Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T22:26:29.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of sweetpotato to diquat applied pretransplanting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2020

Stephen L. Meyers Open the ORCID record for Stephen L. Meyers [Opens in a new window] ,
Katherine M. Jennings ,
Donnie K. Miller  and
Mark W. Shankle
Stephen L. Meyers*
Affiliation:
Associate Extension/Research Professor, North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Pontotoc Ridge-Flatwoods Branch Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Pontotoc, MS, USA; current: Assistant Professor, Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Purdue Unversity, West Lafayette, IN, USA
Katherine M. Jennings
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Donnie K. Miller
Affiliation:
Professor, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Northeast Research Station, St. Joseph, LA, USA
Mark W. Shankle
Affiliation:
Research Professor, North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Pontotoc Ridge-Flatwoods Branch Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Pontotoc, MS, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Stephen L. Meyers, Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN47907. Email: slmeyers@purdue.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field trials were conducted in North Carolina in 2017 and Louisiana and Mississippi in 2018 to determine the effect of pretransplanting applications of diquat on sweetpotato crop tolerance, yield, and storage root quality. In North Carolina treatments consisted of two rates of diquat (560 or 1,120 g ai ha−1) alone or mixed with 107 g ai ha−1 flumioxazin and applied 1 d before transplanting (DBP), sequential applications of diquat (560 or 1,120 g ha−1) 1 and 17 DBP, 107 g ha−1 flumioxazin alone, and a nontreated check. In Louisiana and Mississippi treatments consisted of diquat (560 or 1,120 g ha−1) applied 1 DBP either alone or followed by (fb) rehipping rows or 107 g ha−1 flumioxazin immediately prior to transplanting. Additional treatments included 546 g ha−1 paraquat applied 1 DBP and a nontreated check. In North Carolina injury was ≤3% for all treatments through 23 d after transplanting (DAP), and no injury was observed after 23 DAP. Visual sweetpotato stunting pooled across the Mississippi and Louisiana trials ranged from 1% to 14%, 0% to 6%, and 0% to 3% at 2, 4, and 6 wk after planting (WAP), respectively, and no crop injury was observed after 6 WAP. Diquat applied 1 DBP and not fb rehipping resulted in greater crop injury (12%) than comparable treatments that were rehipped (2%). In North Carolina single and sequential diquat applications resulted in reduced No. 1 sweetpotato yield (24,230 and 24,280 kg ha−1, respectively) compared with the nontreated check, but No. 1 yield when diquat plus flumioxazin (26,330 kg ha−1) was used was similar to that of the nontreated check. No. 1 yield did not differ by treatment in Louisiana and Mississippi.

Keywords

DiquatsweetpotatoIpomoea batatas (L.) Lam. ‘Beauregard’, ‘Covington’, ‘Orleans’Crop injurycrop tolerancestorage root
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 34 , Issue 5 , October 2020 , pp. 637 - 641
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2020

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Peter J. Dittmar, University of Florida

References

Basinger, NT, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW, Jordan, DL, Everman, WJ, Hestir, EL, Waldschmidt, MD, Smith, SC, Brownie, C (2019) Interspecific and intraspecific interference of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) in sweetpotato. Weed Sci 67:426–432 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, LB, Chaudhari, S, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Meyers, SL, Monks, DW (2016) Evaluation of herbicide timings for Palmer amaranth control in a stale seedbed sweetpotato production system. Weed Technol 30:725–732 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[EPA] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2019) Paraquat dichloride. https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/paraquat-dichloride#action. Accessed: September 16, 2019Google Scholar
Frans, RE, Talbert, R, Marx, D, Crowley, H (1986) Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. Pages 29–46 in Camper, ND, ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Monks, DW (2010) Interference of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in sweetpotato. Weed Sci 58:199–203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seem, JE, Creamer, NG, Monks, DW (2003) Critical weed-free period for ‘Beauregard’ sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas). Weed Technol 17:686–695 Google Scholar
Shaner, DL, ed. (2014) Herbicide Handbook. 10th ed. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America. Pp 166–167, 337–338 Google Scholar
Smith, SC, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW, Chaudhari, S, Schultheis, JR, Reberg-Horton, C (2020) Critical timing of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) removal in sweetpotato. Weed Technol. doi: 10.1017/wet.2020.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, JR, Reigart, JR (2013) Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings. 6th ed. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-01/documents/rmpp_6thed_final_lowresopt.pdf Accessed: September 17, 2019Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Marketing Service (2005) United States Standards for Grades of Sweet Potatoes. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 5 pGoogle Scholar
[USDA-NASS] U.S. Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service (2019) Quick Stats Webpage. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/results/75D2A051-8D9C-3A90-824F-58D2CFE85C0E Accessed: September 17, 2019Google Scholar