Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:30:15.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of AC 263,222 for Sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) Control in Soybean (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Marshall B. Wixson  and
David R. Shaw
Marshall B. Wixson
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. Weed Sci., Miss. State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
David R. Shaw
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. Weed Sci., Miss. State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were established in 1989 and 1990 to determine the effects of application rate and timing on sicklepod control and soybean tolerance to POST applications of AC 263,222 and chlorimuron. When applied to 3-, 6-, or 10-leaf sicklepod, 35 g ai ha-1 or more AC 263,222 controlled more than 85% of sicklepod early in the season, and season-long when applied to 3- or 6-leaf sicklepod. At all timings, 70 g ha-1 or more AC 263,222 resulted in better control than a PRE application of 420 g ai ha-1 metribuzin followed by 9 g ai ha-1 chlorimuron applied POST. At 35 g ha-1 or more AC 263,222, application timing did not affect sicklepod control. However, control was reduced with 18 g ha-1 when applications were delayed from 3- or 6-leaf to 10-leaf sicklepod. At the 10-leaf sicklepod growth stage, a PRE application of imazaquin increased both sicklepod control and soybean yield with 35 g ha-1 AC 263,222 as compared with AC 263,222 applied alone. Soybean injury and height reductions with AC 263,222 at 35 g ha-1 and above were greater than with chlorimuron; however, increased soybean injury or height reduction was not reflected in pod numbers or yield.

Keywords

AC 263,222, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-methyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidchlorimuron, 2-[[[[4-chloro-6-methoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidimazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acidmetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onesicklepod, Cassia obtusifolia L. ♯ CASOBsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Terra-Vig 515’ImidazolinoneCASOB
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 434 - 438
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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. Ahmadi, M. S., Haderlie, L. C., and Wicks, G. A. 1980. Effect of growth stage and water stress on barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control and glyphosate absorption and translocation. Weed Sci. 28:277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bridges, D. C., and Walker, R. H. 1985. Influence of weed management and cropping systems on sicklepod seed in soil. Weed Sci. 33: 800–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1980. Competition of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 28:258–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Doty, C. H., and Sweet, R. D. 1972. Yellow nutsedge control as influenced by time of treatment. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 26: 137–145.Google Scholar
5. Edmund, R. M. Jr., and York, A. C. 1987. Factors affecting postemergence control of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) with imazaquin and DPX-F6025: spray volume, growth stage, and soil applied alachlor and vernolate. Weed Sci. 35:216–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Elmore, C. D. 1989. Weed survey–southern states. Res. Rep. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:408.Google Scholar
7. Fehr, W. R., Caviness, C. E., Burmood, D. T., and Pennington, J. D. 1971. Stage of development descriptions for soybeans, Glycine max (L.) Merr. Crop Sci. 11:25–26.Google Scholar
8. Glaze, N. C., and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 1984. Competition effects of sicklepod on lima beans. Weed Sci. 32:1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hauser, W. E., Buchanan, G. A., Nichols, R. L., and Patterson, R. M. 1982. Effects of Florida beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum) and sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) on peanut (Arachis hypogaea) yield. Weed Sci. 30:602–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Shaw, D. R. 1987. Sicklepod control in soybeans with Canopy, Scepter, and Classic. Miss. Agric. For. Exp. Stn. Res. Rep. Vol. 12, No. 20.Google Scholar
11. Shaw, D. R., Smith, C. A., Coats, G. E., Riley, D. G., Mack, R. A., Minton, B. W., Rainero, H. P., and Wesley, R. A. Jr. 1988. Weed control investigations in non-delta soybeans – 1987. Miss. Agric. For. Exp. Stn. Info. Bull. 115, 144 p.Google Scholar
12. Shaw, D. R., and Coats, G. E. 1988. Herbicide and cultivation for sicklepod, Cassia obtusifolia, control in soybeans, Glycine max . Weed Technol. 2:187–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Sherman, M. E., Thompson, L. Jr., and Wilkinson, R. E. 1983. Sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) management in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 31:622–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Teem, D. W., Hoveland, C. S., and Buchanan, G. A. 1980. Sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and coffee senna (Cassia occidentalis): geographic distributions, germination, and emergence. Weed Sci. 28:68–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Thurlow, D. L., and Buchanan, G. A. 1972. Competition of sicklepod with soybeans. Weed Sci. 20:379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Willard, T. S., Griffin, J. L., Reynolds, D. B., Vidrine, P. R., and Habetz, R. J. 1990. Evaluation of AC 263,222 in soybeans in Louisiana. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:29.Google Scholar
17. Wixson, M. B., and Shaw, D. R. 1989. Weed control and soybean tolerance with AC 263,222. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:60.Google Scholar