Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:27:34.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Persistence of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Herbicides and Injury to Replacement Soybeans (Glycine max) after Stand Failure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Tim Sharp ,
Robert Frans  and
Ronald Talbert
Tim Sharp
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Altheimer Lab., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Robert Frans
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Altheimer Lab., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Ronald Talbert
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Altheimer Lab., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] are often the replacement crop when cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is abandoned because of stand failure in the southern United States. Injury from cotton herbicides may be reduced if the soybean planting is delayed more than 4 weeks after cotton planting or if the original herbicide-treated area is fully tilled and a new seedbed formed. Planting delay intervals were compared with five cotton preemergence herbicides on Calloway silt loam at one location. Seedbed-preparation methods were included in a similar experiment at two locations on Sharkey silty clay. Herbicides compared were fluometuron [1,1-dimethyl-3-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)urea], norflurazon [4-chloro-5-(methylamino)-2-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)-3(2H)-pyridazinone], cyanazine {2-[[4-chloro-6-(ethylamino)-s-triazin-2-yl] amino]-2-methylpropionitrile}, perfluidone {1,1,1-trifluoro-N-[2-methyl-4-phenylsulfonyl)phenyl] methanesulfonamide}, fluridone {1-methyl-3-phenyl-5-[3-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4(1H)-pyridinone}, and diuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea]. Seedbeds compared were no-till and conventional (fully tilled). Soybean planting delays after cotton planting were 20, 29, and 56 days (first year), and 15 and 29 or 15 and 30 days (second year). We found in the 2-yr studies that fluridone severely damaged soybeans both years. Fluometuron and diuron also caused damage the second year when we experienced wet, cool conditions in the spring. Most injury occurred on the clay, with yield reductions occurring even after the 30-day delay. Norflurazon was most injurious at this location. The no-tillage planting method resulted in the least herbicide injury on the silt loam and the conventional tillage method was better on the clay. Detailed studies with fluometuron under incubation conditions showed that degradation was inhibited most by low temperatures and high soil moisture.

Keywords

Glycine maxherbicide degradationno-tillageyieldsfluometuron
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , January 1982 , pp. 109 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 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. Bryant, T. A. and Andrews, H. 1967. Disappearance of diuron, norea, 'linuron, trifluralin, diphenamid, DCPA, and prometryn from the soil. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 20:395–404.Google Scholar
2. Burnside, O. C., Schmidt, E. L., and Behrens, R. 1961. Dissipation of simazine from the soil. Weeds 9:477–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Dobey, H. D. and Freeman, J. F. 1965. Leaching of diuron and diphenamid in soils. Weeds 13:360–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Erickson, L. C. 1964. The movement and phytotoxicity of monuron in Palouse silt loam soil. Weeds 12:100–102.Google Scholar
5. Eshel, Y. 1969. Tolerance of cotton to diuron, fluometuron, norea, and prometryn. Weed Sci. 17:492–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Frans, R. E. 1971. Influence of cotton preemergence herbicides on growth of soybeans. Ark. Farm Res. 20(3):2.Google Scholar
7. Jackson, A. W., Jeffery, L. S., and McCutchen, T. 1974. Tolerance of soybeans and grain sorghum to fluometuron residues. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 27:333.Google Scholar
8. Murray, D. S., Santelmann, P. W., and Davidson, J. M. 1974. Influence of soil properties on soil persistence of dipropetryn. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 27:339.Google Scholar
9. Nishimoto, R K., Appleby, A. P., and Furtick, W. R. 1969. Plant response to herbicide placement in soils. Weed Sci. 17:474–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Savage, K. E. 1972. Persistence of atrazine, butylate, fluometuron, linuron and nitralin in 15 southern soils. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 25:426.Google Scholar
11. Sharp, T. C., Frans, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1978. Timing of soybean planting following cotton stand failure. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 31:61.Google Scholar
12. Smith, A. L., Wilson, C., and Ward, H. S. 1953. Cold injury to cotton seedlings in Alabama in 1952. Plant Dis. Rep. 37:179.Google Scholar
13. Talbert, R. E. 1967. The relative selectivity of some soil-applied herbicides in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 20:375–379.Google Scholar
14. Upchurch, R. P. and Pierce, W. C. 1957. The leaching of monuron from Lakeland sand soil. Part I: The effect of amount, intensity, and frequency of simulated rainfall. Weeds 5:321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Upchurch, R. P. and Pierce, W. C. 1958. The leaching of monuron from Lakeland sand soil. Part II: The effect of soil temperature, organic matter, soil moisture, and amount of herbicide. Weeds 6:24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Weldon, L. W. and Timmons, F. L. 1961. Penetration and persistence of diuron in soil. Weeds 9:195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar