Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:04:18.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carrier Volume Affects Herbicide Activity in Simulated Spray Drift Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Philip A. Banks  and
Jill Schroeder
Philip A. Banks*
Affiliation:
MARATHON-Agricultural & Environmental Consulting, Inc., 2649 Navajo Road, Las Cruces, NM 88007
Jill Schroeder
Affiliation:
MARATHON-Agricultural & Environmental Consulting, Inc., 2649 Navajo Road, Las Cruces, NM 88007
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted to determine if varying carrier volume proportionally with herbicide dosage, thus maintaining constant herbicide concentration in the carrier, would change the response of sweet corn to glyphosate and of cotton to 2,4-D when compared with using a constant carrier volume where herbicide concentration would vary and be more dilute. For all the parameters measured, more sweet corn injury occurred if the concentration of glyphosate was constant in all volumes of spray. The glyphosate no-effect level for sweet corn was determined to be 0.046 kg/ha when using the variable carrier volume but was over four times greater (0.185 kg/ha) when applied at the constant carrier volume of 281 L/ha. Cotton response to 2,4-D was similar, with the constant herbicide concentration in the carrier at the lower volumes causing greater injury. The response of seed cotton yield was not different when comparing constant to variable carrier volume. The highly sensitive growth stage of cotton at the time of application (bud formation before blooming) may explain this result. These studies demonstrate the need to use carrier volumes that are proportional to the herbicide dosage, thus maintaining constant herbicide concentration in the carrier, when conducting simulated herbicide drift research. Failure to do so could underestimate the potential for injury.

Keywords

Glyphosate2,4-Dcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Acala 1517-95’sweet corn, Zea mays L. ‘Sweetie 82’Crop injurynontarget cropsoff-site movementDAT, days after treatmentOM, organic matterNMSU-PSRC, New Mexico State University Plant Sciences Research Center
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 2002 , pp. 833 - 837
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

Al-Khatib, K., Gealy, D. R., and Boerboom, C. M. 1994. Effect of thifensulfuron concentration and droplet size on phytotoxicity, absorption, and translocation in pea (Pisum sativum). Weed Sci. 42: 482–486.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, E. P. 1992. Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) response to simulated herbicide spray drift. Weed Technol. 6: 956–960.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K. and Peterson, D. 1999. Soybean (Glycine max) response to simulated drift from selected sulfonylurea herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Weed Technol. 13: 264–270.Google Scholar
Ambach, R. M. and Ashford, R. 1982. Effects of variations in drop makeup on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 30: 221–224.Google Scholar
Auch, D. E. and Arnold, W. E. 1978. Dicamba use and injury on soybeans (Glycine max) in South Dakota. Weed Sci. 26: 471–475.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. A. and Kapusta, G. 1993. Soybean (Glycine max) tolerance to simulated drift of nicosulfuron and primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 7: 740–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, J. A., Griffin, J. L., Peters, D. A., Ellis, J. M., Linscombe, S. D., and Godley, J. L. 2000. Corn and rice response to simulated drift rates of lighting. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53: 22.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. B. and Guttieri, M. J. 1994. Potato response to simulated drift of imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Sci. 42: 70–75.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Chase, C. A., and Locascio, S. J. 2001a. Crop injury from sublethal rates of herbicide. I. Tomato. Hortscience 36: 669–673.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Chase, C. A., and Locascio, S. J. 2001b. Crop injury from sublethal rates of herbicide. II. Cucumber. Hortscience 36: 674–676.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Chase, C. A., and Locascio, S. J. 2001c. Crop injury from sublethal rates of herbicide. III. Pepper. Hortscience 36: 677–681.Google Scholar
Hemphill, D. D. Jr. and Montgomery, M. L. 1981. Response of vegetable crops to sublethal application of 2,4, D. Weed Sci. 29: 632–635.Google Scholar
Jacoby, P. W., Meadors, C. H., and Clark, L. E. 1990. Effects of triclopyr, clopyralid, and picloram on growth and production of cotton. J. Prod. Agric. 3: 297–301.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
Ogg, A. G. Jr., Ahmedullah, M. A., and Wright, G. M. 1991. Influence of repeated applications of 2,4-D on yield and juice quality of concord grapes. Weed Sci. 39: 284–295.Google Scholar
Romanowski, R. R. 1980. Simulated drift studies with herbicides on field-grown tomato. Hortscience 15/ 6: 793–794.Google Scholar
Sandberg, C. C., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1978. Effect of diluent volume and calcium on glyphosate phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 26: 476–479.Google Scholar
Smith, D. T. and Wiese, A. F. 1972. Cotton Response to Low Rates of 2,4-D and Other Herbicides. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin B-1120. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E., Street, J. E., and Mueller, T. C. 1992. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) injury from simulated quinclorac drift. Weed Sci. 40: 106–109.Google Scholar
Stahlman, P. W. and Phillips, W. M. 1979. Effects of water quality and spray volume on glyphosate phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 27: 38–41.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1994. Potato response to simulated drift of dicamba, clopyralid, and tribenuron. Weed Sci. 42: 110–114.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1995a. Effect of sublethal dosages of 2,4-D on annual broadleaf crops. Can. J. Plant Sci. 75: 179–185.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1995b. Response of four annual broadleaf crops to simulated imazamethabenz spray drift. Can. J. Plant Sci. 75: 751–757.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1996. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) tolerance to sublethal doses of imazethapyr. Can. J. Plant Sci. 76: 937–940.Google Scholar