Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:25:06.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of AC 263,222 Rate and Application Method on Weed Management in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Theodore M. Webster ,
John W. Wilcut  and
Harold D. Coble
Theodore M. Webster
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Harold D. Coble
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in 1991 and 1992 to evaluate the weed control effectiveness from several rates of AC 263,222 applied PPI and PRE (36 and 72 g ai/ha), early POST (EPOST) (18, 36, 54, or 72 g/ha), POST (18, 36, 54, or 72 g/ha), and EPOST followed by (fb) POST (27 fb 27 g/ha or 36 fb 36 g/ha). These treatments were compared to the commercial standard of bentazon at 0.28 kg ai/ha plus paraquat at 0.14 kg ai/ha EPOST fb bentazon at 0.56 kg/ha plus paraquat at 0.14 kg/ha plus 2,4-DB at 0.28 kg ae/ha. Application method had little effect on weed control with AC 263,222. In contrast, application rate affected control. Purple nutsedge, yellow nutsedge, prickly sida, smallflower morningglory, bristly starbur, common cocklebur, and coffee senna were controlled at least 82% with AC 263,222 at 36 g/ha (one-half the maximum registered use rate) regardless of application method. AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha (registered use rate) controlled sicklepod 84 to 93%, Florida beggarweed 65 to 100%, and Ipomoea morningglory species 89 to 99%. A single application of AC 263,222 at 36 g/ha or more controlled all weeds (with the exception of Florida beggarweed) as well or greater than sequential applications of bentazon plus paraquat fb bentazon, paraquat, and 2,4-DB. All rates of AC 263,222 applied POST and all application methods of AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha had better yields than the pendimethalin control.

Keywords

2,4-DB, 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butanoic acidparaquat, 1,1'-dimethyl-4,4'-bipyridinium ionbristly starbur, Acanthospermum hispidum DC. # ACNHIcoffee senna, Cassia occidentalis L. # CASOCcommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. # XANSTFlorida beggarweed, Desmodium tortuosum (Sw.) DC. # DEDTOmorningglory species, Ipomoea spp.prickly sida, Sida spinosa L. # SIDSPpurple nutsedge, Cyperus rotundus L. # CYPROsicklepod, Senna obtusifolia (L.) Irwin and Barneby # CASOByellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L. # CYPESBentazonparaquat2,4-DBAcanthospermum hispidumCassia occidentalisCyperus esculentusCyperus rotundusDesmodium tortuosumIpomoea hederaceaACNHICASOCXANSTDEDTOSIDSPCYPROCASOBIAQTACYPESC, cotyledonDAP, days after plantingEPOST, early postfb, followed byL, leafVNG, viningPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, preemergence.
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 1997 , pp. 520 - 526
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Batts, R. B., York, A. C., and Wilcut, J. W. 1995. Pursuit and Cadre carryover in peanut/cotton rotations. Proc. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc. 27:59.Google Scholar
Brecke, B. J. and Colvin, D. L. 1991. Weed management in peanuts. In Pimentel, D., ed. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture. Volume 3, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. pp. 239–251.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1995. Weed survey—Southern states: broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48:290–325.Google Scholar
Evans, J. R., Turner, J. C., Gourd, D. R., and McKemie, T. E. 1988. Interaction of bentazon and paraquat for peanut weed control. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:68.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. L., Reynolds, D. B., Vidrine, P. R., and Bruff, S. A. 1993. Soybean (Glycine max) tolerance and sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) control with AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 7:331–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klingaman, T.E., King, C. A., and Oliver, L. R. 1992. Effect of application rate, weed species, and weed stage of growth on imazethapyr activity. Weed Sci. 40:227–232.Google Scholar
Obrigawitch, T., Martin, A. R., and Roeth, F. R. 1983. Degradation of thiocarbamate herbicides in soils exhibiting rapid EPTC breakdown. Weed Sci. 31:187–192.Google Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, and Wilcut, J. W. 1992. Imazethapyr systems for weed management in Georgia peanut. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:106.Google Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., and Wiley, G. L. 1995. AC 263,222 and imazethapyr rates and mixtures for weed management in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 9:801–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehtje, G. R., Wilcut, J. W., and McGuire, J. A. 1992. Influence of bentazon on the phytotoxicity of paraquat to peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 40:90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehtje, G. R., Wilcut, J. W., McGuire, J. A., and Hicks, T. V. 1991. Foliar penetration and phytotoxicity of paraquat as influenced by peanut cultivar. Peanut Sci. 18:67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. 1991. Imazethapyr and AC 263,222 systems for Georgia peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:138.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. and Richburg, J. S. III. 1992. Pursuit and Cadre mixtures for weed control in Georgia peanut. Proc. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc. 24:46.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Eastin, E. F., Wiley, G. R., Walls, F. R. Jr., and Newell, S. 1994a. Imazethapyr and paraquat systems for weed management in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 42:601–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Wiley, G. L., and Walls, F. R. 1996. Postemergence AC 263,222 systems for weed control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 44:615–621.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Wiley, G. W., Walls, F. R. Jr., Jones, S. R., and Iverson, M. J. 1994b. Imidazolinone herbicide systems for peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Sci. 21:23–28.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. and Walls, F. R. 1990. Herbicide combinations for weed control in peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:71.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Walls, F. R. Jr., and Horton, D. N. 1991a. Weed control, yield and net returns using imazethapyr in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 39:238–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Walls, F. R. Jr., and Horton, D. N. 1991b. Imazethapyr for broadleaf weed control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Peanut Sci. 18:26–30.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Wehtje, G. R. 1994c. The control and interaction of weeds in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Rev. Weed Sci. 6:177–205.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. E. 1988. Carbamothioates. In Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Volume 3. New York: Marcel-Dekker. pp. 245–300.Google Scholar
Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Use of AC 263,222 for sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) control in soybean. Weed Technol. 5:434–438.Google Scholar
York, A. C. and Wilcut, J. W. 1995. Potential for Pursuit and Cadre applied to peanuts to carryover to cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:602.Google Scholar
York, A. C., Wilcut, J. W., Swann, C. W., Jordan, D. L., and Walls, F. R. Jr. 1995. Efficacy of imazethapyr in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) as affected by time of application. Weed Sci. 43:107–116.Google Scholar
Young, J. H., Person, N. K., Donald, J. O., and Mayfield, W. H. 1982. Harvesting, curing, and energy utilization. In Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T. eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Yoakum, TX: American Peanut Research Education Society. pp. 458–487.Google Scholar