Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T05:22:39.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rice (Oryza sativa) Tolerance to Fenoxaprop

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles E. Snipes  and
Joe E. Street
Charles E. Snipes
Affiliation:
Mississippi Agric. and For. Exp. Stn., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Joe E. Street
Affiliation:
Delta Branch, Mississippi Agric. and For. Exp. Stn., Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted for 3 yr to evaluate the effects of the ethyl ester of fenoxaprop {(±)-2-[4-[(6-chloro-2-benzoxazolyl)oxy] phenoxy] propanoic acid} on rice (Oryza sativa L. 'Starbonnet′) applied at 112 and 168 g ai/ha or as two applications of 112 g ai/ha applied 10 to 14 days apart. Fenoxaprop did not adversely affect grain yield, panicle weight, seed weight, or seed germination when applied before the booting stage of both sprinkler-irrigated and flooded rice. Rice height was sometimes reduced by treatment at earlier growth stages, but yields were not affected. With the exception of applications at early jointing (internode elongation = 6 mm) in 1983, milling yield was not adversely affected by fenoxaprop applications made prior to booting of both sprinkler-irrigated and flood-culture rice. Applications during heading adversely affected most yield parameters.

Keywords

Grain yieldsmilling yieldcrop injurygermination
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , May 1987 , pp. 401 - 406
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 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. Adair, R. C., Bollich, C. N., Bowman, D. H., Jodon, N. E., Johnston, T. H., Webb, B. D., and Atkins, J. G. 1973. Rice breeding and testing methods in the United States. Pages 27–75 in Rice in the United States: Varieties and Production. Agric. Handb. No. 289. U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv. Google Scholar
2. Anderson, R. N. 1976. Response of monocotyledons to HOE 22870 and HOE 23408. Weed Sci. 24:266–269.Google Scholar
3. Boldt, P. F. and Putnam, A. R. 1980. Selectivity mechanisms for foliar application of diclofop-methyl. I. Retention, absorption and volatility. Weed Sci. 28:474–477.Google Scholar
4. Boldt, P. F. and Putnam, A. R. 1981. Selectivity mechanisms for foliar application of diclofop-methyl. II. Metabolism. Weed Sci. 29:237–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Brewster, B. D., Appleby, A. P., and Spinney, R. L. 1977. Control of Italian ryegrass and wild oats in winter wheat with HOE 23408. Agron. J. 69:911–913.Google Scholar
6. Crawford, S. H. and Carroll, K. R. 1985. Rice weed control studies with HOE-33171. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 38:37.Google Scholar
7. Derr, J. F., Monaco, T. J., and Sheets, T. J. 1985. Response of three grass species to fluazifop. Weed Sci. 33:693–697.Google Scholar
8. Fedtke, C. and Schmidt, R. R. 1977. Chlorfenprop-methyl: Its hydrolysis in vivo and in vitro and a new principle for selective herbicidal action. Weed Res. 17:233–239.Google Scholar
9. Friesen, H. A., O'Sullivan, P. A., and Vanden Born, W. H. 1976. HOE 23408, a new selective herbicide for wild oats and green foxtail in wheat and barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 56:567–578.Google Scholar
10. Hendley, P., Dicks, J. W., Monaco, T. J., Slyfield, S. M., Tummon, O. J., and Barrett, J. C. 1985. Translocation and metabolism of pyridinyloxyphenoxypropionate herbicides in rhizomatous quackgrass (Agropyron repens). Weed Sci. 33:11–24.Google Scholar
11. Hill, B. D., Stobbe, E. H., and Jones, B. L. 1978. Hydrolysis of the herbicide benzoylprop-ethyl by wild oat esterase. Weed Res. 18:149–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Hosaka, H., Inaba, H., and Ishikawa, H. 1984. Response of monocotyledons to BAS 9052 OH. Weed Sci. 32:28–32.Google Scholar
13. Jeffcoat, B. and Harries, W. N. 1973. Selectivity and mode of action of ethyl ($pM)-2-(N-benzoyl-3,4-dichloroanilino)propionate in the control of Avena fatua in cereals. Pestic. Sci. 4:891–899.Google Scholar
14. Khodayari, K. and Smith, R. J. 1985. Performance of fenoxapropethyl and selected herbicides for weed control in dry-seeded rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 38:33.Google Scholar
15. Morrison, I. N. and Maurice, D. C. 1984. The relative response of two foxtail (Setaria) species to diclofop. Weed Sci. 32:686–690.Google Scholar
16. Roberts, T. R. 1977. The metabolism of the herbicide flampropisopropyl in barley. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 7:378–390.Google Scholar
17. Shimabukuro, R. H., Walsh, W. C., and Hoeranf, R. A. 1979. Metabolism and selectivity of diclofop-methyl in wild oat and wheat. J. Agric. Food Chem. 27:615–623.Google Scholar
18. Snipes, C. E., Street, J. E., and Whatley, L. L. 1984. Rice tolerance to fenoxaprop-ethyl. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 37:40.Google Scholar
19. Todd, L. 1984. Efficacy of HOE-33171 in rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 37:40.Google Scholar
20. Todd, B. G. and Stobbe, E. H. 1977. Selectivity of diclofop-methyl among wheat, barley, wild oat (Avena fatua) and green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Sci. 25:382–385.Google Scholar