Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T10:52:54.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of Nicosulfuron Rate, Adjuvant, and Weed Size on Annual Weed Control in Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

George Kapusta
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, IL 62901
Ronald F. Krausz
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, IL 62901
Mustajab Khan
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, IL 62901
Joseph L. Matthews
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, IL 62901

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1988 and 1989 to (i) evaluate annual weed control with nicosulfuron applied at rates of 17 to 70 g ai/ha with several additives and (ii) evaluate annual weed control with nicosulfuron applied at rates of 17 to 105 g/ha at three corn growth stages. In 1988, in the adjuvant study, giant foxtail control increased linearly with no additive or with urea ammonium nitrate as the rate of nicosulfuron increased. Petroleum oil concentrate, nonionic surfactant, and a combination of either petroleum oil concentrate or nonionic surfactant with urea ammonium nitrate applied with nicosulfuron increased giant foxtail control to 90% or greater regardless of rate both years. Nicosulfuron at all rates with no additive and in combination with all additives controlled 93% or more of redroot pigweed and Pennsylvania smartweed both years. Corn grain yield was related to the level of giant foxtail control. In the rate by corn growth stage study, giant foxtail, redroot pigweed, and Pennsylvania smartweed control was 90% or greater regardless of nicosulfuron rate or application stage both years. Corn grain yield was related more to the duration of weed competition than the level of weed control with grain yield 8 to 12% lower with nicosulfuron applied at the V7 growth stage compared with the V3 or V5 growth stage.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Anonymous. 1992. National crop residue management survey. Conservation Technology Information Center, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
2. Beckett, T. H., Stoller, E. W., and Bode, L. E. 1992. Quizalofop and sethoxydim activity as affected by adjuvants and ammonium fertilizers. Weed Sci. 40:1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Beyer, E. M. Jr., Duffy, M. J., Hay, J. V., and Schlueter, D. D. 1988. Sulfonylureas. p. 117189 in Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action, Vol. 3. Marcel-Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
4. Bhowmik, P. C. and Nandihalli, U. B. 1988. Control of large crabgrass and fall panicum in corn with tridiphane and atrazine combinations. Weed Sci. 36:359362.Google Scholar
5. Bhowmik, P. C., O'Toole, B. M., and Andaloro, J. 1992. Effects of nicosulfuron on quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 6:5256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Boydston, R. A. 1990. Soil water content affects the activity of four herbicides on green foxtail (Setaria virdis). Weed Sci. 38:578582.Google Scholar
7. Boydston, R. A. and Slife, F. W. 1987. Postemergence control of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) in corn (Zea mays) with tridiphane and triazine combinations. Weed Sci. 35:103108.Google Scholar
8. Buhler, D. D. and Burnside, O. C. 1984. Effect of application factors on postemergence phytoxicity of fluazifop-butyl, haloxyfop-methyl, and sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 32:574583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Camacho, R. F. and Moshier, L. J. 1991. Absorption, translocation, and activity of CGA-136872, DPX-V9360, and glyphosate in rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Sci. 39:354357.Google Scholar
10. Camacho, R. F., Moshier, L. J., Morishita, D. W., and Devlin, D. L. 1991. Rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in corn (Zea mays) with primisulfuron and nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 5:789794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Chen, Y. Z. and Penner, D. 1985. Combination effects of acifluorfen with crop oil concentrates and postemergence grass herbicides. Weed Sci. 33:9195.Google Scholar
12. Chernicky, J. P., Gossett, B. J., and Murphy, T. R. 1984. Factors influencing control of annual grasses with sethoxydim or RO-13-8895. Weed Sci. 32:174177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Chernicky, J. P., Gast, R., and Slife, F. W. 1989. The effect of sethoxydim on corn (Zea mays) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi). Weed Sci. 37:600603.Google Scholar
14. Defelice, M. S., Witt, W. W., and Martin, J. R. 1987. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control and soil moisture relationships in no-tillage, double-cropped soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 35:108114.Google Scholar
15. Dexter, A. G., Burnside, O. C., and Lavy, T. L. 1966. Factors influencing the phytotoxicity of foliar applications of atrazine. Weeds 14:222228.Google Scholar
16. Fawcett, J. A., Harvey, R. G., Arnold, W. E., Bauman, T. T., Eberlein, C. V., Kells, J. J., Moshier, L. J., Slife, F. W., and Wilson, R. G. 1987. Influence of environment on corn (Zea mays) tolerance to sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 35:568575.Google Scholar
17. Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 40:441447.Google Scholar
18. Harker, K. N. 1992. Effects of various adjuvants on sethoxydim activity. Weed Technol. 6:865870.Google Scholar
19. Harrison, S. K., Wax, L. M., and Bode, L. E. 1986. Influence of adjuvants and application variables on postemergence weed control with bentazon and sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 34:462466.Google Scholar
20. Hart, S. E., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 1992. Influence of adjuvants on the efficacy, absorption, and spray retention of primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 6:592598.Google Scholar
21. Hartzler, R. G. and Foy, C. L. 1983. Efficacy of three postemergence grass herbicides for soybeans. Weed Sci. 31:557561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Kells, J. J., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1984. Absorption, translocation, and activity of fluazifop-butyl as influenced by plant growth stage and environment. Weed Sci. 32:143149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberi with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:2629.Google Scholar
24. Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1993. The effect of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) plant height on control with six postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:491494.Google Scholar
25. Mooleni, M. K., Knake, E. L., and Slife, F. W. 1964. Competition of smooth pigweed in corn and soybeans. Weeds 12:126128.Google Scholar
26. Obrigawitch, T. T., Kenyon, W. H., and Kuratle, H. 1990. Effect of application timing on rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control with DPX-V9360. Weed Sci. 38:4549.Google Scholar
27. Reynolds, D. B., Wheless, T. G., Basler, E., and Murray, D. S. 1988. Moisture stress effects on absorption and translocation of four foliar-applied herbicides. Weed Technol. 2:437441.Google Scholar
28. Ritchie, S. W., Hanway, J. J., and Benson, G. O. 1986. How a corn plant develops. Iowa State Univ., Coop. Ext. Ser. Special Rep. No. 48. p 21.Google Scholar
29. Ritter, R. L., Kaufman, L. M., Monaco, T. J., Novitzky, W. P., and Moreland, D. E. 1989. Characterization of triazine-resistant giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) and its control in no-tillage corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 37:591595.Google Scholar
30. Rudyanski, W. J., Fawcett, R. S., and McAllister, R. S. 1987. Effect of prior pesticide use on thiocarbamate herbicide persistence and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) control. Weed Sci. 35:6874.Google Scholar
31. Stoller, E. W., Wax, L. M., and Alm, D. M. 1993. Survey results on environmental issues and weed science research priorities within the corn belt. Weed Technol. 7:763770.Google Scholar
32. Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Effect of adjuvants on weed control and soybean (Glycine max) tolerance with AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 5:817822.Google Scholar