Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:31:14.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Responses of Six Morningglory (Ipomoea) Species to Bentazon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

M. R. McClelland
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
L. R. Oliver
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
W. D. Mathis
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
R. E. Frans
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701

Abstract

Field and greenhouse tests were conducted from 1974 to 1976 to determine the most effective rate and number of applications of bentazon [3-isopropyl-1H-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-(4)3H-one 2,2-dioxide] for the control of six morningglory (Ipomoea) species. Growth chamber studies were conducted to determine photosynthesisrespiration equilibrium points (PRE-points) on two morningglory species. These units were used to measure the duration of the phytotoxic effect of bentazon on these morningglories from both single and repeat applications. Declining PRE-points indicated declining bentazon toxic activity within the plant. A treatment of two applications of bentazon at 0.84 kg/ha applied at a 4-day interval beginning with 2-week-old morningglory plants was optimal for maintaining a high PRE-point level. In field and greenhouse studies the greatest toxicity, regardless of morningglory species, occurred with bentazon at 0.84 or 1.12 kg/ha applied at 14 days and repeated at 28 days after emergence and 0.56 kg/ha applied three times with the first application made 14 days after emergence. Differences in susceptibility of the individual species indicated the importance of proper species identification before bentazon applications.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 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. Bulley, N. R. and Tregunna, E. B. 1970. Photosynthesis and photorespiration rates at the CO2 compensation point. Can. J. Bot. 48:12711276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Crowley, R. H. and Murray, D. S. 1977. Relationship of weed size and susceptibility to postemergence applied herbicides. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 25.Google Scholar
3. Frans, R. E. 1972. Broadleaf control in soybeans with topically applied herbicides. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 25:154.Google Scholar
4. Heichel, G. H. and Musgrave, R. B. 1969. Relation of CO2 compensation concentration to apparent photosynthesis in maize. Plant Physiol. 44:17241728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Mahoney, M. D. and Penner, D. 1975. The basis for bentazon selectivity in navy bean, cocklebur, and black nightshade. Weed Sci. 23:272276.Google Scholar
6. Mahoney, M. D. and Penner, D. 1975. Bentazon translocation and metabolism in soybean and navy bean. Weed Sci. 23:265275.Google Scholar
7. Mathis, W. D. and Oliver, L. R. 1975. Effects of bentazon on different weed species at various stages of growth. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 28:35.Google Scholar
8. McClelland, M. R., Frans, R. E., and Oliver, L. R. 1976. The effect of repeated sprayings with bentazon on selected weed species. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 29:106.Google Scholar
9. Mine, A. and Matsunaka, S. 1975. Mode of action of bentazon: effect on photosynthesis. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 5:444450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Mine, A., Miyakodo, M., and Matsunaka, S. 1975. The mechanism of bentazon selectivity. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 5:566574.Google Scholar
11. Potter, J. R. and Wergen, W. P. 1975. The role of light in bentazon toxicity to cocklebur: physiology and ultrastructure. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 5:458470.Google Scholar
12. Stutte, C. A. 1974. Evaluation of chemicals for yield-enhancing properties on soybeans. Pages 923927 in Bieleski, R. L., Ferguson, A. R., and Cresswell, M. M., eds. Bull. 12. Royal Society of New Zealand, Wellington.Google Scholar
13. Stutte, C. A., Rudolph, R. D. and May, K. J. 1978. Evaluation of plant response to enviromental conditions using photosynthesisrespiration CO2 equilibrium (PRE-point). Agron. J. (in review).Google Scholar
14. Thompson, J. T. and Daniel, J. W. 1974. Effectiveness of Basagran with air and ground applicators. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 27:7476.Google Scholar
15. Wuerzer, B., Thompson, J., and Daniel, J. W. 1972. Application rate and timing of BAS-3512-H in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 25:108.Google Scholar