Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:15:25.031Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interaction of Pyrithiobac and Graminicides for Weed Control in Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

W. James Grichar ,
Brent A. Besler ,
Kevin D. Brewer  and
Robert G. Lemon
W. James Grichar*
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, P.O. Box 755, Yoakum, TX 77995
Brent A. Besler
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, P.O. Box 755, Yoakum, TX 77995
Kevin D. Brewer
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, P.O. Box 755, Yoakum, TX 77995
Robert G. Lemon
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Extension Service, College Station, TX 77843
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: w-grichar@tamu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted from 1996 through 1998 to evaluate control of broadleaf signalgrass and slender amaranth by clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, and fluazifop-P-butyl plus fenoxaprop-P-ethyl applied alone, in combination with pyrithiobac, or sequentially with pyrithiobac. Broadleaf signalgrass control with graminicides alone was 75 to 100%. Although broadleaf signalgrass control with clethodim was not reduced by pyrithiobac, control with fluazifop-P-butyl and fluazifop-P-butyl plus fenoxaprop-P-ethyl was reduced by pyrithiobac. Pyrithiobac controlled slender amaranth 85 to 100% when applied alone. However, slender amaranth control by pyrithiobac was inconsistent when pyrithiobac was applied in mixture or sequentially with graminicides. A reduction in slender amaranth control may have resulted from a combination of reduced graminicide efficacy and interference caused by broadleaf signalgrass with slender amaranth (pyrithiobac alone). Cotton yields were highest when pyrithiobac was applied 24 h after graminicides.

Keywords

Clethodimfenoxaprop-P-ethylfluazifop-P-butylpyrithiobacbroadleaf signalgrass, Brachiaria platyphylla (Griseb.) Nash # BRAPPslender amaranth, Amaranthus gracilis Desf. # AMAVIcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Deltapine 50’, ‘Paymaster H-1215’, ‘DP5690RR’Amaranthus gracilisAMAVIantagonismBrachiaria platyphyllaBRAPPherbicide interactionPOST, postemergencePRE, preemergenceWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , September 2003 , pp. 461 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Buchanan, G. A. 1992. Trends in weed control methods. in McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. R., eds. Weeds of Cotton: Characterization and Control. Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation. Pp. 47–72.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr. 1994. Report of the 1993 cotton weed loss committee. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 18:1679.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., Jennings, K. M., and Batts, R. B. 1998. Interactions of bromoxynil and postemergence graminicides on large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis). Weed Technol. 12:544–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1994a. Weed and rotational crop responses to Staple in the Texas southern High Plains. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 18:1705.Google Scholar
Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1994b. Efficacy of Staple in cotton and its phytotoxicity on rotational crops in the Texas southern High Plains. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:51–52.Google Scholar
Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1996. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and devil's-claw (Proboscidea louisianica) control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) with pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 10:7–12.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1998. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:299–313.Google Scholar
Everson, A. C., Holshouser, D. L., Chandler, J. M., and Bierman, R. H. 1991. Broadleaf weed control in cotton with DPX-PE350 in south central Texas. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:77.Google Scholar
Ferreira, K. L., Burton, J. D., and Coble, H. D. 1995. Physiological basis for antagonism of fluazifop-P by DPX-PE350. Weed Sci. 43:184–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grafstrom, L. D. Jr. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1988. Uptake and translocation of fluazifop in green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Sci. 36:153–158.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. 1991a. Control of Texas panicum (Panicum texanum) and southern crabgrass (Digitaria ciliaris) in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) with postemergence herbicides. Peanut Sci. 18:6–9.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. 1991b. Sethoxydim and broadleaf herbicide interaction effects on annual grass control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 5:321–324.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. and Boswell, T. E. 1986. Herbicide combinations in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 1:290–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holshouser, D. L. and Coble, H. D. 1990. Compatibility of sethoxydim with five postemergence broadleaf herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:128–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993a. Influence of application rate and timing on efficacy of DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7:216–219.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993b. Interactions of DPX-PE350 with fluazifop-P, sethoxydim, clethodim, and quizalofop-P. Weed Technol. 7:605–610.Google Scholar
Keeling, J. W., Dotray, P. A., and Abernathy, J. R. 1996. Effects of reported applications of trifluralin and pendimethalin on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 10:295–298.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E. and Allen, R. L. 1996. Interaction of graminicides applied in combination with pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 10:889–892.Google Scholar
Tredaway, J. A., Patterson, M. G., and Wehtje, G. R. 1998. Interaction of clethodim with pyrithiobac and bromoxynil applied in low volume. Weed Technol. 12:185–189.Google Scholar
Vidrine, P. R., Crawford, S. H., and Girlinghouse, J. M. 1993. DPX-PE350 interactions in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:26.Google Scholar
Vidrine, P. R., Crawford, S. H., and Millhollon, L. P. 1990. Weed control and cotton tolerance with KIH-8921. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:137.Google Scholar
Vidrine, P. R., Reynolds, D. B., and Blonin, D. C. 1995. Grass control in soybean (Glycine max) with graminicides applied alone and in mixtures. Weed Technol. 9:68–72.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P. and Shaw, D. R. 1997. Effect of application timing on pyrithiobac persistence. Weed Sci. 45:179–182.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P., Shaw, D. R., Baughman, T. A., Snipes, C. E., and Bryson, C. T. 2000. Influence of cultivation timing on pyrithiobac performance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 14:116–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitwell, T., Wehtje, G., Walker, R. H., and McGuire, J. A. 1985. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in soybeans (Glycine max) with postemergence grass herbicides applied alone and in mixtures. Weed Sci. 33:673–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
York, A. C., Wilcut, J. W., and Grichar, W. J. 1993. Interaction of 2,4-DB with postemergence graminicides. Peanut Sci. 20:57–61.Google Scholar