Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:58:41.360Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential Response of Soybean (Glycine max) Cultivars to AC 263,222

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Marshall B. Wixson  and
David R. Shaw
Marshall B. Wixson
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. Weed Sci., Miss. State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
David R. Shaw
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. Weed Sci., Miss. State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thirty soybean cultivars were grown in a hydroponic culture to observe differential tolerance to AC 263,222. Root length was reduced with 1.1 mM AC 263,222 in 18 of the 30 cultivars. ‘Bedford’, ‘Asgrow 5403’, and ‘Asgrow 6297’ were cultivars with a root length reduction of 30% or more, whereas roots of ‘DPL 506’, ‘RA 606’, and ‘Coker 6727’ were reduced less than 7%. Root weight was reduced in only 10 of the 30 cultivars. Asgrow 6297, ‘Bragg’, and ‘Narow’ root weights were reduced more than 20%. Shoot weight was reduced in 23 cultivars, and ‘Coker 6955’, ‘Braxton’, ‘Coker 485’, ‘Epps', and Coker 6727 shoots were reduced more than 25%. The most tolerant cultivars were ‘Centennial’, RA 606, ‘Tracy M’, ‘Johnston’, and ‘Hartz 7126’. The most sensitive cultivars to AC 263,222 with all response variables measured were Bedford, Asgrow 6297, Asgrow 5403, Coker 6955, Narow, Bragg, and Braxton. These cultivars all have ‘Jackson’ as a common parent. This suggests a genetic basis for AC 263,222 sensitivity in soybean.

Keywords

AC 263,222, (±)-2,4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-methyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.Herbicide tolerancehydroponicvariety
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 430 - 433
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. Allen, F. L., and Bhardwaj, H. L. 1987. Genetic relationships and selected pedigree diagrams of North American soybean cultivars. Tenn. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 652. 25 p.Google Scholar
2. Barrentine, W. L., Edwards, C. J. Jr., and Hartwig, E. E. 1976. Screening soybeans for tolerance to metribuzin. Agron. J. 68:351–353.Google Scholar
3. Barrett, M. 1989. Protection of corn (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from imazethapyr toxicity with antidotes. Weed Sci. 37:296–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Edwards, C. J. Jr., Barrentine, W. L., and Kilen, T. C. 1976. Inheritance of sensitivity of soybean cultivars to metribuzin. Crop Sci. 16:119–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Graf, G. R., and Ogg, N. G. Jr. 1976. Differential response of potato cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:137–139.Google Scholar
6. Hayes, R. M., and Wax, L. M. 1975. Differential interspecific response of soybean cultivars to bentazon. Weed Sci. 23:516–521.Google Scholar
7. Keeling, B. L. 1982. Factors affecting the reaction of soybeans to Phytothphora megasperma var. sojae in hydroponic culture. Crop Sci. 22:325–327.Google Scholar
8. Kent, L. M., Barrentine, W. L., and Wills, G. D. 1988. Response of twenty determinate soybean (Glycine max) cultivars to imazaquin, Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:50.Google Scholar
9. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1988. Response of corn (Zea mays) cultivars to imazaquin. Weed Sci. 36:625–628.Google Scholar
10. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1988. Effect of soil pH on imazaquin and imazethapyr adsorption to soil and phytotoxicity of corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 36:78–83.Google Scholar
11. Runyan, T. J., McNeil, W. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Differential tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:94–97.Google Scholar
12. Shaner, D. L., and Robson, P. A. 1985. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of AC 252,214 in soybeans (Glycine max), common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 33:469–471.Google Scholar
13. Shannon, J. G., and Schillinger, J. A. 1989. Registration of ‘A 5474’ soybean. Crop Sci. 29:1091.Google Scholar
14. Shaw, D. R., Smith, C. A., Coats, G. E., Askew, J. E. Jr., Edwards, N. C. Jr., and Hovermale, C. H. 1988. Metribuzin tolerance in soybeans. Miss. Agric. For. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. No. 152, 10 p.Google Scholar
15. Smith, R. J. Jr., and Caviness, C. E. 1973. Differential response of soybean cultivars to propanil. Weed Sci. 21:279–281.Google Scholar
16. Snipes, C. E., Street, J. E., and Boykin, D. L. 1987. Influence of flood interval and cultivar on rice (Oryza sativa) tolerance to fenoxaprop. Weed Sci. 35:842–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Stephenson, G. R., Mcleod, J. E., and Phatak, S. C. 1976. Different tolerance of tomato cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:161–165.Google Scholar
18. Willard, T. S., Griffin, J. L., Reynolds, D. B., Vidrine, P. R., Habetz, R. J. 1990. Evaluation of AC 263,222 in soybeans in Louisiana. Proc. South. Weed Sci Soc. 43:29.Google Scholar
19. Wixson, M. B., and Shaw, D. R. 1990. Effects of application timing and spray additives on postemergence weed control and soybean tolerance with AC 263,222. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 30:14.Google Scholar
20. Wixson, M. B., and Shaw, D. R. 1989. Weed control and soybean tolerance with AC 263,222. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:60.Google Scholar