Rice producers in the United States need effective herbicides to control problematic weeds. Previous research has demonstrated that acetochlor can provide in-season weed control in rice; however, undesirable injury is common. Thus, trials were initiated in 2020 and 2021 to evaluate 1) rice cultivar tolerance to microencapsulated (ME) acetochlor with the use of a fenclorim seed treatment at 2.5 g ai kg−1 of seed; 2) a dose-response of a fenclorim seed treatment with ME acetochlor; and 3) rice tolerance to fenclorim and ME acetochlor under cool, wet conditions. For all trials, acetochlor was applied delayed-preemergence (4 to 7 d after planting). In the dose-response trials and in the presence of acetochlor, the fenclorim seed treatment rate of 2.5 g ai kg−1 reduced rice injury and increased rice plant heights and shoot numbers relative to acetochlor without fenclorim, and plant heights and shoot numbers were comparable to those of the nontreated control in all evaluations. In the cultivar screening, 14 of 16 cultivars exhibited <20% injury with acetochlor at 1,260 g ai ha−1 and fenclorim at 2.5 g ai kg−1 2 wk after emergence (WAE) at the Pine Tree Research Station (PTRS). At the Rice Research and Extension Center (RREC) 2 and 4 WAE and at PTRS 4 WAE, all cultivars exhibited <20% injury with acetochlor and fenclorim. The fenclorim seed treatment in the presence of acetochlor provided comparable rice plant height, shoot numbers, groundcover, and rough rice yield to that of the nontreated control. Under cool, wet conditions, rice injury without fenclorim ranged from 15% to 60% with acetochlor at 1,050 g ai ha−1, whereas injury from acetochlor with the fenclorim seed treatment ranged from 0% to 20%. Based on the results of these experiments, the fenclorim seed treatment appears to safen an assortment of rice cultivars from injury caused by ME acetochlor.

Many problematic weeds have evolved resistance to herbicides in mid-southern U.S. rice fields. With the lack of new effective herbicides, rice producers seek alternatives that are currently not labeled for rice production. Inhibitors of very-long chain fatty acid elongase (VLCFA) are currently not labeled for use with U.S. rice crops but are labeled for use in other U.S. row cropping systems and rice production in Asia. Previous research has demonstrated the utility of VLCFA inhibitors for weed control in rice; however, these herbicides induce variable amounts of injury to the crop when applied early in the growing season. Experiments were initiated in 2020 and 2021 at the Rice Research and Extension Center near Stuttgart, AR, to evaluate rice tolerance and weed control with acetochlor and seed treatment with a herbicide safener, fenclorim. Three rates of a microencapsulated formulation of acetochlor (630, 1,260, and 1,890 g ai ha−1), four application timings (preemergence, PRE; delayed-preemergence, DPRE; spiking; and 1-leaf), and without or with the fenclorim seed treatment (2.5 g kg−1 of seed) were used to evaluate rice tolerance, weedy rice control, and barnyardgrass control. Acetochlor applied DPRE at 1,260 g ai ha−1 provided better weedy rice and barnyardgrass control than applications at the 1-leaf stage at the same rate. Acetochlor rates of 1,260 and 1,890 g ai ha−1 reduced barnyardgrass and weedy rice densities by more greater than the 630 g ai ha−1 rate. The fenclorim seed treatment did not influence weedy rice or barnyardgrass control but did reduce injury for DPRE acetochlor applications. Based on these results, acetochlor can be safely applied to rice DPRE (≤19% injury) at 1,260 g ai ha−1 when the seed is treated with fenclorim, leading to ≥88% barnyardgrass and ≥45% weedy rice control 28 d after treatment.

Studies on genetically modified (GM) feedstuffs for poultry (and other livestock species) have not added any substance to public concerns in Europe about their safety for human or bird health. The compositions of maize lines engineered for insect resistance (Bt-maize) or herbicide tolerance (glyphosate) and herbicidetolerant soybean have all proved to be essentially indistinguishable from their conventional counterparts. Consequently, and not surprisingly, comparative feeding studies with broilers and layers in which conventional maize (50 to 78%) or soybeans (27%) were replaced in feeds by transgenic varieties, also have failed to show differences of any significance in production parameters. These data indicate that feeding studies with target livestock species contribute very little to the safety assessment of crops engineered for input traits that have little or no detectable effect on chemical composition. However, comparative growth studies made with broiler chicks, particularly sensitive to any change in nutrient supply or the presence of toxic elements in their feed, can be used to screen for any unintended adverse consequence of the recombinant event not detected by compositional analysis. This does, however, depend on whether the GM plant can be matched to a parental line or another suitable control and its suitability for inclusion in broiler diets. The discovery that DNA fragments from the digestive tract can be found in the tissues of animals evoked interest in the fate of ingested transgenes. Plant DNA derived from feed has been detected in the muscle, liver, spleen and kidneys of broilers and layers, although not in eggs. However, no fragments of transgenic DNA or its expressed protein have been found to date in poultry meat or eggs or in any other animal tissues examined.