Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:47:16.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pyrithiobac and Insecticide Coapplication Effects on Cotton Tolerance and Broadleaf Weed and Thrips (Frankliniella spp.) Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Richard W. Costello ,
James L. Griffin ,
B. Rogers Leonard ,
Donnie K. Miller  and
Gabie E. Church
Richard W. Costello
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, LSU AgCenter, 302 Life Sciences Building, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
James L. Griffin
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, LSU AgCenter, 104 Sturgis Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
B. Rogers Leonard
Affiliation:
Macon Ridge Location of the Northeast Research Station, LSU AgCenter, 212A Macon Ridge Road, Winnsboro, LA 71295
Donnie K. Miller*
Affiliation:
Northeast Research Station, LSU AgCenter, P.O. Box 438, St. Joseph, LA 71366
Gabie E. Church
Affiliation:
Department of Experimental Statistics, LSU AgCenter, 161 Ag. Admin. Building, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies investigated possible interactions associated with early-season coapplication of the herbicide pyrithiobac and various insecticides. Pyrithiobac at 70 g ai/ha, in combination with the insecticides acephate or dicrotophos at 370 g ai/ha, fipronil at 56 g ai/ha, imidacloprid at 52 g ai/ha, lambda-cyhalothrin at 37 g ai/ha, or oxamyl, carbofuran, or dimethoate at 280 g ai/ha did not reduce cotton leaf area, height, main stem node number, main stem nodes to first square, days to first square or flower, main stem nodes above white flower, or seed cotton yield compared with pyrithiobac alone. Pyrithiobac alone reduced dry weight of pitted morningglory, hemp sesbania, prickly sida, velvetleaf, and entireleaf–ivyleaf morningglory 28 d after treatment (DAT) 86, 98, 51, 94, and 91%, respectively, and weed control was not affected by the coapplication of insecticides. Control of thrips (adult plus larvae) 5 DAT with insecticides was unaffected by pyrithiobac addition at the P = 0.05 level of significance. At the P = 0.1 level, however, addition of pyrithiobac to dimethoate resulted in a reduction in insecticide efficacy in one of three experiments. Efficacy of other insecticides was unaffected.

Keywords

Acephate, O,S-dimethyl acetylphosphoramidothioatecarbofuran, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethylbenzofuran-7-yl methylcarbamatedicrotophos, 3-dimethoxyphosphinoyloxy-N,N-dimethylisocrotonamidepyrithiobacpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAprickly sida, Sida spinosa L. # SIDSPvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medic. # ABUTHcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Herbicide–insecticide interactionDAT, days after treatmentNAWF, node above white flowerPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, preemergence
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 2005 , pp. 430 - 436
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: 2907 Highway 586, Oak Grove, LA 71263.

