Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T02:43:29.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Potential Use of Imazethapyr Mixtures in Drill-Seeded Imidazolinone-Resistant Rice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kristie J. Pellerin ,
Eric P. Webster ,
Wei Zhang  and
David C. Blouin
Kristie J. Pellerin
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Eric P. Webster*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Wei Zhang
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
David C. Blouin
Affiliation:
Department of Experimental Statistics, 45 Agriculture Administration Building, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: ewebster@agcenter.lsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The efficacy of imazethapyr in drill-seeded imidazolinone-resistant rice was evaluated in Louisiana in 2000 and 2001. Imazethapyr was applied preemergence (PRE), or no PRE, followed by a postemergence (POST) application of imazethapyr alone, or in a mixture with bensulfuron, bentazon plus aciflurofen, carfentrazone, halosulfuron, propanil plus molinate, triclopyr, or V-10029. Imazethapyr applied PRE followed by a POST application of imazethapyr controlled barnyardgrass equivalent to or higher than other treatments evaluated. Red rice control at 35 days after postemergence treatment (DAT) was 66 to 81% with imazethapyr applied PRE followed by any POST application, but a reduction in control was observed with a POST application of imazethapyr. Although alligatorweed control increased with POST applications, these treatments suggested only suppression. Hemp sesbania control never exceeded 10% with imazethapyr-only treatments and at 35 DAT, all POST applications, except bensulfuron, increased control above 84%. Rice yield increased with treatments receiving a PRE application of imazethapyr compared with no imazethapyr applied PRE.

Keywords

AcifluorfenbensulfuronbentazoncarfentrazonehalosulfuronimazethapyrmolinatepropanilV-10029, sodium 2,6-bis[(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)oxy]benzoatealligatorweed, Alternanthera philoxeroides (Mart.) Griseb. #3 ALRPHbarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. # ECHCGhemp sesbania, Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex A.W. Hill # SEBEXred rice, Oryza sativa L. # ORYSArice, Oryza sativa L. imidazolinone-resistant ‘93 AS-3510’ and ‘CL 121’Acetolactate synthase; Clearfield riceherbicide mixturesALS, acetolactate synthase (EC 4.1.3.18)DAT, days after postemergence treatmentIR, imidazolinone-resistantPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, preemergence.
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 18 , Issue 4 , December 2004 , pp. 1037 - 1042
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

Arnold, R. N., Murray, M. W., Gregory, E. J., and Smeal, D. 1993. Weed control in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with imazethapyr combinations. Weed Technol. 7:361–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Askew, S. D., Shaw, D. R., and Street, J. E. 2000. Graminicide application timing influences red rice (Oryza sativa) control and seedhead reduction in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 14:176–181.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D., Street, J. E., and Shaw, D. R. 1998. Herbicide programs for red rice (Oryza sativa) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 12:103–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantwell, J. R., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Imazethapyr for weed control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 3:596–601.Google Scholar
Carmer, S. G., Nyquist, W. E., and Walker, W. M. 1989. Least significant differences for combined analysis of experiments with two or three-factor treatment designs. Agron. J 81:665–672.Google Scholar
Croughan, T. P. 1994. Application of tissue culture techniques to the development of herbicide resistant rice. La Agric 3:25–26.Google Scholar
Dillon, T. L., Baldwin, F. L., and Talbert, R. E. 1999. Control of red rice and other difficult weeds in imidazolinone tolerant rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 52:15.Google Scholar
Fagerness, M. J. and Penner, D. 1998. Evaluation of V-10029 and trinexapac-ethyl for annual bluegrass seedhead suppression and growth regulation of five cool-season turfgrass species. Weed Technol. 12:436–440.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. L., Dunand, R. T., Baker, J. B., Regan, R. P., and Cohn, M. A. 1991. Integrating red rice control measures in soybeans rice rotations. La Agric 34:6–7.Google Scholar
Hager, A. G., Wax, L. M., Bollero, G. A., and Stoller, E. W. 2003. Influence of diphenylether herbicide application rate and timing on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 17:14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D. H., Jordan, D. L., Johnson, W. G., Talbert, R. E., and Frans, R. E. 1993. Nicosulfuron, primisulfuron, imazethapyr, and DPX-PE350 injury to succeeding crops. Weed Technol. 7:641–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khodayari, K. M., Smith, R. J. Jr., and Black, H. L. 1987. Red rice (Oryza sativa) control with herbicide treatments in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 35:127–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masson, J. A. and Webster, E. P. 2001. Use of imazethapyr in water-seeded imidazolinone-tolerant rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 15:103–106.Google Scholar
Masson, J. A., Webster, E. P., and Williams, B. J. 2001. Flood depth, application timing, and imazethapyr activity in imidazolinone-tolerant rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 15:315–319.Google Scholar
Richard, E. P. Jr. and Street, J. E. 1984. Herbicide performance in rice (Oryza sativa) under three flooding conditions. Weed Sci. 32:157–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., and Wiley, G. L. 1995. AC 263,222 and imazethapyr rates and mixtures for weed management in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 9:801–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1999. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 8. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1234 p.Google Scholar
Scherder, E. F., Talbert, R. E., Lovelace, M. L., and Buehring, N. W. 2001. Weed control programs in herbicide-tolerant rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 54:39–40.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. and Khodayari, K. 1985. Herbicide treatments for control of weeds in dry-seeded rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Sci. 33:686–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonnier, E. A. 1978. Cultural control of red rice. in Eastin, E. F., ed. Red Rice Research and Control. College Station, TX: Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bull. B-1270. Pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
Steele, G. L., Chandler, J. M., and McCauley, G. N. 2002. Control of red rice (Orysa sativa) in imidazolinone-tolerant rice (O. sativa). Weed Technol. 16:627–630.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1995. Bentazon tank-mixtures for improved redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) control in navy bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Technol. 9:610–616.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P. and Masson, J. A. 2001. Acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides on imidazolinone-tolerant rice. Weed Sci. 49:652–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, E. P., Zhang, W., Lanclos, D. Y., Masson, J. A., and Morris, S. N. 1999. Experimental herbicides for weed control in rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 52:16–17.Google Scholar
Zhang, W., Webster, E. P., and Selim, H. M. 2001. Effect of soil moisture on efficacy of imazethapyr in greenhouse. Weed Technol. 15:355–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar