Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:24:54.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chlorsulfuron Effects on Shoot Growth and Root Buds of Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

William W. Donald
William W. Donald*
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agr., Metabolism and Radiation Res. Lab., Fargo, ND 58105
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effect of 67 g ai/ha chlorsulfuron {2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-amino] carbonyl] benzenesulfonamide} on Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. ♯ CIRAR] root bud growth was examined in a series of greenhouse trials in which potted plants were treated with foliar sprays. Injury to root buds was assayed by determining their ability to form secondary shoots. Added surfactant, 0.2% (v/v) oxysorbic [oxysorbic (20 POE) polyethylene sorbitan monooleate], did not enhance chlorsulfuron-induced inhibition of parent shoot growth, but it increased root bud injury from foliarly applied chlorsulfuron. Cuttings taken from controls formed more secondary shoots than did chlorsulfuron-treated plants 2 weeks following spraying. However, root fresh weight and final secondary shoot growth from cut roots were unchanged 3 weeks after chlorsulfuron treatment compared to the time of spraying. Foliar treatment or a combination of foliar and soil treatment inhibited root fresh weight accumulation and secondary shoot growth equally 1 month following treatment relative to harvest controls. Soil treatment alone did not reduce either root fresh weight gains or secondary shoot outgrowth from root buds. Foliar treatment of vegetative Canada thistle with chlorsulfuron inhibited subsequent secondary shoot outgrowth from root buds more than did treatment at flowering.

Keywords

Herbicideperennial weedroot budsCIRAR
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 42 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 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. Alley, H. P. 1981. Mechanical, cultural, and chemical control of Canada thistle in small grains and pastures. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 36:176–179.Google Scholar
2. Alley, H. P., Humburg, N. E., and Vore, R. E. 1982. Comparison of chlorsulfuron and Dowco 290 for control of Canada thistle in smooth bromegrass pasture. Res. Progr. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. p. 2.Google Scholar
3. Blankendaal, M., Hodgson, R. H., Davis, D. G., Hoerauf, R. A., and Shimabukuro, R. H. 1972. Growing plants without soil for experimental use. USDA Misc. Publ. 1251. 17 pp.Google Scholar
4. Brewster, B. D., Appleby, A. P., and Boren, P. K. 1981. Bioassay of DPX 4189 soil residues in western Oregon. Res. Progr. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. pp. 298–299.Google Scholar
5. Chew, V. 1977. Comparisons among treatment means in an analysis of variance. U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Ser./H/6. 64 pp.Google Scholar
6. Donald, W. W. 1983. Chlorsulfuron effects on Canada thistle root bud growth. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. p. 76.Google Scholar
7. Henson, M. A. and Zimdahl, R. L. 1982. The effect of chlorsulfuron on winter wheat yield and Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.] control. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 35:118.Google Scholar
8. Hodgson, R. H., ed. 1982. Adjuvants for Herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL. 144 pp.Google Scholar
9. Kleinbaum, D. G. and Kuper, L. L. 1978. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods. Durbury Press, North Scituate, MA. 556 pp.Google Scholar
10. Levitt, G., Ploeg, H. L., Weigel, R. C. Jr., and Fitzgerald, D. J. 1981. 2-ehloro-N-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)aminocarbonyl)benenesulfonamide, a new herbicide. J. Agric. Food Chem. 29:416–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Marriage, P. B. 1981. Response of Canada thistle to herbicides. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 36:162–167.Google Scholar
12. Messersmith, C. G. and Lym, R. G. 1980. Herbicide and plant growth regulator screening trials on leafy spurge. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:60–61.Google Scholar
13. Messersmith, C. G. and Lym, R. G. 1980. Herbicide evaluation for Canada thistle and prickly lettuce control. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:63.Google Scholar
14. Moore, R. G. and Frankton, C. 1974. The Thistles of Canada. Canada Dep. Agric. Monograph 10. 112 pp.Google Scholar
15. Norris, R. F., Lardelli, R. A., and Ayres, D. 1981. Efficacy and carryover of herbicides for winter annual weed control in wheat. Res. Progr. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. p. 287.Google Scholar
16. Palm, H. L., Riggleman, J. D., and Allison, D. A. 1980. Worldwide review of the new cereal herbicide – DPX 4189. Proc. 1980 Br. Crop Protection Conf. – Weeds, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
17. Ray, A. A. 1982. SAS User's Guide: Basics. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC. 923 pp.Google Scholar
18. Ray, T. B. 1980. Studies on the mode of action of DPX 4189. Proc. 1980 Br. Crop Protection Conf.–Weeds, pp. 7–14.Google Scholar
19. Ray, T. B. 1982. The mode of action of chlorsulfuron: A new herbicide for cereals. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 17:10–17.Google Scholar
20. Sampson, T. C., Thill, D. C., and Callihan, R. H. 1982. Effect of chlorsulfuron soil persistence on biomass production of five crops. Res. Progr. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. pp. 229–230.Google Scholar
21. Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. 1969. Biometry. W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, CA. 776 pp.Google Scholar
22. Sweetser, P. B., Schow, G. S., and Hutchison, J. M. 1982. Metabolism of chlorsulfuron by plants: biological basis for selectivity of a new herbicide for cereals. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 17:18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar