Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T09:19:17.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Herbicides for Postemergence Application in Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert G. Wilson
Robert G. Wilson*
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Nebraska, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted near Scottsbluff, NE, to evaluate the selectivity of sequential POST applications of ethofumesate and triflusulfuron for weed control in sugarbeet. When applied alone ethofumesate and triflusulfuron reduced common lambsquarters, hairy nightshade, and redroot pigweed density while triflusulfuron also reduced kochia density compared with an untreated control. Combining ethofumesate with desmedipham plus phenmedipham increased sugarbeet injury compared with desmedipham plus phenmedipham. Combining triflusulfuron with desmedipham plus phenmedipham increased kochia control but did not increase sugarbeet injury over that obtained with desmedipham plus phenmedipham. Weed control and sugarbeet injury from herbicides generally were unaffected by application in 97 or 182 L/ha of water carrier. However, herbicide control of hairy nightshade in 1993 was greater with 97 than 182 L/ha of water carrier.

Keywords

Desmedipham, ethyl[3-[[(phenylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]carbamateethofumesate, (±)-2-ethoxy-2,3-dihydro-3,3-dimethyl-5-benzofuranyl methanesulfonatephenmedipham, 3-[(methoxycarbonyl)amino]phenyl (3-methylphenyl)carbamatetriflusulfuron, methyl 2-[[[[[4-((dimethylamino-6-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy))-1,3,5 triazin-2-yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-methylbenzoatecommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. ♯ CHEALhairy nightshade, Solanum sarrachoides Sendtner ♯ SOLSAkochia, Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. ♯ KCHSCredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. ♯ AMAREsugarbeet, Beta vulgaris L. ‘Monohikari.’DesmediphamethofumesatephenmediphamtriflusulfuronAmaranthus retroflexusChenopodium albumKochia scopariaSolanum sarrachoidesAMARECHEALKCHSCSOLSA
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 807 - 811
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Association of Official Agriculture Chemists. 1955. Official Methods of Analysis. 8th ed. Washington, DC. p. 564–568.Google Scholar
2. Betarnix label. Nor-Am Chemical Company, Agribusiness Division, 3509 Silverside Road, P.O. Box 7495, Wilmington, DE 19803.Google Scholar
3. Buhler, D. D. and Burnside, O. C. 1984. Effect of application factors on postemergence phytotoxicity of fluazifop, haloxyfop and sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 32:574–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Fore, Z. Q. and Dexter, A. G. 1989. The influence of application factors on the phytotoxicity of several postemergence herbicides. J. Sugar Beet Res. 26:1–10.Google Scholar
5. Miller, S. D. and Fornstrom, K. J. 1989. Weed control and labor requirements in sugarbeets. J. Sugar Beet Res. 26:1–9.Google Scholar
6. Peters, T. J. and Dexter, A. G. 1987. Herbicide efficacy as influenced by application method and plant growth stages. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 42:75.Google Scholar
7. Schweizer, E. E. 1980. Herbicides applied sequentially for economical control of annual weeds in sugarbeets. Weed Sci. 28:152–159.Google Scholar
8. Wicks, G. A. and Wilson, R. G. 1983. Control of weeds in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris) with handhoeing and herbicides. Weed Sci. 31:493–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Wilson, R. G. 1992. Sequential herbicide application for weed control in sugarbeets. J. Sugar Beet Res. 29:1–7.Google Scholar
10. Winter, S. R. and Wiese, A. F. 1982. Economical control of weeds in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 30:620–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar