Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T06:51:44.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of Glyphosate with Other Herbicides for Weed Control in Corn (Zea mays): Efficacy and Economics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jason A. Ferrell  and
William W. Witt
Jason A. Ferrell
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40526
William W. Witt*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40526
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wwitt@uky.uga
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glyphosate was compared with other commonly used corn herbicides at three locations in Kentucky in 1998 and 1999. Sequential glyphosate treatments provided greater than 87% control of common cocklebur, ivyleaf morningglory, common lambsquarters, and giant ragweed. Control of these species with glyphosate treatments was similar to the control with atrazine plus other postemergence (POST) herbicides. Generally, treatments containing s-triazines and chloracetamides applied to the soil surface were not as effective as sequential glyphosate or atrazine plus POST herbicides. Corn yield was not significantly different at any location or for any year, whereas differences in net return occurred at one location in 1998.

Keywords

Atrazinechloracetamidesglyphosates-triazinescommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #3 XANSTcommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. #CHEALgiant ragweed, Ambrosia trifida L. #AMBTRivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea L. Jacq. #IPOHEcorn, Zea mays L. ‘DeKalb 626RR’AcetochlordicambaDigitaria sanguinalis L. Scop. DIGSAdimethenamidgiant foxtaillarge crabgrass1-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-triazin-2-yl)-3-[2-(3,3,3-trifluoropropyl)-phenylsulfonyl]-ureametolachlornet returnprimisulfuronprosulfuronRoundup Ready®cornSetaria faberi Herrm. SETFAsimazineASN, as neededMP, mid-postemergencePOST, postemergencePRE, preemergenceREG, regrowth
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 2002 , pp. 701 - 706
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

Anonymous. 1998. Agriculture Chemical Usage: 1997 Field Crop Summary. National Agricultural Statistical Service and Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 7 p.Google Scholar
Ateh, C. M. and Harvey, R. G. 1999. Annual weed control by glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 13: 394–398.Google Scholar
Comes, R. D., Bruns, V. F., and Kelley, A. D. 1976. Residues and persistence of glyphosate in irrigation water. Weed Sci. 24: 47–50.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1999. Weed management in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 13: 324–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1999a. Weed management and net returns with transgenic, herbicide-resistant, and non-transgenic cotton. Weed Technol. 13: 411–420.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., Batts, R. R., and Jennings, K. M. 2000. Weed management in glufosinate- and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 14: 77–88.Google Scholar
Gonzini, L. C., Hart, S. E., and Wax, L. M. 1999. Herbicide combinations for weed management in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 13: 354–360.Google Scholar
Greir, P. W. and Stahlman, P. W. 1999. EXP 31130A efficacy and corn (Zea mays) response in western Kansas. Weed Technol. 13: 404–410.Google Scholar
Harper, S. S. 1994. Sorption–desorption and herbicide behavior in soil. Rev. Weed Sci. 6: 207–225.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Bradley, P. R., Hart, S. E., Buesinger, M. L., and Massey, R. E. 2000. Efficacy and economics of weed management in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 14: 57–65.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F. and Kapusta, G. 1998. Preemergence weed control in imidazolinone-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 12: 151–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., Matthews, J. L., Baldwin, J. L., and Maschoff, J. 1999. Evaluation of glufosinate-resistant corn and glufosinate: efficacy on annual weeds. Weed Technol. 13: 691–696.Google Scholar
Lanie, A. J., Griffen, J. L., Vidrine, P. R., and Reynolds, D. B. 1994. Herbicide combinations for soybean (Glycine max) planted in stale seedbed. Weed Technol. 8: 17–22.Google Scholar
Leonard, R. A. 1990. Movement of pesticides into surface waters. In H.;thCheng, H., ed. Pesticides in the Soil Environment: Processes, Impacts and Modeling. Madison, WI: Soil Science Society of America. Chap. 9.Google Scholar
Malik, J., Barry, G., and Kishore, G. 1989. The herbicide glyphosate. Biofactors 2: 17–25.Google Scholar
Moss, T. 2000. 1998 Yellow Corn Cost and Returns. University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension, Series 2000-02. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Nelson, H. and Jones, R. D. 1994. Potential regulatory problems associated with atrazine, cyanazine, and alachlor in surface water source drinking water. Weed Technol. 8: 852–861.Google Scholar
Noruma, N. S. and Hilton, H. W. 1977. The adsorption and degradation of glyphosate in five Hawaiian sugarcane soils. Weed Res. 17: 113–121.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. K., Pendergrass, R., and Hayes, R. M. 1999. Economic analysis of alternative herbicide regimes on Roundup Ready soybean. J. Prod. Agric. 12: 449–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slack, C. H. and Witt, W. W. 2000. Weed Control Recommendations. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Sprague, C. L., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 1999. Weed control and corn tolerance from soil-applied RPA 201772. Weed Technol. 13: 713–725.Google Scholar
Sprague, C. L., Stoller, E. W., and Hart, S. E. 1997. Preemergence broadleaf weed control and crop tolerance in imidazolinone-resistant and susceptible corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 11: 118–122.Google Scholar
Sprankle, P., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1975. Absorption, mobility, and microbial degradation of glyphosate in soil. Weed Sci. 23: 229–234.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. J. 1999. Influence of herbicide application rate, timing, and interrow cultivation on weed control and corn yield in glufosinate-resistant and glyphosate resistant corn. Weed Technol. 13: 807–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wait, J. D., Johnson, W. G., and Massey, R. E. 1999. Weed management with reduced rates of glyphosate in no-till, narrow row, glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 13: 478–783.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P., Bryant, K. J., and Earnest, L. D. 1999. Weed control and economics in nontransgenic and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 13: 586–593.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Cardina, J., and Loux, M. M. 1998. The influence of weed management in wheat (Triticum aestivum) stubble on weed control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 12: 522–526.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. S. and Worsham, A. D. 1988. Combinations of nonselective herbicides for difficult to control weeds in no-till corn and soybeans. Weed Sci. 36: 648–652.Google Scholar