Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bvgqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T07:17:02.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soybean [Glycine max (L.)] Response to Lactofen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Rex A. Wichert  and
Ronald E. Talbert
Rex A. Wichert
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Ronald E. Talbert
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1987 and 1988 to evaluate the vegetative response of soybeans to early postemergence applications of lactofen and to measure crop recovery. Soybean injury 4 d after treatment (DAT) averaged 29 and 34% with 0.22 and 0.44 kg ai ha−1 of lactofen, respectively. Severity of leaf injury depended on leaf size at the time of lactofen application. Leaf area of soybean trifoliates one through three were reduced 30 to 45% at 12 DAT but recovered by 26 DAT. Later emerging trifoliates were not affected. Fresh weights of lactofen-treated soybeans were less than those of untreated plants 4, 8, and 16 DAT, and dry weights were less at 16 and 26 DAT. Lactofen reduced stomatal conductance of expanded leaves but had no effect on unexpanded leaves. Soybean yields did not differ with lactofen treatment.

Keywords

Lactofen, (±)-2-ethoxy-1-methyl-2-oxoethyl 5-[2-chloro-4- (trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoatesoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr., ‘Forrest’Diphenyletherstomatal conductancephytotoxicityphysiology

Information

Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 23 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Bennett, J. M., Sinclair, T. R., Muchow, R. C., and Costello, S. R. 1987. Dependence of stomatal conductance on leaf water potential, turgor potential, and relative water content in field-grown soybean and maize. Crop Sci. 27:984–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Dornhoff, G. M. and Shibles, R. 1976. Leaf morphology and anatomy in relation to CO2 exchange rate of soybean leaves. Crop Sci. 16:377–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Fehr, W. R. and Caviness, C. E. 1979. Pages 6–7 in Stages of soybean development. Iowa Agric. Home Econ. Exp. Stn. Coop. Ext. Serv. Spec. Rep. 80. ES Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011.Google Scholar
4. Field, C. B. 1987. Leaf age effects on stomatal conductance. Pages 367–385 in Zeiger, E., Farquhar, C. D., and Cowan, I. R., eds. Stomatal Function. Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
5. Gorske, S. F. and Hopen, H. J. 1978. Effects of two diphenylether herbicides on common purslane (Portulaca oleracea). Weed Sci. 26:585–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Higgins, J. M., Whitwell, T., Murdock, E. C., and Toler, J. E. 1988. Recovery of pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) and ivyleaf morningglory (Ipomoea hederacea) following applications of acifluorfen, fomesafen, and lactofen. Weed Sci. 36:345–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Kapusta, G., Jackson, L. A., and Mason, D. S. 1986. Yield responses of weed-free soybeans (Glycine max) to injury from postemergence broadleaf herbicides. Weed Sci. 34:304–307.Google Scholar
8. Krieg, D. R. and Hutmacher, R. B. 1986. Photosynthetic rate control in sorghum: Stomatal and nonstomatal factors. Crop. Sci. 26:112–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Kunert, K. J., Sandmann, G., and Boger, P. 1987. Modes of action of diphenyl ethers. Pages 35–55 in Foy, C. L., ed. Reviews of Weed Science. Imperial Printing Co. Google Scholar
10. Lee, S. D. and Oliver, L. R. 1982. Efficacy of acifluorfen on broadleaf weeds. Times and methods for application. Weed Sci. 30:520–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Ondok, J. P. 1969. Growth analysis applied to the estimation of gross assimilation and respiration rate. Photosynthetica 4:214–222.Google Scholar
12. Oosterhuis, D. M. and Walker, S. 1987. Stomatal resistance measurements as an indicator of water deficit stress in wheat and soybeans. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 4:113–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Setter, T. L. and Brun, W. A. 1980. Stomatal closure and photosynthetic inhibition in soybean leaves induced by petiole girdling and pod removal. Plant Physiol. 65:884–887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Taylor, R. R. 1985. Today's herbicide: Cobra postemergence herbicide shows promise for producers and PPG. Weeds Today 16(4):3.Google Scholar
15. Weiland, R. T., Stutte, C. A., and Talbert, R. E. 1979. Foliar nitrogen loss and CO2 equilibrium as influenced by three soybean (Glycine max) postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 27:545–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Wichert, R. A., Bozsa, R., Talbert, R. E., and Oliver, L. R. 1992. Temperature and relative humidity effects on diphenylether herbicides. Weed Technol. 6:19–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Wong, S. C., Cowan, I. R., and Farquhar, G. D. 1979. Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature 282:424–426.Google Scholar