Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:49:54.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Problem Weed Control in Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean with Glyphosate Tank Mixes and Soil-Applied Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Stevan Z. Knezevic ,
Avishek Datta ,
Jon Scott ,
Robert N. Klein  and
Jeff Golus
Stevan Z. Knezevic*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728
Avishek Datta
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728
Jon Scott
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728
Robert N. Klein
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska West Central Research and Extension Center, North Platte, NE 69101
Jeff Golus
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska West Central Research and Extension Center, North Platte, NE 69101
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although glyphosate controls many plant species, certain broadleaf weeds in Nebraska's cropping systems exhibit various levels of tolerance to the labeled rates of this herbicide, including ivyleaf morningglory, Venice mallow, yellow sweetclover, common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, kochia, Russian thistle, and field bindweed. Therefore, two field studies were conducted in 2004 and 2005 at Concord and North Platte, NE, to evaluate performance of (1) seven preemergence (PRE) herbicides and (2) glyphosate tank mixes applied postemergence (POST) at three application times for control of eight weed species that are perceived as problem weeds in glyphosate-resistant soybean in Nebraska. The PRE herbicides, including sulfentrazone plus chlorimuron, pendimethalin plus imazethapyr, imazaquin, and pendimethalin plus imazethapyr plus imazaquin provided more than 85% control of most weed species tested in this study 28 d after treatment (DAT). However, sulfentrazone plus chlorimuron and pendimethalin plus imazethapyr plus imazaquin were the only PRE treatments that provided more than 80% control of most weed species 60 DAT. In the POST glyphosate tank-mix study, the level of weed control was significantly affected by the timing of herbicide application; control generally decreased as weed height increased. In general, glyphosate tank mixes applied at the first two application times (early or mid-POST) with half label rates of lactofen, imazamox, imazethapyr, fomesafen, imazaquin, or acifluorfen, provided more than 80% control of all species that were 20 to 30 cm tall except ivyleaf morningglory, Venice mallow, yellow sweetclover, and field bindweed. Glyphosate tank mixes applied late POST with lactofen, imazethapyr, or imazaquin provided more than 70% control of common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, kochia, and Russian thistle that were 30 to 50 cm tall. Overall, glyphosate tank mixes with half label rates of chlorimuron or acifluorfen were the best treatments; they provided more than 80% control of all the studied weed species when applied at early growth stages. Results of this study suggested that mixing glyphosate with other POST broadleaf herbicides, or utilizing soil-applied herbicides after crop planting helped effectively control most problematic weeds in glyphosate-resistant soybean in Nebraska.

Keywords

Acifluorfenchlorimuronfomesafenglyphosateimazamoximazaquinimazethapyrlactofenpendimethalinsulfentrazonecommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. CHEALfield bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis L. CONARivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea Jacq. IPOHEkochia, Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. KCHSCRussian thistle, Salsola tragus L. SASKRvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik. ABUTHVenice mallow, Hibiscus trionum L. HIBTRyellow sweetclover, Melilotus officinalis (L.) Lam. MEUOFsoybean, Glycine max L.PRE herbicidesPOST herbicide combinationsbroadleaf weedsherbicide-resistant crops
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , December 2009 , pp. 507 - 512
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

