Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T21:29:15.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rice (Oryza sativa) Response to Imazaquin Residues in a Soybean (Glycine max) and Rice Rotation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ronnie S. Helms ,
Timothy N. Tripp ,
Roy J. Smith Jr. ,
Ford L. Baldwin  and
Max Hackworth
Ronnie S. Helms
Affiliation:
Univ. Arkansas Dep. Agron., Southeast Res. Ext Cent, Monticello, AR 71655
Timothy N. Tripp
Affiliation:
Southeast Res. Ext Cent., Monticello, AR 71655
Roy J. Smith Jr.
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Stuttgart, AR 72160
Ford L. Baldwin
Affiliation:
Pest Manage., Univ. Arkansas Coop. Ext. Serv., Little Rock, AR 72203
Max Hackworth
Affiliation:
American Cyanamid Co., P.O. Box 90, Pocahontas, AR 72455
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nine field experiments were conducted from 1984 through 1988 to determine the effect on rice of imazaquin applied to soybeans the previous growing season. Imazaquin was applied preplant incorporated, preemergence, or postemergence at rates ranging from 70 to 560 g ai/ha. ‘Bond’, ‘Lemont’, ‘Mars', ‘Newbonnet’, and ‘Tebonnet’ rice were planted the following year. Across all locations, years, cultivars, soil series, methods of application, and imazaquin rates, rice injury symptoms were not observed, and rice grain yields were not reduced by imazaquin residues.

Keywords

Imazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acidrice, Oryza sativa L., ‘Bond’, ‘Lemont’, ‘Mars', ‘Newbonnet’, ‘Tebonnet’soybeans, Glycine max (L.)Merr.Herbicide carryoverimazaquin persistence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 513 - 517
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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. W. and Lavy, T. L. 1987. Microbial and photolytic dissipation of imazaquin in soil. Weed Sci. 35:865–870.Google Scholar
2. Basham, G. W., 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
3. Goetz, A. J., Wehtje, G., Walker, R. L., and Hajek, B. 1986. Soil solution and mobility characterization of imazaquin. Weed Sci. 34:788–793.Google Scholar
4. Huey, B. A., and Moldenhauer, K.A.K. 1988. Choosing a profitable variety. In Rice Production Handbook. Misc. Publ. 192. Univ. Arkansas Coop. Ext. Serv., Little Rock, AR.Google Scholar
5. Huey, B. A., Miley, W. N., Helms, R. S., and Norman, R. J. 1988. Fertilization of rice in Arkansas. Ext. Leafl. 405. Univ. Arkansas Coop. Ext. Serv., Little Rock, AR.Google Scholar
6. Khodayari, K., and Smith, R. J. 1986. Water management and cultivar interaction with fenoxaprop in dry-seeded rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:70.Google Scholar
7. Kurtz, M. E., Snipes, C. E., and Street, J. E. 1988. The effect of soybean herbicides on subsequent rice production. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 28:2.Google Scholar
8. Mills, J. A., Witt, W. W., and Olsen, J. L. 1987. Effects of tillage systems on imazaquin and imazethapyr persistence. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 40:378.Google Scholar
9. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., 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
10. 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. 36:78–33.Google Scholar
11. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, . 1988. Response of corn (Zea mays) cultivars to imazaquin. Weed Sci. 36:625–628.Google Scholar
12. Retzinger, E. J., Tripp, T. N., and Helms, R. S. 1987. Simulated spray drift of imazaquin on rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 40:373.Google Scholar
13. SAS. 1982. SAS Users Guide: Statistics. Statistical Analysis System. SAS Inst., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
14. Shaner, D. L., and Robson, P. A. 1985. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of AC 252,214 in soybean (Glycine max), common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 33:469–471.Google Scholar
15. Shaner, D. L., Anderson, P. C., and Stidham, M. A. 1984. Imidazolinones: potent inhibitors of acetohydroxyacid synthase. Plant Physiol. 76:545–546.Google Scholar
16. Snipes, C. E., Street, J. E., and Boykin, D. L. 1987. Influence of flood interval and cultivar on rice (Oryza sativa) tolerance to fenoxaprop. Weed Sci. 35:842–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Street, J. E., Tripp, T. N., and Helms, R. S. 1988. Rice response to imazaquin. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:71.Google Scholar
18. Turner, F. T., Chen, C. C., and Bollick, C. N. 1982. Coleoptile and mesocotyl lengths in semidwarf rice seedlings. Crop Sci. 22:43–46.Google Scholar
19. Wells, B. R., and Gilmour, J. T. 1977. Sterility in rice cultivars as influenced by MSMA rate and water management Agron. J. 69:451–454.Google Scholar