Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:08:39.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Soybean (Glycine max) and Rice (Oryza sativa) in Rotation to AC 263,222

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles F. Grymes ,
James M. Chandler  and
Paul R. Nester
Charles F. Grymes
Affiliation:
Dep. Soil and Crop Sci., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
James M. Chandler
Affiliation:
Dep. Soil and Crop Sci., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
Paul R. Nester
Affiliation:
American Cyanamid Co., The Woodlands, TX 77381
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1991 and 1992 to evaluate the response of soybean and the subsequent rice crop to AC 263,222 applied alone and in tank mixtures with imazethapyr or imazaquin. In 1991, 18, 36, and 70 g ai/ha of AC 263,222 visibly stunted soybean 9, 19, and 35%, respectively. Adding imazethapyr at 36 g/ha or imazaquin at 70 g/ha to AC 263,222 in a tank mixture did not increase soybean response compared to AC 263,222 alone. Soybean yield was not reduced by any treatment. In 1992, 14 g/ha of AC 263,222 alone or in tank mixtures damaged soybean 38% or greater. In one study, rice was injured the year following application of AC 263,222 alone and in tank mixtures. Rice yield was reduced by 70 g/ha of AC 263,222 alone and by 36 g/ha of AC 263,222 when tank mixed with 36 g/ha of imazethapyr.

Keywords

AC 263,222, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-methyl-3-pyridinecarboxylicacidimazaquin,2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acidimazethapyr, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidrice, Oryza sativa L. ‘Millie’ and ‘Maybelle’soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. Tracy M.’Imazaquinimazethapyrimidazolinonepersistence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , September 1995 , pp. 504 - 511
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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

1. Basham, G., Lavy, T. L., Oliver, L. R., and Scott, H. D. 1987. Imazaquin persistence and mobility in three Arkansas soils. Weed Sci. 35:576–582.Google Scholar
2. Buhler, D. D. and Proost, R. T. 1992. Influence of application time on bioactivity of imazethapyr in no-tillage soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 40:122–126.Google Scholar
3. Cole, T. A., Wehtje, G. R., Wilcut, J. W., and Hicks, T. V. 1989. Behavior of imazethapyr in soybeans (Glycine max), peanuts (Arachis hypogaea), and selected weeds. Weed Sci. 37:639–644.Google Scholar
4. Fehr, W. R. and Caviness, C. E. 1977. Stages of soybean development. Spec. Rep. 80. Coop. Ext. Serv. Iowa State Univ., Ames. 12 p.Google Scholar
5. Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gbur, E. E. Jr. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:421–428.Google Scholar
6. Goetz, A. J. and Lavy, T. L. 1990. Soil texture influence on the field persistence of imazethapyr. Arkansas Farm Res. Arkansas Agric. Exp. Stn. 39:8.Google Scholar
7. Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 680 p.Google Scholar
8. Griffin, J. L. and Habetz, R. J. 1989. Soybean (Glycine max) tolerance to preemergence and postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 3:459–462.Google Scholar
9. Helms, R. S., Tripp, T. N., Smith, R. J. Jr., Baldwin, F. L., and Hackworth, M. 1989. Rice (Oryza sativa) response to imazaquin residues in a soybean (Glycine max) and rice rotation. Weed Technol. 3:513–517.Google Scholar
10. Hollifield, B., Murdock, E. C., Stapelton, G. S., and Toler, J. E. 1992. Single and sequential herbicide programs for control of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:326.Google Scholar
11. Johnson, D. H., Talbert, R. E., Beaty, J. D., Guy, C. B., and Smith, R. J. 1992. Rice response following imazaquin, imazethapyr, chlorimuron, and clomazone use. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:371.Google Scholar
12. Kent, L. M., Barrentine, W. L., and Willis, G. D. 1988. Response of twenty determinate soybean (Glycine max) cultivars to imazaquin. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:50.Google Scholar
13. Ladlie, J. S. 1991. Guide to herbicide injury symptoms in soybeans with “look-alike” symptoms. Agri Growth Research, Inc., Hollondale, MN. 88 p.Google Scholar
14. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on soils, sediments, and selected adsorbents. Weed Sci. 37:712–718.Google Scholar
15. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone in soil. Weed Sci. 37:259–267.Google Scholar
16. Malefyte, T. and Quakenbush, L. 1991. Influence of environmental factors on the biological activity of the imidazolinone herbicides. p. 103–127 in Shaner, L. and O'Connor, S., ed. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
17. Mangels, G. 1991. Behavior of the imidazolinone herbicides in the soil—a review of the literature. p. 191–209 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S., ed. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
18. Miller, D. K. and Griffin, J. L. 1993. Soybean (Glycine max) cultivar response to AC 263,222 as influenced by supplemental irrigation. Weed Technol. 7:920–924.Google Scholar
19. Mills, J. A. and Witt, W. W. 1989. Effect of tillage systems on the efficacy and phytotoxicity of imazaquin and imazethapyr in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 37:233–238.Google Scholar
20. Mills, J. A. and Witt, W. W. 1989. Efficacy, phytotoxicity, and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone in no-till double-crop soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 37:353–359.Google Scholar
21. Monks, C. D. and Banks, P. A. 1991. Rotational crop response to chlorimuron, clomazone, and imazaquin applied the previous year. Weed Sci. 39:629–633.Google Scholar
22. Newsom, L. J., Shaw, D. R., and Hydrick, D. E. 1992. Cultivar response of soybean to AC 263,222 as influenced by soil moisture. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:53.Google Scholar
23. Newsom, L. J. and Shaw, D. R. 1992. Soybean (Glycine max) cultivar tolerance to chlorimuron and imazaquin with varying hydroponic solution pH. Weed Technol. 6:382–388.Google Scholar
24. Newsom, L. J. and Shaw, D. R. 1992. Soybean (Glycine max) response to chlorimuron and imazaquin as influenced by soil moisture. Weed Technol. 6:389–395.Google Scholar
25. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1988. Effect of soil pH on imazaquin and imazethapyr adsorption to soil and phytotoxicity to corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 36:78–83.Google Scholar
26. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. R., and Leavitt, R. A. 1988. Influence of rate, method of application, and tillage on imazaquin persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 36:90–95.Google Scholar
27. Riley, D. G. and Shaw, D. R. 1989. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) control with imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 3:95–98.Google Scholar
28. Shaw, D. R. and Wixson, M. B. 1991. Postemergence combinations of imazaquin or imazethapyr with AC 263,222 for weed control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 39:644–649.Google Scholar
29. Stougaard, R. N., Shea, P. J., and Martin, A. R. 1990. Effect of soil type and pH on adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:67–73.Google Scholar
30. Vidrine, P. R., Reynolds, D. B., and Griffin, J. L. 1988. Performance of imazethapyr in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:40.Google Scholar
31. Willard, T. S. and Griffin, J. L. 1990. Evaluation of AC 263,222 in soybeans in Louisiana. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:29.Google Scholar
32. Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1987. Influence of inorganic salts and imazapyr on control of pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) with imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 1:328–331.Google Scholar
33. Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Differential response of soybean (Glycine max) cultivars to AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 5:430–433.Google Scholar
34. Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Effect of adjuvants on weed control and soybean (Glycine max) tolerance with AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 5:817–822.Google Scholar
35. Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Effect of soil applied AC 263,222 on crops rotated with soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 6:276–279.Google Scholar
36. Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Use of AC 263,222 for sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5:434–438.Google Scholar