Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:39:56.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Control from Herbicide Combinations with Glyphosate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

David R. Shaw  and
James C. Arnold
David R. Shaw*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762
James C. Arnold
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse studies were initiated to evaluate glyphosate alone and tank-mixed with acifluorfen, CGA 277476, chlorimuron, cloransulam-methyl, fomesafen, imazaquin, or pyrithiobac on seedling johnsongrass, broadleaf signalgrass, pitted morningglory, and hemp sesbania. Johnsongrass and broadleaf signalgrass control by glyphosate was not affected by the selective herbicides applied in mixtures. Pitted morningglory control by glyphosate ranged from 0% with 280 g ai/ha to 67% with 840 g/ha. There was an additive effect when selective herbicides were added to 280 g/ha glyphosate 2 wk after treatment (WAT). When acifluorfen was added to 560 g/ha glyphosate, pitted morningglory control 2 WAT increased to 100% compared with 55% with glyphosate alone. Similarly, the addition of fomesafen or acifluorfen to 840 g/ha glyphosate controlled pitted morningglory 2 WAT by 90 and 98%, respectively, compared with 67% with glyphosate alone. Only tank mixtures of acifluorfen, CGA 277476, or fomesafen, and 840 g/ha glyphosate reduced fresh weight compared with glyphosate alone 4 WAT. Acifluorfen, CGA 277476, and fomesafen controlled pitted morningglory by 85 to 100% when added to 1,120 g/ha glyphosate. Both acifluorfen and fomesafen effectively controlled hemp sesbania without the addition of glyphosate 2 WAT. Chlorimuron and pyrithiobac added to 1,120 g/ha glyphosate increased hemp sesbania control to 88 and 99%, respectively, compared with 45% with glyphosate alone 2 WAT. CGA 277476, cloransulam-methyl, imazaquin, and pyrithiobac were antagonistic to hemp sesbania fresh weight reduction when compared with the expected response, but fresh weights were still reduced more than with the same rate of glyphosate alone.

Keywords

AcifluorfenCGA-277476, 2-[[[[(4,6-dimethyl-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-oxetanyl esterchlorimuroncloransulam-methylfomesafenglyphosateimazaquinpyrithiobacbroadleaf signalgrass, Brachiaria platyphylla (Griseb.) Nash. #3 ECHCGhemp sesbania, Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex. A. W. Hill # SEBEXjohnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. # SORHApitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAAdditive effects, herbicide antagonism, tank mixturesALS, acetolactate synthaseWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 2002 , pp. 1 - 6
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

Bloodworth, K. M., Reynolds, D. B., Snipes, C. E., Shaw, D. R., Buehring, N. W., Serviss, B. E., and Elkins, W. C. 1997. Weed control programs in Roundup Ready cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:43.Google Scholar
Bruff, S. A. and Shaw, D. R. 1992. Tank-mix combinations for weed control in stale seedbed soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 6: 45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Werling, W. L. 1989. Weed control from imazaquin and metolachlor in no-till soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 37: 392–399.Google Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15: 20–22.Google Scholar
Flint, J. L. and Barrett, M. 1989a. Antagonism of glyphosate toxicity to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) by 2,4-D or dicamba. Weed Sci. 37: 700–705.Google Scholar
Flint, J. L. and Barrett, M. 1989b. Interactions of glyphosate with 2,4-D or dicamba on field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Weed Sci. 37: 12–18.Google Scholar
Hydrick, D. E. and Shaw, D. R. 1994. Effects of tank-mix combinations of non-selective foliar and selective soil-applied herbicides on three weed species. Weed Technol. 8: 129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, D. L., York, A. C., Griffin, J. L., Clay, P. A., Vidrine, P. R., and Reynolds, D. B. 1997. Influence of application variables on efficacy of glyphosate. Weed Technol. 11: 354–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapusta, G. R., Krausz, R. F., and Matthews, J. L. 1994. Soybean tolerance and summer annual weed control with glufosinate and glyphosate in resistant soybeans. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Control Conf. 49:120.Google Scholar
LaMastus, F. E., Shaw, D. R., and Smith, M. C. 1998. Influence of application timing and rate on weed control in Roundup-Ready soybean. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:8.Google Scholar
Lich, J. M., Renner, K. A., and Penner, D. 1997. Interaction of glyphosate with postemergence soybean (Glycine max) herbicides. Weed Sci. 45: 12–21.Google Scholar
Lolas, P. C. and Coble, H. D. 1980. Translocation of 14C-glyphosate in johnsongrass [Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.] as affected by growth stage and rhizome length. Weed Res. 20: 267–270.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Anderson, J. M. 1981. The technical and economic effects of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 296: 245–252.Google Scholar
Miller, D. K. and Griffin, J. L. 1994. Comparison of herbicide programs and cultivation of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 8: 77–82.Google Scholar
Moshier, L. J. 1980. Response of honeyvine milkweed (Ampelamus albidus) to herbicide applications. Weed Sci. 28: 722–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Effect of glyphosate on pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) interference in drilled Roundup-Ready soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:201.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N. 1998. Weed management in no-till Roundup Ready soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:270.Google Scholar
Rhodes, G. N., Mueller, T. C., and Hayes, R. M. 1998. Performance of Roundup Ready corn weed control systems in Tennessee. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:20.Google Scholar
Smith, M. C., Shaw, D. R., and Brommer, C. L. 1997. Weed control with sequential applications in Roundup Ready soybean. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:39.Google Scholar
Starke, R. J. and Oliver, L. R. 1996. Postemergence weed control with glyphosate in combination with chlorimuron, fomesafen, and sulfentrazone. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:55.Google Scholar
Stougaard, R. N., Kapusta, G., and Roskamp, G. 1984. Early preplant applications for no-till soybean (Glycine max) weed control. Weed Sci. 32: 293–298.Google Scholar
Tingle, C. H., Chandler, J. M., and Prostko, E. P. 1998. Herbicide combinations for residual control in Roundup Ready corn. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51: 21–22.Google Scholar
Viator, B. J., Griffin, J. L., Clay, P. A., and Ellis, J. M. 1998. Johnsongrass control using Roundup Ready technology in fallowed sugarcane fields. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51: 6–7.Google Scholar
Vidrine, P. R., Griffin, J. L., Jordan, D. L., and Miller, D. K. 1997. Postemergence weed control in soybeans utilizing glyphosate and chlorimuron. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:175.Google Scholar
Wilson, H., Hines, T. E., Bellinder, R. R., and Grande, J. A. 1985. Comparisons of HOE-39866, SC-0224, paraquat, and glyphosate in no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 33: 531–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. S. and Worsham, A. D. 1988. Combinations of non-selective herbicides for difficult to control weeds in no-till corn (Zea mays) and soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 36: 648–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar