Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T07:33:49.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of Glyphosate and Surfactant Concentrations on Giant Burreed (Sparganium eurycarpum) Control with a Ropewick Applicator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John W. Leif III
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. Rant Genet., Univ. Minn., St. Paul, MN 55108
Ervin A. Oelke
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. Rant Genet., Univ. Minn., St. Paul, MN 55108

Abstract

Field and laboratory experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of glyphosate concentration, surfactant concentration, and ammonium sulfate on the control of giant burreed when applied through a ropewick applicator. Under non-flooded conditions, a 30% (v/v) solution of glyphosate applied with a ropewick applicator gave the highest giant burreed injury in 1987 and 1988, and reduced corm and rhizome viability compared to the nontreated control in 1987. Warm, dry conditions may have been responsible for poor long-term control in 1988 by reducing translocation of glyphosate to rhizomes. Addition of ammonium sulfate or surfactant did not influence glyphosate toxicity to giant burreed when applied with a ropewick applicator. In the laboratory, leaf necrosis at the point of application was observed with surfactant at 0.6% or 1.2% regardless of glyphosate concentration. Absorption of 14C-glyphosate increased two-fold with the addition of surfactant, and translocation to roots and rhizomes decreased almost two-fold as surfactant concentration was increased from 0 to 1.2%. Electrolyte leakage increased with 30% glyphosate when surfactant concentration was increased from 0 to 1.2%. Localized leaf necrosis and disruption of tissues inside the leaf may be responsible for reduced giant burreed control with glyphosate and surfactant applied in high concentrations.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Ahmadi, M. S., Haderlie, L. C., and Wicks, G. A. 1980. Effect of growth stage and water stress on barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control and on glyphosate absorption and translocation. Weed Sci. 28:277282.Google Scholar
2. Amback, R.M., and Ashford, R. 1982. Effects of variations in drop makeup on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 30:221224.Google Scholar
3. Blair, A. M. 1975. The addition of ammonium salts or a phosphate ester to herbicides to control Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. Weed Res. 15:101105.Google Scholar
4. Boerboom, C. M., and Wyse, D. L. 1988. Selective application of herbicides for Canada thistle (Cirsium arvence) control in birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus). Weed Technol. 2:183186.Google Scholar
5. Boerboom, C. M., and Wyse, D. L. 1988. Influence of glyphosate concentration on glyphosate absorption and translocation in Canada thistle (Corcium arvense). Weed Sci. 36:291295.Google Scholar
6. Chase, R. L., and Appleby, A. P. 1979. Effects of humidity and moisture stress on glyphosate control of Cyperus rotundus L. Weed Res. 19:241246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Claus, J. S., and Behrens, R. 1976. Glyphosate translocation and quackgrass rhizome bud kill. Weed Sci. 24:149152.Google Scholar
8. Clay, S. A., and Oelke, E. A. 1987. Effects of giant burreed (Sparganium eurycarpum) and shade on wild rice (Zizania palustris). Weed Sci. 35 640646.Google Scholar
9. Clay, S. A., and Oelke, E. A. 1988. Basis for differential susceptibility of rice (Oryza sativa), wild rice (Zizania palustris), and giant burreed (Spar ganium eurycarpum) to bentazon. Weed Sci. 36:301304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Fernald, M. L. 1950. Grays Manual of Botany. Eight ed. American Boo Co., New York. p. 6162.Google Scholar
11. Gougler, J. A., and Geiger, D. R. 1981. Uptake and distribution of N phosphonomethylglycine in sugar beet plants. Plant Physiol. 68:668672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Hull, H. M., Davis, D. G., and Stolzenberg, G. E. 1982. Action of adjuvants on plant surfaces. p. 1025 in Hodgson, R., ed., Adjuvants for Herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
13. Klevorn, T. B., and Wyse, D. L. 1984. Effect of soil temperature and moisture on glyphosate and photoassimilate distribution in quackgrass (Agropyron repens). Weed Sci. 402407.Google Scholar
14. Oelke, E. A., Clay, S. A., and McClellan, M. J. 1986. Wild rice production research. p. 313 in Minnesota Wild Rice Research – 1985. Agric. Exp. Stn., Univ. Minn. Misc. Publ. 36.Google Scholar
15. O'Sullivan, P. A., O'Donnovan, J. T., and Hammon, W. M. 1981. Influence of non-ionic surfactants, ammonium sulfate, water quality, and spray volume on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Can. J. Plant Sci. 61:391400.Google Scholar
16. Pereira, W., and Crabtree, G. 1986. Absorption, translocation, and toxicity of glyphosate and oxifluorfen in yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus). Weed Sci. 28:277282.Google Scholar
17. Prenderville, G. N., and Warren, G. F. 1977. Effect of four herbicides and two oils on leaf-cell membrane permeability. Weed Res. 30:251258.Google Scholar
18. Ransom, J. K., Oelke, E. A., and Wyse, D. L. 1983. Behavior of 2,4-D in common waterplantain (Alisma triviale). Weed Sci. 31:163169.Google Scholar
19. Sandberg, C. L., Meant, W. F., and Penner, D. 1980. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of 14C-glyphosate in several weed species. Weed Res. 20:195200.Google Scholar
20. Sherrick, S. I., Hold, H. A., and Hess, F. D. 1986. Effects of adjuvants and environment during plant development on glyphosate absorption and translocation in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Weed Sci. 34:811816.Google Scholar
21. Sukumaran, N. P., and Weiser, C. L. 1972. An excised leaflet test for evaluating potato frost tolerance. Hortic. Sci. 7:467468.Google Scholar
22. Vanstone, D. E., and Stobbe, H. E. 1977. Electrolyte conductivity – a rapid measure of herbicide injury. Weed Sci. 25:352354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar