Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:35:00.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Adjuvants and Desmedipham plus Phenmedipham on Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and Sugarbeet Response to Triflusulfuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert J. Starke ,
Karen A. Renner ,
Donald Penner  and
Frank C. Roggenbuck
Robert J. Starke
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Karen A. Renner
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Donald Penner
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Frank C. Roggenbuck
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse studies determined the influence of 14 adjuvants and desmedipham plus phenmedipham on velvetleaf control and sugarbeet injury by triflusulfuron. A second study determined if six adjuvants, or desmedipham plus phenmedipham, influenced 14C-triflusulfuron absorption by cotyledon or first true leaves of velvetleaf. Triflusulfuron applied twice at 4.4 g ai ha−1 (split application), alone or in combination with any adjuvant, did not reduce sugarbeet dry weight. Desmedipham plus phenmedipham applied twice at 370 g ai ha−1 (split application) reduced sugarbeet dry weight 3%. The addition of an adjuvant to desmedipham plus phenmedipham reduced sugarbeet dry weight 21 to 66% depending on the adjuvant. Sugarbeet injury was not greater when triflusulfuron was applied with any adjuvant (except urea ammonium nitrate (UAN)) plus desmedipham plus phenmedipham compared to desmedipham plus phenmedipham plus the respective adjuvant alone. Velvetleaf was most easily controlled in the cotyledon stage of growth. Velvetleaf control by triflusulfuron increased from 0 (no adjuvant) to 80% by the addition of Scoil or Sylgard 309 plus UAN. Cotyledonary leaves of velvetleaf absorbed 28% more 14C-triflusulfuron than first true leaves. Adjuvant increased 14C-triflusulfuron absorption by cotyledonary leaves from 15% (no adjuvant) to 48 to 90%. Desmedipham plus phenmedipham decreased velvetleaf control by triflusulfuron plus X-77 or X77 plus UAN compared to triflusulfuron plus the adjuvant alone. Velvetleaf control by triflusulfuron plus other adjuvants was not reduced by desmedipham plus phenmedipham. Absorption of 14C-triflusulfuron by cotyledonary and first true leaf velvetleaf decreased when desmedipham plus phenmedipham was added to triflusulfuron plus Dash, Dash plus UAN, X-77, X-77 plus UAN, and Sylgard 309 plus UAN.

Keywords

desmedipham, ethyl 3-[[(phenylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]carbamatephenmedipham, 3[(methoxycarbonyl)amino]phenyl (3-methylphenyl)carbamatetriflusulfuron, 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6-(2,2,2,-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-methylbenzoic acidvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medicus. ♯ ABUTHsugarbeets Beta vulgaris (L.) ‘Mono Hy E-4.’Absorptionadjuvantsulfonylureasurfactanturea-ammonium nitrateABUTH
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , September 1996 , pp. 489 - 495
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 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. Anderson, R. N., Menges, R. M., and Conn, J. S. 1985. Variability in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and reproduction beyond its current range in North America. Weed Sci. 33: 507–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Beckett, T. H. and Stoller, E. W. 1991. Effects of methylammonium and urea ammonium nitrate on foliar uptake of thifensulfuron in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 39: 333–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Dexter, A. G., Luecke, J. L., and Bredehoeft, M. W. 1992. Postemergence control of broadleaf weeds in sugarbeet. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 47: 125.Google Scholar
4. Dexter, A. G., Luecke, J. L., and Bredehoeft, M. W. 1993. Postemergence herbicide combinations in sugarbeet. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 48: 90.Google Scholar
5. Falk, R. H., Guggenheim, R., and Schulke, G. 1994. Surfactant-induced phytotoxicity. Weed Technol. 8: 519–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Fielding, R. J. and Stoller, E. W. 1990. Effects of additives on the efficacy, uptake, and translocation of the methyl ester of thifensulfuron. Weed Sci. 38: 172–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Fielding, R. J. and Stoller, E. W. 1990. Effects of additives on efficacy, uptake, and translocation of chlorimuron ethyl ester. Weed Technol. 4: 264–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hagood, E. S. Jr., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L. Jr., and Schreiber, M. M. 1980. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 28: 729–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hinz, J. R. and Owen, M.D.K. 1994. Effect of drought stress on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and bentazon efficacy. Weed Sci. 42: 76–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Levene, B. C. and Owen, M.D.K. 1994. Movement of 14C-bentazon with adjuvants into common cocklebur (Xanthium stumarium) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Technol. 8: 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Mitich, L. W. 1991. Intriguing world of weeds. Velvetleaf. Weed Technol. 5: 253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Reese, K. D. and Loux, M. M. 1992. Efficacy and timeliness of DPX-66037 for weed control in sugarbeets. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 47: 124.Google Scholar
13. Renner, K. A. and Crook, T. M. 1992. Postemergence weed control in sugarbeets with DPX-66037. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 47: 126.Google Scholar
14. Renner, K. A. and Powell, G. E. 1991. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) control in sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris). Weed Technol. 5: 97–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Roggenbuck, F. C., Burow, R. F., and Penner, D. 1994. Relationship of leaf position to herbicide absorption and organosilicone adjuvant efficacy. Weed Technol. 8: 582–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Prodoehl, K. A., Campbell, L. G., and Dexter, A. G. 1992. Phenmedipham + desmedipham effects on sugarbeet. Agron J. 84: 1002–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Schweizer, E. E. and Bridge, L. D. 1982. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference in sugarbeets. (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 30: 514–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Schmenk, R. E. Jr. 1994. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti(Medik.)) competitiveness in corn as affected by preemergence herbicides. , Michigan State University. pp. 64.Google Scholar
19. Spencer, N. R. 1984. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti(Malvaceae)), history and economic impact in the united states. Econ. Bot. 38: 407–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Starke, R. J. and Renner, K. A. 1993. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) response to triflusulfuron methyl. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 48: 88–89.Google Scholar
21. Warwick, S. I. and Black, L. D. 1990. The biology of Canadian weeds. (Abutilon theophrasti). Can. J. Plant Sci. 68: 1069–1085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Zhao, C. C. 1990. Factors affecting the activity of thifensulfuron. Weed Sci. 38: 553–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar