Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T10:49:10.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glufosinate Combinations and Row Spacing for Weed Control in Glufosinate-Resistant Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Curtis A. Jones ,
James M. Chandler ,
John E. Morrison Jr. ,
Scott A. Senseman  and
Christopher H. Tingle
Curtis A. Jones*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
James M. Chandler
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
John E. Morrison Jr.
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, 808 East Blackland Road, Temple, TX 76502
Scott A. Senseman
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
Christopher H. Tingle
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

Research was conducted in 1997 and 1998 to evaluate narrow row spacing and glufosinate in glufosinate-resistant corn. Glufosinate-resistant corn was planted in 51- and 102-cm row spacings at the same plant populations. Herbicide treatments included glufosinate alone and in different herbicide combinations. Atrazine plus glufosinate enhanced Palmer amaranth control compared to glufosinate alone. Control of johnsongrass, ivyleaf morningglory, entireleaf morningglory, Texas panicum, smellmellon, browntop panicum, and toothed spurge with glufosinate was greater than 82%. Common sunflower control with glufosinate was greater than 95%. Atrazine followed by glufosinate applications provided at least 94% control of all species and was the most consistent herbicide system used. Row spacing had little effect on weed control. Crop injury to glufosinate-resistant corn was minimal with glufosinate and atrazine plus glufosinate combinations.

Keywords

Atrazineglufosinatebrowntop panicum Panicum fasciculatum Sw. #3 PANFAentireleaf morningglory Ipomoea hederacea var. intergriuscula Gray # IPOHGivyleaf morningglory Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq. # IPOHEjohnsongrass Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. # SORHAPalmer amaranth Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. # AMAPAsmellmellon Cucumis melo L. var. dudaim Naud. # CUMMDcommon sunflower Heliathus annuus L. # HELANTexas panicum Panicum texanum Buckl. # PANTEtoothed spurge Euphorbia dentata Michx. # EPHDEcorn (Zea mays L.)Narrow-row corntransgenic cornatrazinependimethalinprimisulfuronCGA 152005 (proposed nameprosulfuron)DAT, days after POST treatmentfb, followed byLPOST, late postemergencePOST, postemergencePRE, preemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2001 , pp. 141 - 147
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

Alessi, J. and Power, J. F. 1974. Effect of plant population, row spacing, and relative maturity on dryland corn in the Northern Plains. I. Corn forage and grain yield. Agron. J. 66: 316–319.Google Scholar
Alessi, J. and Power, J. F. 1975. Effect of plant spacing on phenological development of early and midseason corn hybrids in a semiarid region. Crop Sci. 15: 179–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Board, J. E., Harville, B. G., and Saxton, A. M. 1990. Narrow-row seed-yield enhancement in determinate soybean. Agron. J. 82: 64–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Board, J. E., Kamal, M., and Harville, B. G. 1992. Temporal importance of greater light interception to increase yield in narrow-row soybean. Agron. J. 84: 575–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camp, C. R., Karlen, D. L., and Lambert, J. R. 1985. Irrigation scheduling and row configurations for corn in the Southeastern Coastal Plain. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 28: 1159–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, M. D., Biggs, W. W., Eastin, J. D., Maranville, J. W., and Sullivan, C. Y. 1974. Light transmission in field communities of sorghum. Agron. J. 66: 471–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flenet, 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: 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. New York: J. Wiley. pp. 304–308.Google Scholar
Hauser, E. and Buchanan, G. A. 1982. Production of Peanuts as Affected by Weed Competition and Row Spacing. Auburn, AL: Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station Bull. 538. 35 p.Google Scholar
Hodges, D. E. and Evans, D. W. 1990. Light interception model for estimating the effects of sow spacing on plant competition in maize. J. Prod. Agric. 3: 190–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hydrick, D. E. and Shaw, D. R. 1995. Non-selective and selective herbicide combinations in stale seedbed (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 9: 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlen, D. L. and Camp, C. R. 1985. Row spacing, plant population, and water management effects on corn in the in the Atlantic coastal plain. Agron. J. 77: 393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanie, A. J., Griffin, J. L., Vidrine, P. R., and Reynolds, D. B. 1994. Herbicide combinations for soybean (Glycine max) planted in stale seedbed. Weed Technol. 8: 17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, J. A., Camper, H. M., and Jones, G. D. 1971. Row spacing and population effects on corn yields. Agron. J. 63: 12–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mickelson, J. A. and Harvey, R. G. 1997. Control of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm.) wild-proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) and woolly cupgrass [Eriochloa villosa (Thumb.) Kunth.] in glufosinate resistant field corn. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 37:87.Google Scholar
Mickelson, J. A. and Renner, K. A. 1997. Weed control using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in narrow and wide row soybeans. J. Prod. Agric. 10: 431–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parvez, A. Q., Gardner, F. P., and Boote, K. J. 1989. Determinate- and indeterminate-type soybean cultivar responses to pattern, density, and planting date. Crop Sci. 29: 150–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridley, S. M. and McNally, S. F. 1985. Effects of phosphinothricin on the isoenzymes of glutamine synthetase isolated from plant species which exhibit varying degrees of susceptibility to the herbicide. Plant Sci. 39: 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, S. W. and Hanway, J. J. 1982. How a corn plant develops. Ames, IA: Iowa State University, Cooperative Extension Service. 21 p.Google Scholar
Ritter, R. L. and Menbere, H. 1998. Weed control systems utilizing glufosinate and glufosinate-resistant crops. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 38:5.Google Scholar
Roggenbuck, F. C. and Penner, D. 1997. Efficacious adjuvants for glufosinate-ammonium, glyphosate-isopropylamine, and glyphosate-trimethylsulfonium. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 37:71.Google Scholar
Sanderson, J. W., Stewart, J. F., and Strachan, W. F. 1996. Weed control in glufosinate-ammonium resistant corn. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 49: 43.Google Scholar
Sankula, S., Braverman, M. P., and Linscombe, S. D. 1997a. Response of BAR-transformed rice (Oryza sativa) and red rice (Oryza sativa) to glufosinate application timing. Weed Technol. 11: 303–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankula, S., Braverman, M. P., and Linscombe, S. D. 1997b. Glufosinate-resistant, BAR-transformed rice (Oryza sativa) and red rice (Oryza sativa) response to glufosinate alone and in mixtures. Weed Technol. 11: 662–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, G. J., Hart, S. E., and Wax, L. M. 1997a. Absorption and transocation of glufosinate on four weed species. Weed Sci. 45: 378–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, G. J., Wax, L. M., Simmons, F. W., and Phillips, W. H. II. 1997b. Glufosinate efficacy on annual weeds is influenced by rate and growth stage. Weed Technol. 11: 484–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, R. K., Griffith, D. R., and Christmas, E. P. 1971. Corn performance in relation to row spacing, populations, and hybrids on five soils in Indiana. Agron. J. 63: 580–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. 1995. Influence of narrow row/high population corn (Zea mays) on weed control and light transmittance. Weed Technol. 9: 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. 1998. Influence of corn (Zea mays) population and row spacing on corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) yield. Weed Sci. 31: 81–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. and Frank, J. R. 1983. Effect of row spacing on weed competition with snap beans. Weed Sci. 31: 81–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Wychen, L. R., Harvey, G. H., Vangessel, M. J., Rabaey, T. L., and Bach, D. J. 1999. Efficacy and crop response of glufosinate-based weed management in PAT-transformed sweet corn. Weed Technol. 13: 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaffaroni, E. and Schneiter, A. A. 1989. Water-use efficiency and light interception of semidwarf and standard-height sunflower hybrids grown in different row arrangements. Agron. J. 81: 831–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar