Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:28:52.854Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Row Spacing and Herbicides on Burcucumber (Sicyos angulatus) Control in Herbicide-Resistant Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Wade R. Esbenshade ,
William S. Curran ,
Gregory W. Roth ,
Nathan L. Hartwig  and
Michael D. Orzolek
Wade R. Esbenshade
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University Park, PA 16802
William S. Curran*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University Park, PA 16802
Gregory W. Roth
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University Park, PA 16802
Nathan L. Hartwig
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, University Park, PA 16802
Michael D. Orzolek
Affiliation:
Penn State University, University Park, PA 16802
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments examining burcucumber management in glufosinate-resistant (GR) and imidazolinone-resistant (IMI) corn were conducted in 1997 and 1998 in southeastern Pennsylvania. GR corn was planted in 38- and 76-cm rows, and postemergence (POST) treatments of glufosinate and glufosinate plus atrazine were applied to corn at the V4 or V5 growth stage. In a second study, IMI corn was planted in 76-cm rows, and 15 preemergence (PRE) and POST herbicide programs were evaluated. Herbicide treatments included RPA-201772, CGA 152005, simazine, imazethapyr plus imazapyr, imazamox, chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron, nicosulfuron plus rimsulfuron plus atrazine, CGA 152005 plus primisulfuron, and combinations with atrazine. Burcucumber germinated throughout the growing season, with greatest emergence occurring in early June, gradually decreasing to minimal emergence by mid-July. Glufosinate alone controlled burcucumber 79 to 90% 7 weeks after planting (WAP) regardless of application timing or row spacing. By 10 to 13 WAP, control was 82% or less due to lack of residual control and new burcucumber emergence. Row spacing had little effect on burcucumber emergence or control and appears to have little impact on burcucumber management in corn. In general, PRE herbicide programs were less effective than POST programs, although PRE treatments containing atrazine equaled some POST herbicides. POST-applied chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron, nicosulfuron plus rimsulfuron plus atrazine, and CGA 152005 plus primisulfuron controlled burcucumber greater than 80 and 90% in 1997 and 1998, respectively. Imazethapyr plus imazapyr and imazamox applied POST controlled burcucumber 66% 10 WAP. Adding atrazine to POST herbicide programs did not increase control, with the exception of imazethapyr plus imazapyr.

Keywords

AtrazinechlorimuronglufosinateimazamoximazapyrimazethapyrRPA-201772 (proposed name, isoxaflutole), [5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methyl-sulphonyl-4-trifluoromethyl-benzoyl)isoxozole]nicosulfuronprimisulfuronCGA 152005 (proposed name, prosulfuron), {1-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-triazin-2-yl)-3-[2-(3,3,3,-trifluoropropyl)-phenyl-sulfonyl]urea}, rimsulfuronthifensulfuronburcucumber, Sicyos angulatus L. #3 SIYANcorn, Zea mays L.Cultural controlherbicide-resistant cropsweed emergenceEPOST, early postemergenceGR, glufosinate resistantHRC, herbicide-resistant cropsIMI, imidazolinone resistantMPOST, midpostemergencePOST, postemergencePRE, preemergenceWAP, weeks after planting
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , June 2001 , pp. 348 - 354
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

Blackshaw, R. E. 1989. HOE 39866 use in chemical fallow systems. Weed Technol. 3: 420–428.Google Scholar
Bradley, E. L. and Jeffery, L. S. 1984. Burcucumber (Sicyos angulatus) response to various herbicides. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 37: 43–44.Google Scholar
Childs, J. D. 1996. Postemergence herbicides for control of burcucumber (Sicyos angulatus) in corn. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. 51: 4–5.Google Scholar
Cresswell, J. L., Fawcett, R. S., Brenneman, L. G., and Shires, D. G. 1982. Burcucumber control in corn and soybeans. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37: 54–55.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1999. Weed management in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 13: 324–333.Google Scholar
Curran, W. S. and Lingenfelter, D. D. 2000. Field Crop Weed Control Guide. University Park, PA: Penn State University College of Agricultural Sciences publication AGRS- 68: 13–50.Google Scholar
Flénet, F., Kiniry, J. R., Board, J. E., Westgate, M. E., and Reicosky, D. C. 1996. Row spacing effects on light extinction coefficients of corn, sorghum, soybean, and sunflower. Agron. J. 88: 185–195.Google Scholar
Forcella, F., Wilson, R. G., Dekker, J., et al. 1997. Weed seedbank emergence across the corn belt. Weed Sci. 45: 67–76.Google Scholar
Johnson, O. R. and Webb, F. J. 1994. Burcucumber control in field corn. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 48: 72–73.Google Scholar
Kurtz, A. R. and Jordan, G. L. 1982. Burcucumber control in corn. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:30.Google Scholar
Legere, A. and Schreiber, M. M. 1989. Competition and canopy architecture as affected by soybean (Glycine max) row width and density of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci. 37: 84–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, R. K., Rieck, C. E., and Witt, W. W. 1981. Germination and emergence of burcucumber (Sicyos angulatus). Weed Sci. 29: 83–86.Google Scholar
Messersmith, D. T., Curran, W. S., Hartwig, N. L., Orzolek, M. D., and Roth, G. W. 1999. Evaluation of several herbicides for burcucumber (Sicyos angulatus) control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 13: 520–524.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. D., Yakubu, Y., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Effect of planting patterns and inter-row cultivation on competition between corn and late emerging weeds. Weed Sci. 44: 856–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, S. W., Hanway, J. J., and Benson, G. O. 1997. How a Corn Plant Develops. Ames, IA: Iowa State University of Science and Technology Special Rep. 48: 3–12.Google Scholar
Ross, M. A. and Williams, J. L. 1966. Control of burcucumber in field corn. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. 21:10.Google Scholar
Schnappinger, M. G., Vitolo, D. B., and Pruss, S. W. 1996. Postemergence burcucumber control in corn. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:162.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Myers, R. A. 1989. Effects of shading and soybean (Glycine max) interference on Solanum ptycanthum (eastern black nightshade) growth and development. Weed Res. 29: 307–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylorson, R. B. 1992. Anesthetic effects on secondary dormancy and phytochrome responses in Setaria faberi seeds. Plant Physiol. 70: 882–886.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E., Schabenberger, O., and Kells, J. J. 1999. Response of annual weed species to glufosinate and glyphosate. Weed Technol. 13: 542–547.Google Scholar
Wiepke, T., Hirsh, B., Heimer, J., and Glenn, S. 1985. Efficacy of DPX-F6025 on burcucumber in soybeans. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:13.Google Scholar
Wilson, H. P. and Hines, T. E. 1989. Burcucumber response to sulfonylurea herbicides. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:23.Google Scholar
Wilson, H. P., Hines, T. E., Bellinger, R. R., and Grande, J. A. 1985. Comparisons of HOE-39866, SC-0224, paraquat, and glyphosate in no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 33: 531–536.Google Scholar
Yelverton, F. H. and Coble, H. D. 1991. Narrow row spacing and canopy formation reduces weed resurgence in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5: 169–174.Google Scholar