References

Literature Cited

Allen, R. L. and Snipes, C. E. 1995. Interactions of foliar insecticides applied with pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 9:512–517.Google Scholar
Bagwell, R. D., Leonard, B. R., and Burris, G. et al. 2003. Cotton Insect Control 2003. LAES Pub. No. 1083. 5/2003 Rev.Google Scholar
Biediger, D. L., Baumann, P. A., Weaver, D. N., Chandler, J. M., and Merkle, M. G. 1992. Interactions between primisulfuron and selected soil-applied insecticides in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 6:807–812.Google Scholar
Bowling, C. C. and Flinchum, W. T. 1968. Interaction of propanil with insecticides applied as seed treatments on rice. J. Econ. Entomol. 61:67–69.Google Scholar
Bowling, C. C. and Hudgins, H. R. 1966. The effect of insecticides on the selectivity of propanil on rice. Weeds 14:94–95.Google Scholar
Burris, E., Pavloff, A. M., Leonard, B. R., Graves, J. B., and Church, G. 1990. Evaluation of two procedures for monitoring populations of early season insect pest (Thyanoptera: Thripidae and Homoptera: Aphididae) in cotton under selected management strategies. J. Econ. Entomol. 83:1065–1068.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr. and York, A. C. 1988. Interactions of carbaryl and dimethoate with sethoxydim. Weed Technol. 2:433–436.Google Scholar
Carter, F. L., Tugwell, N. P., Phillips, J. R., and Cochran, M. J. 1989. Thrips control strategy: effect on crop growth, yield, maturity, and quality. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:295–297.Google Scholar
El-Refai, A. R. and Mowafy, M. 1973. Interaction of propanil with insecticides absorbed from soil and translocated into rice plants. Weed Sci. 21:246–248.Google Scholar
Frazier, T. L., Nissen, S. J., Mortensen, D. A., and Meinke, L. J. 1993. The influence of terbufos on primisulfuron absorption and fate in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 41:664–668.Google Scholar
Frear, D. S. and Still, G. G. 1968. The metabolism of 3,4-dichloropropionamilide in plants. Partial purification and properties of an aryl acylamidase from rice. Phytochemistry 7:913–920.Google Scholar
Hacskaylo, J. K., Walker, J. K. Jr., and Pires, E. G. 1964. Response of cotton seedlings to combinations of preemergence herbicides and systemic insecticides. Weeds 12:288–291.Google Scholar
Hatzios, K. K. and Penner, D. 1985. Interactions of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1:1–63.Google Scholar
Hawkins, B. S., Peacock, H. A., and Steele, T. E. 1966. Thrips injury to upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) varieties. Crop Sci. 6:256–258.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. C. 1993a. DPX-PE350 does not interact with early-season insecticides in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 7:92–96.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. C. 1993b. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7:159–162.Google Scholar
Kapusta, G. and Krausz, R. F. 1992. Interaction of terbufos and nicosulfuron on corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 6:999–1003.Google Scholar
Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1993. Effects of DPX PE350 on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) growth, yield, and fiber quality. Weed Technol. 7:930–933.Google Scholar
Khodayari, K., Smith, R. J., and Tugwell, N. P. 1986. Interaction of propanil and selected insecticides on rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Sci. 34:800–803.Google Scholar
Leah, J. M., Caseley, J. C., Riches, C. R., and Valverde, B. 1994. Association between elevated activity on aryl acylamidases and propanil resistance in jungle-rice, Echinochloa colona . Pestic. Sci. 42:281–289.Google Scholar
Mascarenhas, V. J. and Griffin, J. L. 1997. Weed control interactions associated with Roundup and insecticide mixtures. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:799–800.Google Scholar
Matsunka, S. 1968. Propanil hydrolysis: inhibition in rice by insecticides. Science 160:1360–1361.Google Scholar
Morton, C. A., Harvey, R. G., Kells, J. K., Landis, D. A., Lueschen, W. E., and Fritz, V. A. 1993. In-furrow terbufos reduces field and sweet corn (Zea mays) tolerance to nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 7:934–939.Google Scholar
Pankey, J. H., Griffin, J. L., Leonard, B. R., Miller, D. K., Downer, R. G., and Costello, R. W. 2004. Glyphosate-insecticide combination effects on weed and insect control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 18:698–703.Google Scholar
Ratchford, K. and Burris, E. 1985. Effects of early season pesticides in cotton. La. Agric. 28 (3):14–15.Google Scholar
Scott, W. P., Snodgrass, G. L., Shaw, R., and Adams, D. A. 1996. Impact of insecticides applied with/without bromoxynil herbicide on various cotton pests in laboratory bioasssays. J. Entomol. 31:365–370.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. and Tugwell, N. P. 1975. Propanil-carbofuran interactions in rice. Weed Sci. 23:176–178.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E. and Allen, R. L. 1992. Broadleaf weed control in cotton with DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:26.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E. and Seifert, S. 2003. Influence of malathion timing on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 17:266–268.Google Scholar
Sunderland, S. L. and Coble, H. D. 1994. Differential tolerance of morningglory species (Ipomoea sp.) to DPX-PE350. Weed Sci. 42:227–232.Google Scholar
Swanson, C. R. and Swanson, H. R. 1968. Inhibition of degradation of monuron in cotton leaf tissue by carbamate insecticides. Weeds 16:481–485.Google Scholar
Watts, J. G. 1937. Reduction of cotton yield by thrips. J. Econ. Entomol. 30:860–862.Google Scholar
Williams, M. R. 2004. Cotton insect losses 2003. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:1249–1257.Google Scholar
Wilson, L. T. 1986. The compensatory response of cotton to leaf and fruit damage. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:149–153.Google Scholar
York, A. C., Jordan, D. L., and Frans, R. E. 1991. Insecticides modify cotton Gossypium hirsutum) response to clomazone. Weed Technol. 5:729–735.Google Scholar