Davis, V.M., Johnson, W.G., and Gibson, K.D. 2005. An update on the distribution of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) in Indiana. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 60:198.Google Scholar
Ellis, J.M. and Griffin, J.L. 2002. Benefits of soil-applied herbicides in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 16:541–547.Google Scholar
Elmore, C.D., Hurst, H.R., and Austin, D.F. 1990. Biology and control of morningglories (Ipomoea spp.). Rev. Weed Sci 5:83–114.Google Scholar
Evans, S.P., Knezevic, S.Z., Shapiro, C.A., and Lindquist, J.L. 2003. Nitrogen level affects critical period for weed control in corn. Weed Sci 51:408–417.Google Scholar
Ferrell, J.A. and Witt, W.W. 2002. Comparison of glyphosate with other herbicides for weed control in corn: efficacy and economics. Weed Technol 16:701–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzini, L.C., Hart, S.E., and Wax, L.M. 1999. Herbicide combinations for weed management in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 13:354–360.Google Scholar
Heap, I.M. 2008. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/summary/MOASummary.asp. Accessed: September 25, 2008.Google Scholar
Holloway, J.C. Jr. and Shaw, D.R. 1995. Influence of soil-applied herbicides on ivyleaf morningglory (Ipomoea hederacea) growth and development in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci 43:655–659.Google Scholar
Holloway, J.C. Jr. and Shaw, D.R. 1996. Effect of herbicides on ivyleaf morningglory (Ipomoea hederacea) interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci 44:860–864.Google Scholar
Holt, J.S. 1992. History of identification of herbicide-resistant weeds. Weed Technol 6:615–620.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z. 2006. Weeds species on the increase in eastern Nebraska. Pages 122–131. in. Proceedings of the 2006 Crop Protection Clinics. Lincoln, NE: Univ. of Nebraska.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z. 2007. Herbicide tolerant crops: 10 years later. Maydica 52:245–250.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z., Evans, S.P., Blankenship, E.E., VanAcker, R.C., and Lindquist, J.L. 2002. Critical period of weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Sci 50:773–786.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z., Evans, S.P., and Mainz, M. 2003a. Yield penalty due to delayed weed control in corn and soybean. Crop Manag. J. http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/cm/research/2003/delay/. Accessed: October 20, 2008.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z., Evans, S.P., and Mainz, M. 2003b. Row spacing influences critical time of weed removal in soybean. Weed Technol 17:666–673.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z. and Klein, R.N. 2005. Glyphosate dose response curves and selectivity for control of problem weeds in Roundup-Ready soybean. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 60:149.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S.Z., Sikkema, P.H., Tardif, F., Hamill, A.S., Chandler, K., and Swanton, C.J. 1998. Biologically effective dose and selectivity of RPA 201772 (isoxaflutole) for preemergence weed control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 12:670–676.Google Scholar
Kniss, A.R., Miller, S.D., and Wilson, R.G. 2005. Common lambsquarters control with glyphosate: what's the problem. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 60:200.Google Scholar
Krausz, R.F. and Kapusta, G. 1994. Annual weed control with glyphosate at several rates, weed sizes, and spray volumes. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf 49:120–121.Google 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.Google Scholar
Lee, L.J. and Ngim, J. 2000. A first report of glyphosate-resistant goosegrass (Eleusine indica (L) Gaertn) in Malaysia. Pest Manag. Sci 56:336–339.Google Scholar
Lich, J.M., Renner, K.A., and Penner, D. 1997. Interaction of glyphosate with postemergence soybean (Glycine max) herbicides. Weed Sci 45:12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powles, S.B., Lorraine-Colwill, D.F., Dellow, J.J., and Preston, C. 1998. Evolved resistance to glyphosate in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in Australia. Weed Sci 46:604–607.Google Scholar
Reynolds, D.B., Jordan, D.L., Vidrine, P.R., and Griffin, J.L. 1995. Broadleaf weed control with trifluralin plus flumetsulam in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 9:446–451.Google Scholar
SAS, 1999. SAS. Version 8.1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Smeda, R.J., Pollard, J.M., and Sellers, B.A. 2005. Documenting the extent of glyphosate-resistant common ragweed. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 60:152.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. 2001. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed from Delaware. Weed Sci 49:703–705.Google Scholar
Vencill, W.K., Wilcut, J.W., and Monks, C.D. 1995. Efficacy and economy of weed management systems for sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) and morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 9:456–461.Google Scholar
Wilson, J.S. and Worsham, A.D. 1988. Combinations of nonselective herbicides for difficult to control weeds in no-till corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci 36:648–652.Google Scholar
Wilson, R.G., Miller, S.D., Kniss, A.R., Westra, P., and Stahlman, P.W. 2005. Risk of weed spectrum shifts and herbicide resistance in irrigated Roundup-Ready cropping systems—a western Nebraska perspective after 8 years. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 60:138.Google Scholar