Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:04:37.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Glyphosate-Resistant Hard Red Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kirk A. Howatt ,
Gregory J. Endres ,
Paul E. Hendrickson ,
Ezra Z. Aberle ,
John R. Lukach ,
Brian M. Jenks ,
Neil R. Riveland ,
Stephen A. Valenti  and
Craig M. Rystedt
Kirk A. Howatt*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5051
Gregory J. Endres
Affiliation:
Carrington Research/Extension Center, Carrington, ND 58421
Paul E. Hendrickson
Affiliation:
Carrington Research/Extension Center, Carrington, ND 58421
Ezra Z. Aberle
Affiliation:
Carrington Research/Extension Center, Carrington, ND 58421
John R. Lukach
Affiliation:
Langdon Research/ Extension Center, Langdon, ND 58249
Brian M. Jenks
Affiliation:
North Central Research/Extension Center, Minot, ND 58701
Neil R. Riveland
Affiliation:
Williston Research/Extension Center, Williston, ND 58801
Stephen A. Valenti
Affiliation:
Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO 63167
Craig M. Rystedt
Affiliation:
Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO 63167
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The potential for future commercialization of glyphosate-resistant wheat necessitates evaluation of agronomic merits of this technology. Experiments were established to evaluate glyphosate-resistant wheat and weed responses to glyphosate rate, application timing, and tank mixtures. Glyphosate at 1,680 g/ha did not injure wheat. Wheat response to glyphosate applied to one- to three- or three- to five-leaf wheat was not different from that of untreated wheat. Wheat was injured more from glyphosate plus thifensulfuron or glyphosate plus dicamba than from individual herbicides at one of six locations, but grain yield was not affected by glyphosate tank mixtures. Glyphosate application timing did not affect control of wild oat or common lambsquarters 56 d after treatment. Glyphosate when applied to one- to three-leaf wheat provided better control of wild buckwheat than later glyphosate application, whereas glyphosate applied to three- to five-leaf wheat provided the best control of green and yellow foxtail, redroot pigweed, and Canada thistle. Weed control with glyphosate tended to be better than with conventional herbicides, and wheat treated with glyphosate produced approximately 10% more grain than wheat treated with conventional herbicide tank mixes.

Keywords

DicambaglyphosatethifensulfuronCanada thistle, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. #3 CIRARgreen foxtail, Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. # SETVIredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREwild buckwheat, Polygonum convolvulus L. # POLCOyellow foxtail, S. glauca (L.) Beauv. # SETLUspring wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Genetically modified organismGMOherbicide injuryherbicide-resistant cropstransgenic wheatwheat yieldDAT, days after treatmentGMO, genetically modified organism
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , September 2006 , pp. 706 - 716
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, E. B. and Harker, K. N. 2002. Selective weed control with glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 16:885–892.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1992. Rationale for developing herbicide resistant crops. Weed Technol. 6:621–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. W., Harker, K. N., O'Donovan, J. T., Baig, M. N., and Kidnie, M. J. 2002. Glyphosate timing and tillage effects on glyphosate-resistant canola (Brassica napus). Weed Technol. 16:124–130.Google Scholar
Dernoeden, P. H. and Fidanza, M. A. 1994. Fenoxaprop-P activity influenced by auxin-like herbicide application timing. Hortscience 29:1518–1519.Google Scholar
Donald, W. W. and Khan, M. 1996. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) effects on yield components of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 44:114–121.Google Scholar
Durgan, B. R., Yenish, J. P., Daml, R. J., and Miller, D. W. 1997. Broadleaf weed control in hard red spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) with F8426. Weed Technol. 11:489–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., and Kirkland, K. J. 1995. Ethametsulfuron interactions with grass herbicides on canola (Brassica napus, B. rapa). Weed Technol. 9:91–98.Google Scholar
Holm, F. A., Kirkland, K. J., and Stevenson, F. C. 2000. Defining optimum herbicide rates and timing for wild oat (Avena fatua) control in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 14:167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Bradley, P. R., Hart, S. E., Buesinger, M. L., and Massey, R. E. 2000. Efficacy and economics of weed management in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 14:57–65.Google Scholar
Kirkland, K. J. 1993. Spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) growth and yield as influenced by duration of wild oat (Avena fatua) competition. Weed Technol. 7:890–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeBaron, H. M. 1990. Weed science in the 1990s: will it be forward or in reverse. Weed Technol. 4:671–689.Google Scholar
Lich, J. M., Renner, K. A., and Penner, D. 1997. Interaction of glyphosate with postemergence soybean (Glycine max) herbicides. Weed Sci. 45:12–21.Google Scholar
Lockhart, S. J. and Howatt, K. A. 2004. Split applications of herbicides at reduced rates can effectively control wild oat (Avena fatua) in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 18:369–374.Google Scholar
Padgette, S. R., Kolacz, K. H., Delannay, X., Re, D. B., LaVallee, B. J., Tinius, C. N., Rhodes, W. K., Otero, Y. I., Barry, G. F., and Eichholtz, D. A. 1995. Development, identification, and characterization of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line. Crop Sci. 35:1451–1461.Google Scholar
Powles, S. B., Lorraine-Colwill, D. F., Dellow, J. J., and Preston, C. 1998. Evolved resistance to glyphosate in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in Australia. Weed Sci. 46:604–607.Google Scholar
Ramsdale, B. K. and Messersmith, C. G. 2002. Low-rate split-applied herbicide treatments for wild oat (Avena fatua) control in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 16:149–155.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L. 2000. The impact of glyphosate-tolerant crops on the use of other herbicides and on resistance management. Pest Manage. Sci. 56:320–326.Google Scholar
Spandl, E., Durgan, B. R., and Forcella, F. 1999. Foxtail (Setaria spp.) seedling dynamics in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) are influenced by seeding date and tillage time. Weed Sci. 47:156–160.Google Scholar
Stahlman, P. W., Currie, R. S., and El-Hamid, M. A. 1997. Nitrogen carrier and surfactant increase foliar herbicide injury in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 11:7–12.Google Scholar
Tal, A., Romano, M. L., Stephenson, G. R., Schwan, A. L., and Hall, J. C. 1993. Glutathione conjugation: a detoxification pathway for fenoxaprop-P-ethyl in barley, crabgrass, oat, and wheat. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 46:190–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanGessel, M. J. 2001. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed from Delaware. Weed Sci. 49:703–705.Google Scholar
Zhang, J., Hamill, A. S., and Weaver, S. E. 1995. Antagonism and synergism between herbicides: trends from previous studies. Weed Technol. 9:86–90.Google Scholar