Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T20:59:23.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Control in Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) With Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

David C. Heering  and
Thomas F. Peeper
David C. Heering
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Okla. State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Thomas F. Peeper
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Okla. State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in Oklahoma to evaluate the effect of three imidazolinone herbicides and metsulfuron on established field bindweed and hard red winter wheat followcrops. Imazapyr at 280 g ai ha-1 and imazethapyr at 560 g ai ha-1 controlled field bindweed from 78 to 100% for 48 wk, but imazaquin at 560 g ai ha-1, metsulfuron at 17.5 g ai ha-1, and 2,4-D plus picloram at 1120 plus 280 g ae ha-1 did not. Imidazolinone herbicides reduced forage and grain yield of wheat seeded 8 to 14 wk after herbicide application. Only imazapyr reduced grain yield of wheat seeded 15 mo after treatment.

Keywords

Imazapyr, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidimazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]=3-quinolinecarboxylic acidimazethapyr, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidmetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidpicloram, 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid2,4-D, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acidfield bindweed Convolvulus arvensis L. ♯ CONARwheat Triticum aestivum L.Imazapyrimazaquinimazethapyrmetsulfuronpicloram2,4-DCONAR
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 411 - 415
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. Alley, H. P. 1965. A promising future for the control of perennial weeds. Down to Earth 21(1):8–10.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1987. Arsenal herbicide. p. 27–28 in Crop Protection Chemicals Reference, 3 ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
3. Anonymous. Undated. Field bindweed: Getting to the root of the problem. Elanco Products Co., Indianapolis, IN. 42 p.Google Scholar
4. Basham, G., Lavy, T. T., Oliver, L. R., and Scott, H. D. 1987. Imazaquin persistence and mobility in three Arkansas soils. Weed Sci. 35:576–582.Google Scholar
5. DeGennaro, F. P., Weller, S. C. 1984. Differential susceptibility of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) biotypes to glyphosate. Weed Sci. 32:472–476.Google Scholar
6. Derscheid, L. A., Stritzke, J. F., and Wright, W. G. 1970. Field bindweed control with cultivation, cropping, and chemicals. Weed Sci. 18:590–596.Google Scholar
7. Goodin, J. R., Jordan, L. S., and Isom, W. H. 1967. Low rates of Tordon for field bindweed control. Down to Earth 22(4):6–7.Google Scholar
8. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone in soil. Weed Sci. 37:259–267.Google Scholar
9. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on soils, sediments, and selected adsorbents. Weed Sci. 37:712–718.Google Scholar
10. Peoples, T. R. 1984. Arsenal herbicide (AC 252,925): A development overview. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 37:378–387.Google Scholar
11. Phillips, W. M. 1978. Field bindweed: The weed and the problem. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 33:140–141.Google Scholar
12. Rashed, M. H., and Haderlie, L. C. 1980. Control of field bindweed with glyphosate and growth regulator combinations. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 35:86.Google Scholar
13. Rieck, W. L., and Schumacher, R. 1978. Glyphosate performance on field bindweed in North Central United States. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 33:150.Google Scholar
14. Riley, D. G., and Shaw, D. R. 1988. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) control with imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 3:95–98.Google Scholar
15. Swan, D. G. 1982. Long-term field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) control in two cropping systems. Weed Sci. 30:476–480.Google Scholar
16. Schweizer, E. F., Swink, J. F., and Heibes, P. E. 1978. Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) control in corn (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) with dicamba and 2,4-D. Weed Sci. 26:665–668.Google Scholar
17. Timmons, F. L. 1949. Duration of viability of bindweed seed under field conditions and experimental results in the control of bindweed seedlings. Agron. J. 41:130–133.Google Scholar
18. Wax, L. M., Fawcett, R. S., and Isely, D. 1981. Field bindweed. p. 139 in Weeds of the North Central States. North Cent. Regional Res. Publ. No. 281. Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 772.Google Scholar
19. Weaver, S. E., and Riley, W. R. 1982. The biology of Canadian weeds. 53. Convolvulus arvensis L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:461–472.Google Scholar
20. Whitworth, J. W., and Muzik, T. J. 1967. Differential response of selected clones of bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 15:275–280.Google Scholar
21. Wiese, A. F., and Lavake, D. E. 1985. Control of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) with postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 34: 77–80.Google Scholar