate was applied with either adjuvant. In contrast, for glyphosate applied to johnsongrass in the vegetative stage, addition of Break-Thru improved control over Induce at both 15- and 60-min rainfall timings in one of two experiments. With no rainfall, addition of Kinetic HV and Break-Thru increased johnsongrass control in only one experiment. For application at the vegetative stage, johnsongrass regrowth averaged across rainfall timings was no more than 10%. In other field experiments, glyphosate at 1.4 kg/ha plus nonionic surfactants, silicone surfactant, crop oil concentrate, methylated seed oil, or a blend of silicone surfactant and methylated seed oil were equally effective in reducing johnsongrass regrowth when applied after seedhead emergence. Improved control of vegetative johnsongrass with some adjuvants was not reflected in decreased regrowth.

Keywords

2,4-D,(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acidglyphosate, N-(phosphonomethyl)glycinejohnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. # SORHACrop oil concentratemethylated seed oilnonionic surfactantrainfall simulatorsilicone surfactant2,4-DSORHADAT, days after treatmentMSO, methylated seed oil
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , December 1998 , pp. 617 - 622
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Ali, A. D., Reagan, T. E., Kitchen, L. M., and Flynn, J. L. 1986. Effects of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) density on sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) yield. Weed Sci. 34:381–383.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1995. Louisiana's Suggested Chemical Weed Control Guide for 1995. Louisiana State Univ. Agric. Cent., Louisiana Coop. Ext. Serv. Pub. 1565. 154 p.Google Scholar
Bruff, S. A., Griffin, J. L., and Richard, E. P. Jr. 1995. Influence of rainfree period after asulam application on johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control. Weed Technol. 9:316–320.Google Scholar
Bryson, C. T. 1987. Effects of rainfall on foliar herbicides applied to rhizome johnsongrass. Weed Sci. 35:115–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Ruiter, H., Uffing, A.J.M., and Meinen, E. 1996. Influence of surfactants and ammonium sulfate on glyphosate phytotoxicity to quackgrass (Elytrigia repens). Weed Technol. 10:803–808.Google Scholar
Donald, W. W. 1988. Established foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum) control with glyphosate plus ammonium sulfate. Weed Technol. 2:364–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, R. J. and Bishop, N. G. 1988. Promotion of stomatal infiltration of glyphosate by an organosilicone surfactant reduces the critical rainfall period. Pestic. Sci. 24:55–62.Google Scholar
Flint, J. L. and Barrett, M. 1989. Antagonism of glyphosate toxicity to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) by 2,4-D and dicamba. Weed Sci. 37:700–705.Google Scholar
Friesen, H. A. 1977. Effect of growth stage on quackgrass control with glyphosate. Weed Sci. Am. Abstr. 17:3.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Vidrine, P. R., Griffin, J. L., and Reynolds, D. B. 1996. Influence of adjuvants on efficacy of clethodim. Weed Technol. 10:738–743.Google Scholar
Jordan, T. N. 1981. Effects of diluent volumes and surfactant on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate to bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon). Weed Sci. 29:79–83.Google Scholar
Millhollon, R. W. 1970. MSMA for johnsongrass control in sugarcane. Weed Sci. 18:333–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millhollon, R. W. 1976. Asulam for johnsongrass control in sugarcane. Weed Sci. 24:496–499.Google Scholar
Moshier, L. J. 1980. Response of honeyvine milkweed (Ampelamus albidus) to herbicide applications. Weed Sci. 28:722–724.Google Scholar
Parochetti, J. V., Wilson, H. P., and Burt, G. W. 1975. Activity of glyphosate on johnsongrass. Weed Sci. 5:395–400.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N. and Singh, M. 1992. Organosilicone adjuvant effects on glyphosate efficacy and rainfastness. Weed Technol. 6:361–365.Google Scholar
Richard, E. P. Jr. 1986. Influence of surfactants on the toxicity of asulam to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and sugarcane (Saccharum sp.). Weed Sci. 34:299–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richard, E. P. Jr. 1992. Herbicide treatments for johnsongrass control in fallow sugar cane fields. J. Am. Soc. Sugarcane Technol. 12:112.Google Scholar
Richard, E. P. Jr., and Griffin, J. L. 1993. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) with asulam applied alone and in mixtures. Weed Technol. 7:657–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riechers, D. E., Wax, L. M., Liebl, R. A., and Bullock, D. G. 1995. Surfactant effects on glyphosate efficacy. Weed Technol. 9:281–285.Google Scholar
Shelton, C. H., von Bernuth, R. D., and Rajbhandari, S. P. 1985. A continuous-application rainfall simulator. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 28:1115–1119.Google Scholar
Sprankle, P., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1975. Absorption, action, and translocation of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 23:235–240.Google Scholar
Suwunnamek, U. and Parker, C. 1975. Control of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) with glyphosate: the influence of ammonium sulphate and other additives. Weed Res. 15:13–19.Google Scholar
Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1985. Effect of inorganic salts on the toxicity and translocation of glyphosate and MSMA in purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus). Weed Sci. 33:755–761.Google Scholar