Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:00:30.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicide Efficacy on Four Amaranthus Species in Soybean (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jonathan K. Sweat ,
Michael J. Horak ,
Dallas E. Peterson ,
Randy W. Lloyd  and
John E. Boyer
Jonathan K. Sweat
Affiliation:
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66502
Michael J. Horak
Affiliation:
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66502
Dallas E. Peterson
Affiliation:
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66502
Randy W. Lloyd
Affiliation:
American Cyanamid Co., Williamsburg, KS 66095
John E. Boyer
Affiliation:
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66502
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field and greenhouse studies were conducted in 1995 and 1996 in Kansas to determine the efficacy of 21 herbicide treatments for control of tumble pigweed, Palmer amaranth, redroot pigweed, and two biotypes of common waterhemp in soybean. In field studies, nine of eleven preemergence treatments controlled all four species 90% or more. However, pendimethalin and trifluralin controlled Palmer amaranth, redroot pigweed, and tumble pigweed less than the other preplant incorporated and preemergence treatments. With the exception of flumiclorac and NAF-75, postemergence treatments controlled 75 to 90% of all four species. A biotype of common waterhemp collected in Iowa was not controlled by acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides. Greenhouse results were similar to field experiments. Results suggest at least 90% control of these Amaranthus species is possible with proper herbicide selection.

Keywords

Flumiclorac, [2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-(1,3,4,5,6,7-hexahydro-1,3-dioxo-2H-isoindol-2-yl)phenoxy]acetic acidNAF-75, N-2(2-carboxymethyl-6-chlorophenyl)-5-ethoxy-7-fluoro(1,2,4)triazolo-(1,5c)-pyrimidine-2-sulfonamidependimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenaminetrifluralin, 2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl) benzenaminecommon waterhemp, Amaranthus rudis Sauer #3 AMATAPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. # AMAPAredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREtumble pigweed, Amaranthus albus L. # AMAALsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.AcetochloracifluorfenalachlorSAN 582fomesafenimazamoximazaquinimazethapyrlactofenmetolachlormetribuzinsulfentrazonethifensulfuronALS, acetolactate synthaseDAT, days after treatmentPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, preemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 315 - 321
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by the 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

Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plunkett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds—Distribution and Biology. Honolulu, HI: University Press of Hawaii. 606 p.Google Scholar
Horak, M. J. and Peterson, D. E. 1995. Biotypes of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) are resistant to imazethapyr and thifensulfuron. Weed Technol. 9:192–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Kendig, J. A., and Null, D. 1996. Waterhemp management in soybean. Columbia, MO: Missouri State Extension Bulletin. 9 p.Google Scholar
Klingaman, T. E. and Oliver, L. R. 1994. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) interference in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 42:523–527.Google Scholar
Mayo, C. M., Horak, M. J., Peterson, D. E., and Boyer, J. E. 1995. Differential control of four Amaranthus species by six postemergence herbicides in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 9:141–147.Google Scholar
Menges, R. M. 1988. Allelopathic effects of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) on seedling growth. Weed Sci. 36:325–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monks, D. M. and Oliver, L. R. 1988. Interactions between soybean (Glycine max) cultivars and selected weeds. Weed Sci. 36:770–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushing, D. W., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1985. Weed interference with cotton (Gossypium birsutum). II. Tumble pigweed (Amaranthus albus). Weed Sci. 33:815–818.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1995. SAS User's Guide: Basics. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1028 p.Google Scholar
Shurtleff, J. L. and Coble, H. D. 1985. Interference of certain broadleaf weed species in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 33:654–657.Google Scholar
Taylor, S., Wax, L. M., Horak, M. J., and Peterson, D. E. 1996. Imidazolinone and sulfonylurea resistance in a biotype of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis). Weed Sci. 44:789–794.Google Scholar
Weed Loss Committee. 1992. Crop Losses Due to Weeds in Canada and the United States. Bridges, D. C., ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 403 p.Google Scholar