Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T17:07:57.632Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tolerance of Six Soft Red Winter Wheat Cultivars to AE F130060 00 Plus AE F115008 00

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

H. Lane Crooks ,
Alan C. York  and
David L. Jordan
H. Lane Crooks
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
Alan C. York*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
David L. Jordan
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tolerance of six soft red winter wheat cultivars to AE F130060 00 plus AE F115008 00 applied at 12.5 plus 2.5 g ai/ha and 25 plus 5 g ai/ha, respectively, at the two- to three-tiller stage was examined under weed-free conditions at four locations over 2 yr. Visible injury averaged 5 and 15% 3 wk after treatment (WAT) in years 1 and 2, respectively. Injury was 2% or less 10 WAT. No differences among cultivars were noted for visible injury, and AE F130060 00 plus AE F115008 00 did not reduce grain yield in year 1. In year 2, averaged over herbicide rates, grain yields of the cultivars ‘Coker 9663’, ‘Pioneer 2580’, ‘Coker 9704’, ‘Pioneer 2684’, ‘FFR 555’, and ‘Jackson’ were reduced 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, and 16%, respectively. The yield reduction for Jackson was different from those for the other cultivars. Yield reduction was attributed to reduced numbers of kernels per spike.

Keywords

AEF 115008 00 (proposed name iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium), 4-iodo-2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acid methyl esterAE F130060 00 (proposed name mesosulfuron-methyl), methyl-2-[[[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-4-[[(methylsulfonyl)amino]methyl] benzoatewheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Coker 9663’, ‘Coker 9704’, ‘FFR 555’, ‘Jackson’, ‘Pioneer 2580’, ‘Pioneer 2684’Cultivar responseyield componentsWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 252 - 257
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

Anonymous. 2003. Finesse Herbicide Supplemental Labeling. Rotational Interval to STS Soybean, Grain Sorghum, Cotton, non-STS Soybeans, Field Corn, and Rice. Web page: http://www.greenbook.net. Accessed: February 10, 2004.Google Scholar
Appleby, A. P., Olsen, P. D., and Colbert, D. R. 1976. Winter wheat yield reduction from interference by Italian ryegrass. Agron. J. 68:463–466.Google Scholar
Bailey, W. A. 2002. Weed Management in Several Crops Through the Integration of Chemical Control and Weed Biology. Ph.D. dissertation. Virginia Polytechnical Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA. 216 p.Google Scholar
Bailey, W. A., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 2002. AE F130060/iodosulfuron (AE F130060) for Italian ryegrass control in VA wheat. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:21–22.Google Scholar
Barnes, M. A., Peeper, T. F., Epplin, F. M., and Kenzer, E. G. Jr. 2001. Effects of herbicides on Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), forage production, and economic returns from dual-purpose winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 15:264–270.Google Scholar
Bowman, D. T. 2002. 2002 Performance of Small Grain Varieties in North Carolina. Web page: http://www.out.ncsu.edu. Accessed: February 10, 2004>..>Google Scholar
Brewster, B. D., Appleby, A. P., and Spinner, R. L. 1977. Control of Italian ryegrass and wild oats in winter wheat with HOE 23408. Agron. J. 69:911–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crooks, H. L. 2003. Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) Management in Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) with AE F130060 Plus AE F115008. Ph.D. dissertation. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 162 p.Google Scholar
Crooks, H. L. and York, A. C. 2002. Italian ryegrass control in wheat with AE F130060-methyl. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:22–23.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. 2002. Weed management in wheat. in 2001–2002 Wheat Production Guide. Publ. CSS0-01-17. Tifton, GA: University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service. Pp. 15–30.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1997. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:227–246.Google Scholar
Frans, R. E., Talbert, R., Marx, D., and Crowley, H. 1986. Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. in Camper, N. D., ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society. Pp. 29–46.Google Scholar
Green, J. M. and Ulrich, J. F. 1993. Response of corn (Zea mays) inbreds and hybrids to sulfonylurea herbicide. Weed Sci. 41:508–516.Google Scholar
Hand, S. S., Smith, T. L., Sanderson, J., Barr, G., Strachan, W. F., and Paulsgrove, M. 2002. AE F130060—a new selective herbicide for grass control in wheat. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:142–143.Google Scholar
Hayes, R. M., Mueller, T. C., and Brawley, P. B. 2002. Italian ryegrass control in wheat with AE F130060-methyl plus iodosulfuron-methyl (AE F130060) with safener mefenpyr-diethyl (AE F107892). Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:211–212.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2002. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Web page: http://www.weedscience.org. Accessed: February 10, 2004.Google Scholar
Kelley, J. P. and Peeper, T. F. 2002. Performance of new herbicides for winter annual grass control in winter wheat. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:22.Google Scholar
Liebl, R. A. and Worsham, A. D. 1987. Interference of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 35:819–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, M. S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75:153–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, R. L. and Menbere, H. 2002. Preemergence control of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 16:55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runyan, T. J., McNeil, W. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Differential tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:94–97.Google Scholar
Schroeder, J. and Banks, P. A. 1989. Soft red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) response to dicamba and dicamba plus 2,4-D. Weed Technol. 3:67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanger, C. E. and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) accessions tolerant to diclofop. Weed Sci. 37:350–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wax, L. M., Bernard, R. L., and Hayes, R. M. 1974. Response of soybean cultivars to bentazon, bromoxynil, chloroxuron, and 2,4-DB. Weed Sci. 22:35–41.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2000. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:247–274.Google Scholar
York, A., Weisz, R., Crooks, L., and Tarleton, B. 2000. Small grain weed control. in Small Grain Production Guide 2000–01. Publication AG-580. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Pp. 57–63.Google Scholar