Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:04:14.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and Imidazolinone-Resistant Corn (Zea mays) to AC 263,222

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John W. Wilcut ,
John S. Richburg III  and
F. Robert Walls Jr.
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31794
John S. Richburg III*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31794
F. Robert Walls Jr.
Affiliation:
American Cyanamid Company, Goldsboro, NC 27530
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1992 and 1993 to evaluate AC 263,222 applied postemergence (POST) alone and as a mixture with atrazine or bentazon for weed control in imidazolinone-resistant corn. Nicosulfuron alone and nicosulfuron plus atrazine were also evaluated. Herbicide treatments were applied following surface-banded applications of two insecticides, carbofuran or terbufos at planting. Crop sensitivity to POST herbicides, corn yield, and weed control was not affected by insecticide treatments. AC 263,222 at 36 and 72 g ai/ha controlled rhizomatous johnsongrass 88 and 99%, respectively, which was equivalent to nicosulfuron applied alone or with atrazine. AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha controlled large crabgrass 99% and redroot pigweed 100%, and this level of control exceeded that obtained with nicosulfuron alone. AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha controlled sicklepod and morningglory species 99 and 98%, respectively. Nicosulfuron alone or with atrazine controlled these two species less than AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha. Addition of bentazon or atrazine to AC 263,222 did not improve control of any species compared with the higher rate of AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha applied alone. Corn yield increased over the untreated control when POST herbicide(s) were applied, but there were no differences in yield among herbicide treatments.

Keywords

carbofuran, 2-3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-7-benzofuranylmethyl-carbamatejohnsongrass, Sorghum halepense L. # SORHAlarge crabgrass, Digitaria sanguinalis L. # DIGSAredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREsicklepod, Senna obtusifolia Irwin and Barneby (L.) # CASOBZea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3343IR.’Pesticide interactionorganophosphate insecticideatrazinebentazoncarbofurannicosulfuronterbufosAmaranthus retroflexusDigitaria sanguinalisIpomoea hederaceaI. hederacea var. integriusculaI. lacunosaI. purpureaSenna obtusifoliaABUTHAMARECASOBDIGSAIPOHEIPOHGIPOLAPHBPUSORHAIR, imidazolinone-resistantIT, imidazolinone-tolerantPOST, postemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 1999 , pp. 484 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 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.)

Footnotes

Current address of J. S. Richburg III: DowAgro-Sciences, Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054.

Current address of J. W. Wilcut: Crop Science Department, Box 7620, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620.

References

Literature Cited

Batts, R. B., York, A. C., and Wilcut, J. W. 1995. Pursuit and Cadre in peanut/ cotton rotation. Proc. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc. 27:59.Google Scholar
Diehl, K. E. and Stoller, E. W. 1995. Effect of simulated rainfall, insecticide formulation, and insecticide application method on the interaction of nicosulfuron and terbufos in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 9:80–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobbels, A. F. and Kapusta, G. 1993. Postemergence weed control in corn (Zea mays) with nicosulfuron combinations. Weed Technol. 7:844–850.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1994. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:279–299.Google Scholar
Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 40:441–447.Google Scholar
Hart, R., Lignowski, E., and Taylor, F. 1991. Imazethapyr herbicide. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 248–259.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. 1992. History of identification of herbicide-resistant weeds. Weed Technol. 6:615–620.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
Jordan, D. L. 1995. Influence of adjuvants on the antagonism of graminicides by broadleaf herbicides. Weed Technol. 9:741–747.Google Scholar
Kapusta, G., Krausz, R. F., Khan, M., and Matthews, J. L. 1994. Effect of nicosulfuron rate, adjuvant, and weed size on annual weed control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 8:696–702.Google Scholar
Kendig, J. A. and DeFelice, M. S. 1994. ALS resistant cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) in Missouri. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 34:12.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F. and Kapusta, G. 1998. Total postemergence weed control in imidazolinone-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 12:151–156.Google Scholar
Mallory-Smith, C. A., Thill, D. C., and Dial, M. J. 1990. Identification of sulfonylurea herbicide-resistant prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola). Weed Technol. 4:163–168.Google Scholar
Manley, B. S., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 1998. Characterization of imidazolinone-resistant smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus). Weed Technol. 12:575–584.Google Scholar
Newhouse, K., Wang, T., and Anderson, P. 1991. Imidazolinone-tolerant crops. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 139–150.Google Scholar
Powles, S. B. and Howat, P. D. 1990. Herbicide resistant weeds in Australia. Weed Technol. 4:178–185.Google Scholar
Primiani, M. M., Cotterman, J. C., and Saari, L. L. 1990. Resistance of kochia (Kochia scoparia) to sulfonylurea and imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:169–172.Google Scholar
Retzinger, E. J. Jr., and Mallory-Smith, C. 1997. Classification of herbicides by site of action for weed resistance management strategies. Weed Technol. 11:384–393.Google Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., Colvin, D. L., and Wiley, G. R. 1996. Weed management in southeastern peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 10:145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., and Eastin, E. F. 1993. Weed control and peanut (Arachis hypogaea) response to nicosulfuron and bentazon alone and in mixture. Weed Sci. 41:615–620.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.Google Scholar
Rubin, B., Sibony, M., Benyamini, Y., and Danino, Y. 1992. Resistance to sulfonylurea herbicides in redroot pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus L.). Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 32:66.Google Scholar
Schmenk, R. E., Barrett, M., and Witt, W. W. 1996. Smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus) resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 36:9.Google Scholar
Sprague, C. L., Stoller, E. W., and Hart, S. E. 1997. Preemergence broadleaf weed control and crop tolerance in imidazolinone-resistant and -susceptible corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 11:118–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thill, D. C., Mallory-Smith, C. A., Saari, L. L., Cotterman, J. C., Primiani, M. M., and Saladini, J. L. 1991. Sulfonylurea herbicide resistant weeds: discovery, distribution, biology, mechanism, and management. In Caseley, J. C., Cussans, G. W., and Atkins, R. K., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Weeds and Crops. London: Butterman and Heineman. p. 115.Google Scholar
Tweedy, M. J. and Kapusta, G. 1995. Nicosulfuron and primisulfuron eradicate rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) in corn (Zea mays) in three years. Weed Technol. 9:748–753.Google Scholar
Wanamarta, G., Penner, D., and Kells, J. J. 1989. The basis of bentazon antagonism on sethoxydim absorption and activity. Weed Sci. 37:400–404.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. and Askew, S. D. 1999. Chemical approaches to weed management. In; Ruberson, J. R., ed. Handbook of Pest Management. New York: Marcel Dekker. pp. 627–661.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Coble, H. D., York, A. C., and Monks, D. W. 1996a. The niche for herbicide-resistant crops in U.S. agriculture. In Duke, S. O., ed. Herbicide-Resistant Crops. Agricultural, Environmental, Economic, Regulatory, and Technical Aspects. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 213–230.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Wiley, G. L., and Walls, F. R. Jr. 1996b. Postemergence AC 263,222 systems for weed control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 44:615–621.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Jordan, D. L. 1995. Weed management systems for oil seed crops. In Smith, A. E., ed. Handbook of Weed Management Systems. New York: Marcel Dekker. pp. 343–400.Google Scholar
Wrubel, R. P. and Gressel, J. 1994. Are herbicide mixtures useful for delaying the rapid development of resistance? A case study. Weed Technol. 8:635–648.Google Scholar