Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:21:48.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diuron Reduces Absorption and Translocation of Glyphosate in Sharppod Morningglory (Ipomoea Cordatotriloba)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

G.L. Steele ,
S.A. Senseman ,
A.S. Sciumbato  and
J.M. Chandler
G.L. Steele
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
S.A. Senseman*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
A.S. Sciumbato
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
J.M. Chandler
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted to evaluate sharppod morningglory control with postemergence herbicides used in cotton and to determine the influence of diuron on glyphosate efficacy. Glyphosate plus diuron was one of the most efficacious herbicide treatments in the field experiment, providing up to 78% control of 10- to 20-cm stem length sharppod morningglory. In growth-chamber experiments, mixtures of either 420 or 840 g ai/ha diuron plus glyphosate potassium salt at 840 g ae/ha were needed to significantly reduce sharppod morningglory biomass. Compared to published results with other Ipomoea spp. and field bindweed, sharppod morningglory absorbed more and translocated less glyphosate after 72 h. Retention of glyphosate in treated leaves increased when the glyphosate was mixed with 420 g/ha diuron. Mixture with 420 or 840 g/ha diuron reduced the concentration of glyphosate in roots; however, only 2% of glyphosate alone was translocated to the roots. These results indicate that the combination of glyphosate with diuron improves aboveground sharppod morningglory desiccation, but limits glyphosate translocation.

Keywords

Diuronglyphosatefield bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis L.sharppod morningglory, Ipomoea cordatotriloba Dennstedt IPOTCcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.14C-glyphosatecottonherbicide interactionperennial morninggloryshort-term controlweed desiccation
Type
Weed Management — Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 414 - 419
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

Agbakoba, C. S. O. and Goodin, J. R. 1969. Effect of stage of growth of field bindweed on absorption and translocation of 14C-labeled 2,4–D and picloram. Weed Sci. 17:436–438.Google Scholar
Barber, L. T., Wilson, D. G., Kirkpatrick, M. T., and Reynolds, D. B. 2003. Post-directed options in Roundup-Ready cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 56:16.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D., Reddy, K. N., Elmore, C. D., and Steele, M. L. 2001. Herbicide efficacy, leaf structure, and spray droplet contact angle among Ipomoea species and smallflower morningglory. Weed Sci. 49:628–634.Google Scholar
Correll, D. S. and Johnston, M. C. 1979. 1247–1253.Manual of the Vascular Plants of Texas. Richardson, TX The University of Texas—Dallas.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 2001. Weed management in ultra narrow row cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 14:19–29.Google Scholar
Devine, M. D., Duke, S. O., and Fedtke, C. 1993. Physiology of Herbicide Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice-Hall. 441.Google Scholar
Dinelli, G., Bonetti, A., Marotti, I., Minelli, M., and Catizone, P. 2005. Possible involvement of herbicide sequestration in the resistance to diclofop-methyl in Italian biotypes of Lolium spp. Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 81:1–12.Google Scholar
Dorneden, D. J. 1986. Biology and Control of Sharppod Morningglory (Ipomoea trichocarpa var trichocarpa Ell.). M.S. thesis. College Station, TX Texas A&M University. 85.Google Scholar
Feng, P. C. C., Tran, M., Chiu, T., Sammons, R. D., Heck, G. R., and CaJacob, C. A. 2004. Investigations into glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis): retention, uptake, translocation, and metabolism. Weed Sci. 52:498–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrell, J. A. and Witt, W. W. 2002. Comparison of glyphosate with other herbicides for weed control in corn (Zea mays): efficacy and economics. Weed Technol. 16:701–706.Google Scholar
Geiger, D. R. and Bestman, H. D. 1990. Self-limitation of herbicide mobility by phytotoxic action. Weed Sci. 38:324–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. J., Hart, C. A., and Jones, C. A. 2001. Plants as sources of cations antagonistic to glyphosate activity. Pest Manag. Sci. 56:351–358.Google Scholar
Hoss, N. E., Al-Khatib, K., Paterson, D. E., and Loughin, T. M. 2003. Efficacy of glyphosate, glufosinate, and imazethapyr on selected weed species. Weed Sci. 51:110–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1996. Control of annual weeds with glyphosate. Weed Technol. 10:957–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahler, W. F. 1988. Shinners' Manual of the North Central Texas Flora. Fort Worth, TX Botanical Research Institute of Texas. 204.Google Scholar
Munoz-Rueda, A., Gonzalez-Murua, C., Becerril, J. M., and Sanchez-Diaz, M. F. 1986. Effects of glyphosate on photosynthetic pigments, stomatal response and photosynthetic electron transport in Medicago sativa and Trifolium pratense . Physiol. Plant. 66:63–68.Google Scholar
[NASS] National Agricultural Statistics Service 2005. Agricultural Chemical Use Database. Washington, DC United States Department of Agriculture. http://www.pestmanagement.info/nass/act_dsp_usage_multiple.cfm. Accessed: June 9, 2008.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Burgos, N. R., and Oliver, L. R. 2001. Differences in weed tolerance to glyphosate involve different mechanisms. Weed Technol. 15:725–731.Google Scholar
Paulsgrove, M. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 2001. Weed management with pyrithiobac preemergence in bromoxynil-resistant cotton. Weed Sci. 49:567–570.Google Scholar
Savoy, B. R., Holshouser, D. L., Smith, K. L., and Chandler, J. M. 1993. A system for morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Weed Technol. 7:615–618.Google Scholar
Scott, G. H., Askew, S. D., and Wilcut, J. W. 2002. Glyphosate systems for weed control in glyphosate-tolerant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 16:191–198.Google Scholar
Senseman, S. A. 2007. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 144–146.243–246.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R. and Arnold, J. C. 2002. Weed control from herbicide combinations with glyphosate. Weed Technol. 16:1–6.CrossRefGoogle 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
Starke, R. J. and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Interaction of glyphosate with chlorimuron, fomesafen, imazethapyr, and sulfentrazone. Weed Sci. 46:652–660.Google Scholar
Steele, G. L. 2004. Interference and control of sharppod morningglory (Ipomoea cordatotriloba var. cordatotriloba Denntedt). Ph.D dissertation. College Station, TX Texas A&M University. 97.Google Scholar
Thelen, K. D., Jackson, E. P., and Penner, D. 1995. The basis of the hard-water antagonism of glyphosate activity. Weed Sci. 43:541–548.Google Scholar
USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service [NRCS] 2002. Baton Rouge, LA National Plant Data Center. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5 (http://plants.usda.gov).Google Scholar
Vencill, W. K. 2003. Glyphosate tank-mixes for layby weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 56:11.Google Scholar
Wanamarta, G. and Penner, D. 1989. Foliar absorption of herbicides. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:215–231.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2000. Weed survey—southern states: grass crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:247–256.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2001. Weed survey—southern states: broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:244–255.Google Scholar
Wehtje, G. and Walker, R. H. 1997. Interaction of glyphosate and 2,4-DB for the control of selected morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) species. Weed Technol. 1:152–156.Google Scholar
Wyrill, J. B. III and Burnside, O. C. 1976. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in common milkweed and hemp dogbane. Weed Sci. 24:557–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar