Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:56:13.134Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mesotrione and Glufosinate in Glufosinate-Resistant Corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Gregory R. Armel ,
Robert J. Richardson ,
Henry P. Wilson  and
Thomas E. Hines
Gregory R. Armel
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Robert J. Richardson
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Henry P. Wilson
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Thomas E. Hines
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1999 and 2000 to evaluate early POST (EPOST) and late POST (LPOST) control of common ragweed and giant foxtail with mesotrione at 70, 105, and 140 g ai/ha alone and in mixtures with glufosinate at 300 g ai/ha in glufosinate-resistant corn. Glufosinate-resistant corn injury was frequently higher with mixtures of mesotrione plus glufosinate than with mesotrione applied alone. Mixtures of mesotrione with glufosinate applied EPOST injured corn 6 to 21% in 1999, but in 2000, injury from mixtures was 23 to 30% from LPOST applications. Common ragweed control was above 77% with all treatments, which included 105 g/ha mesotrione. Giant foxtail control was higher at 76 to 78% by mixtures of mesotrione with glufosinate applied LPOST than by mesotrione alone. Corn yields were highest when glufosinate was included in treatments at either application timing. In the greenhouse, mixtures of mesotrione with glufosinate-injured glufosinate-resistant corn 11% or less, but corn biomass was reduced by 25% for the mixture of mesotrione at 105 g/ha plus glufosinate at 350 g/ha. Mixtures of mesotrione with glufosinate can be more effective than mesotrione alone but control of common ragweed and giant foxtail might not be commercially acceptable.

Keywords

Glufosinatemesotrionecommon ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. AMBELgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. SETFAcorn, Zea mays L.Application timinginjurytransgenic cropstriketone herbicidestotal postemergenceyield
Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 591 - 596
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

Anonymous 2007. Callisto™ herbicide label. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. Google Scholar
Armel, G. R., Wilson, H. P., Richardson, R. R., and Hines, T. E. 2001. ZA 1296 combinations for control of grasses in corn. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr 41:84.Google Scholar
Armel, G. R., Wilson, H. P., Richardson, R. R., and Hines, T. E. 2003a. Mesotrione alone and in mixtures with glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 17:680–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armel, G. R., Wilson, H. P., Richardson, R. R., and Hines, T. E. 2003b. Mesotrione combinations in no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 17:111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, T. H., Stoller, E. W., and Wax, L. M. 1988. Interference of four annual weeds in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 36:764–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, P. R., Johnson, W. G., Hart, S. E., Buesinger, M. L., and Massey, R. E. 2000. Economics of weed management in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays L.). Weed Technol 14:495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darmency, H. 1994. Genetics of herbicide resistance in weed and crops. Pages 265–277. in Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J. A., editors. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
Donohue, S. J. and Heckendorn, S. E. 1994. Soil test recommendations for Virginia. Virginia Cooperative Extension Service Publication 834. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechic Institute and State University. 155.Google Scholar
Fausey, J. C., Kells, J. J., Swinton, S. M., and Renner, K. A. 1997. Giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) interference in nonirrigated corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 45:256–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagood, E. S., Swann, C. W., Wilson, H. P., Ritter, R. L., Majek, B. A., Curran, W. S., and Chandran, R. 2001. Pest Management Guide: Field Crops. Grain Crops, Soybeans and Forages. Virginia Cooperative Extension Service Publication 456-016. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechic Institute and State University. 398.Google Scholar
Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 40:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamill, A. S., Knezevic, S. Z., Chandler, K., Sikkema, P. H., Tardif, F. J., Shrestha, A., and Swanton, C. J. 2000. Weed control in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 14:578–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. C. and Young, B. G. 2002a. Effect of postemergence application rate and timing of mesotrione on corn (Zea mays) response and weed control. Weed Technol 16:414–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. C. and Young, B. G. 2002b. Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the foliar activity of mesotrione. Weed Sci 50:157–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. A., Chandler, J. M., Morrison, J. E. Jr., Senseman, S. A., and Tingle, C. H. 2001. Glufosinate combinations and row spacing for weed control in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 15:141–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., Matthews, J. L., Baldwin, J. L., and Maschoff, J. 1999. Evaluation of glufosinate-resistant corn and glufosinate: efficacy on annual weeds. Weed Technol 13:691–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lackey, B. A., Beckett, T. H., Dennis, S., and Brownell, K. 1999. ZA 1296: A versatile preemergence and postemergence broadleaf herbicide for corn. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc 53:116.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G., Bartlett, D. W., Fraser, T. E., Hawkes, T. R., Holt, D. C., Townson, J. K., and Wichert, R. A. 2001. Mesotrione: a new selective herbicide for use in maize. Pest Manag. Sci 57:120–128.3.0.CO;2-E>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moseley, C. M. and Hagood, E. S. 1991. Decreasing rates of nonselective herbicides in double-crop no-till soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol 5:198–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, S. R., Shen, X., and DellaPenna, D. 1998. Complementation of the Arabidopsis pds1 mutant with the gene encoding p-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase. Plant Phys 117:1317–1323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohmes, G. A., Kendig, J. A., Barham, R. L., and Ezell, P. M. 2000. Efficacy of ZA 1296 in corn. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 53:225.Google Scholar
Pallett, K. E., Little, J. P., Sheekey, M., and Veerasekaran, P. 1998. The mode of action of isoxaflutole. I. Physiological effects, metabolism, and selectivity. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol 62:113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, D. A., Griffin, J. L., Ellis, J. M., Bond, J. A., and Godley, J. L. 1999. Corn tolerance and weed control with Liberty Link and Roundup Ready programs. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 52:219.Google Scholar
Ritter, R. L. and Menbere, H. 2001. Weed management systems utilizing glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 15:89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, C. L., Penner, D., and Kells, J. J. 1999. Physiological basis for tolerance of four Zea mays hybrids to RPA 201772. Weed Sci 47:631–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starke, R. J. and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Evaluation of chlorimuron, fomesafen, and imazethapyr as potential tank-mixture partners for glufosinate. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 51:11.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. J. 1999. Influence of herbicide application rate, timing, and interrow cultivation on weed control and corn (Zea mays) yield in glufosinate-resistant and glyphosate-resistant corn. Weed Technol 13:807–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsaftaris, A. 1996. The development of herbicide-tolerant transgenic crops. Field Crops. Res 45:115–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vencill, W. K. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th ed. Lawrence, KS: Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. 493.Google Scholar
Viviani, F., Little, J. P., and Pallett, K. E. 1998. The mode of action of isoxaflutole. II. Characterization of the inhibition of carrot 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase by the diketonitrile derivative of RPA 201772. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol 62:125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2000. The southern states 10 most common and troublesome weeds in corn—Virginia. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 53:252.Google Scholar
Wichert, R. A. and Pastushok, G. 2000. Mesotrione—weed control with different adjuvant systems. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 55:81.Google Scholar
Wilson, H. P., Hines, T. E., Bellinder, R. R., and Grande, J. A. 1985. Comparison of HOE-39866, SC-0224, paraquat, and glyphosate in no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 33:531–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wychen, L. R., Harvey, R. G., VanGessel, M. J., Rabaey, T. L., and Bach, D. J. 1999. Efficacy and crop response to glufosinate-based weed management in PAT-transformed sweet corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 13:104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar