Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:19:19.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Control of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) at two heights with POST herbicides in Nebraska popcorn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2020

Ethann R. Barnes
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA; current: Biology Data Management Scientist, GreenLight Biosciences, Research Triangle, NC, USA
Stevan Z. Knezevic
Affiliation:
Professor, Northeast Research and Extension Center, Haskell Agricultural Laboratory, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Concord, NE, USA
Nevin C. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Panhandle Research and Extension Center, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Scottsbluff, NE, USA
Suat Irmak
Affiliation:
Harold W. Eberhard Distinguished Professor, Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Oscar Rodriguez
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA; current: Principal Development Scientist, Conagra Brands Inc, Brookston, IN, USA
Amit J. Jhala*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Amit J. Jhala, PhD, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 279 Plant Science Hall, PO Box 830915, Lincoln, NE68583. (Email: Amit.Jhala@unl.edu)

Abstract

Velvetleaf is an economically important weed in popcorn production fields in Nebraska. Many PRE herbicides in popcorn have limited residual activity or provide partial velvetleaf control. There are a limited number of herbicides applied POST in popcorn compared with field corn, necessitating the evaluation of POST herbicides for control of velvetleaf. The objectives of this study were to (1) evaluate the efficacy and crop safety of labeled POST herbicides for controlling velvetleaf that survived S-metolachlor/atrazine applied PRE and (2) determine the effect of velvetleaf height on POST herbicide efficacy, popcorn injury, and yield. Field experiments were conducted in 2018 and 2019 near Clay Center, Nebraska. The experiments were arranged in a split-plot design with four replications. The main plot treatments were velvetleaf height (≤15 cm and ≤30 cm) and subplot treatments included a no-POST herbicide control, and 11 POST herbicide programs. Fluthiacet-methyl, fluthiacet-methyl/mesotrione, carfentrazone-ethyl, dicamba, and dicamba/diflufenzopyr provided greater than 96% velvetleaf control 28 d after treatment (DAT), reduced velvetleaf density to fewer than 7 plants m−2, achieved 99% to 100% biomass reduction, and had no effect on popcorn yield. Herbicide programs tested in this study provided greater than 98% control of velvetleaf 28 DAT in 2019. Most POST herbicide programs in this study provided greater than 90% control of up to 15 cm and up to 30 cm velvetleaf and no differences between velvetleaf heights in density, biomass reduction, or popcorn yield were observed, except with topramezone and nicosulfuron/mesotrione 28 DAT in 2018. On the basis of contrast analysis, herbicide programs with fluthiacet-methyl or dicamba provided better control than herbicide programs without them at 28 DAT in 2018. It is concluded that POST herbicides are available for control of velvetleaf up to 30-cm tall in popcorn production fields.

Type
Research Article
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: William Johnson, Purdue University

References

Anonymous (2011) Cadet herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 279-3338. Philadelphia, PA: FMC Corporation, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2012) Capreno herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 264-1063. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer Crop Science, Research Triangle ParkGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2014a) Bicep II Magnum Herbicide Product Label. Greensboro, NC: SyngentaGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2014b) Surestart II herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 62719-679. Indianapolis, IN: Corteva AgriscienceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2014c) TripleFLEX II herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 524-614. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer Crop ScienceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016a) Corvus herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 264-1066. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer Crop ScienceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016b) Instigate herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 352-873. Indianapolis, IN: Corteva AgriscienceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2017a) Acuron herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 100-1466. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta Crop ProtectionGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2017b) Resicore herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 62719-693. Indianapolis, IN: Corteva AgriscienceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2018a) Diflexx herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 264-1173. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer Crop ScienceGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2019) Impact herbicide product label. EPA Reg. No. 5481-524. Newport Beach, CA: Amvac Chemical CorporationGoogle Scholar
Barker, DC, Knezevic, SZ, Martin, AR, Walters, DT, Lindquist, JL (2006) Effect of nitrogen addition on the comparative productivity of corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci 54:354363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, ER, Knezevic, SZ, Lawrence, NC, Irmak, S, Rodriguez, O, Jhala, AJ (2019a) Preemergence herbicide delays the critical time of weed removal in popcorn. Weed Technol 33:785793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, ER, Lawrence, NC, Knezevic, SZ, Rodriguez, O, Irmak, S, Jhala, AJ (2019b) Weed control and response of yellow and white popcorn hybrids to herbicides [published online before print January 10, 2020]. Agron J doi: 10.2134/agronj2019.02.0101Google Scholar
Bazzaz, FA, Garbult, K, Reekie, EG, Williams, WE (1989) Using growth analysis to interpret competition between a C3 and a C4 annual under ambient and elevated CO2. Oecologia 79:22323510.1007/BF00388482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertalmio, G, Cook, M, Duty, R, Eisley, B, Green, T, Hacker, M, Hoffman, G, Iverson, J, Jess, L, Koinzan, S, Linn, D, Miyazaki, S, Mueller, D, Mueller, J, Obermeyer, J, Pike, D, Pritchett, G, Reynolds, B, Robbins, M, Schleisman, M, Sieg, E, Sleaford, D, Weaver, J, Ziegler, K (2003) Crop profile for corn (Pop) in the United States (North Central Region). Urbana-Champaign, IL: North Central Integrated Pest Management Center, University of Illinois. https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org/source_report.cfm?sectionid=40&sourceid=393. Accessed: January 12, 2020Google Scholar
Bollman, JD, Boerboom, CM, Becker, RL, Fritz, VA (2008) Efficacy and tolerance to HPPD-inhibiting herbicides in sweet corn. Weed Technol 22:666674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonifas, KD, Walters, DT, Cassman, KG, Lindquist, JL (2005) Nitrogen supply affects root:shoot ratio in corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci 53:67067510.1614/WS-05-002R.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, OC, Wilson, RG, Weisberg, S, Hubbard, KG (1996) Seed longevity of 41 weed species buried 17 years in eastern and western Nebraska. Weed Sci 44:748610.1017/S0043174500093589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussan, AJ, Boerboom, CM, Stoltenberg, DE (2001) Response of velvetleaf demographic processes to herbicide rate. Weed Sci 49:2230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, RT, Hartwig, NL (1982) Competition between corn, velvetleaf and yellow nutsedge. Proc Northeastern Weed Sci Soc 36:24Google Scholar
D’Croz-Mason, N, Waldren, RP (1978) G78-426 Popcorn Production. Historical Materials from University of Nebraska–Lincoln Extension. 745. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/extensionhist/745. Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Defelice, MS, Witt, WW, Barrett, M (1988) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) growth and development in conventional and no-tillage corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 36:60961510.1017/S0043174500075494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durgan, BR, Yenish, JP, Daml, RJ, Miller, DW (1997) Broadleaf weed control in hard red spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) with F8426. Weed Technol 11:48949510.1017/S0890037X00045309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Cornejo, J, Wechsler, S, Livingston, M, Mitchell, L (2014) Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States, ERR-162 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, February 2014. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/45179/43668_err162.pdf Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Geier, PW, Stahlman, PW, Regehr, DL, Olson, BL (2009) Preemergence herbicide efficacy and phytotoxicity in grain sorghum. Weed Technol 23:19720110.1614/WT-08-125.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godar, AS, Varanasi, VK, Nakka, S, Prasad, PVV, Thompson, CR, Mithila, J. (2015) Physiological and molecular mechanisms of differential sensitivity of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to mesotrione at varying growth temperatures. PLoS One 10:e012673110.1371/journal.pone.0126731CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grichar, WJ, Besler, BA, Brewer, KD, Palrang, DT (2003) Flufenacet and metribuzin combinations for weed control and corn (Zea mays) tolerance. Weed Technol 17:346351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, SE (1997) Interacting effects of MON 12000 and CGA-152005 with other herbicides in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci 45:434438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, I (2019) The international survey of herbicide resistant weeds. http://www.weedscience.org. Accessed: September 24, 2019Google Scholar
King, CA, Oliver, LR (1992) Application rate and timing of acifluorfen, bentazon, chlorimuron, and imazaquin. Weed Technol 6:526534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, R, Jhala, A, Pryor, R, Knezevic, S, Rees, J, Whitney, T (2018) Considerations for postemergence dicamba-based herbicide applications in corn. CropWatch. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2018/considerations-post-herbicide-dicamba-applications-corn. Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Kniss, AR, Streibig, JC (2018) Statistical analysis of agricultural experiments using R. http://Rstats4ag.org. Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Lindquist, JL, Maxwell, BD, Buhler, DD, Gunsolus, JL (1995) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) recruitment, seed production, and interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci 43:226232Google Scholar
Lindquist, JL, Mortensen, DA, Clay, SA, Schmenk, R, Kells, JJ, Howatt, K, Westra, P (1996) Stability of corn (Zea mays)–velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference relationships. Weed Sci 44:309313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, JL, Mortensen, DA, Johnson, BE (1998) Mechanisms of corn tolerance and velvetleaf suppressive ability. Agron J 90:787792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liphadzi, KB, Dille, JA (2006) Annual weed competitiveness as affected by preemergence herbicide in corn. Weed Sci 54:15616510.1614/WS-05-156R1.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendiburu, FD (2017) Agricolae: Statistical procedures for agricultural research. R package version 1.2-8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=agricolae. Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Murphy, CA, Lindquist, JL (2002) Growth response of velvetleaf to three postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci 5:36436910.1614/0043-1745(2002)050[0364:GROVTT]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llewellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR, Witt, WW, Barrett, M (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci 60: 3162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pike, D, Pritchett, G, Reynolds, B, Cook, M, Mueller, J, Green, T, Linn, D, Koinzan, S, Eisley, B, Obermeyer, J, Hoffman, G, Robbins, M, Sleaford, D, Schleisman, M, Sieg, E, Weaver, J, Ziegler, K, Duty, R, Iverson, J, Miyazaki, S, Jess, L, Burr, W (2002) North Central region popcorn PMSP. Urbana-Champaign, IL: North Central Integrated Pest Management Center, University of Illinois. http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/pdf/NCRPopcorn.pdf. Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Popcorn Board (2019) Industry facts. https://www.popcorn.org/Facts-Fun/Industry-Facts. Accessed: August 30, 2019Google Scholar
R Core Team (2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed: February 13, 2020Google Scholar
Roskamp, JM, Chahal, GS, Johnson, WG (2013) The effect of cations and ammonium sulfate on the efficacy of dicamba and 2,4-D. Weed Technol 27:7277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, D, Jhala, AJ (2018a) A statewide survey of stakeholders to assess the problem weeds and weed management practices in Nebraska. Weed Technol 32:642655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, D, Jhala, AJ (2018b) Comparison of a premix of atrazine, bicyclopyrone, mesotrione, and S-metolachlor with other preemergence herbicides for weed control and corn yield in no-tillage and reduced-tillage production systems in Nebraska, USA. Soil Till Res 178:8292Google Scholar
Sarangi, D, Jhala, AJ (2018c) Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) control in no-tillage conventional (non-genetically engineered) soybean using overlapping residual herbicide programs. Weed Technol 33:9510510.1017/wet.2018.78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sattin, M, Zanin, G, Berti, A (1992) Case history for weed competition/population ecology: velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 6:21321910.1017/S0890037X00034588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmenk, R, Kells, JJ (1998) Effect of soil-applied atrazine and pendimethalin on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) competitiveness in corn. Weed Technol 12:4752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholes, C, Clay, SA, Brix-Davis, K (1995) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) effects on corn (Zea mays) growth and yield in South Dakota. Weed Technol 9:665668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuster, CL, Al-Khatib, K, Dille, JA (2008) Efficacy of sulfonylurea herbicides when tank mixed with mesotrione. Weed Technol 22: 222230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, NR (1984) Velvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae), history and economic impact in the United States. Economic Botany 38:407416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, GL, Porpiglia, PJ, Chandler, JM (2005) Efficacy of KIH-485 on Texas panicum (Panicum texanum) and selected broadleaf weeds in corn. Weed Technol 19:866869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor-Lovell, S, Wax, LM (2001) Weed control in field corn (Zea mays) with RPA 201772 combinations with atrazine and S-metolachlor. Weed Technol 15:249256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, JR (1998) Influence of corn (Zea mays) population and row spacing on corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) yield. Weed Sci 46:447453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terra, BRM, Martin, AR, Lindquist, JL (2007) Corn-velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference is affected by sublethal doses of postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci 55:491496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toole, EH, Brown, E (1946) Final results of the buried seed experiment. J Agric Res 72:201210Google Scholar
[USDA NASS] U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2018) Quick stats. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/ Accessed: July 30, 2018Google Scholar
Vaughn, LG, Lindquist, JL, Bernards, ML (2007) The effect of variable water supply on corn and velvetleaf. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the North Central Weed Science Society, Redhook NY: Curran Associates. 236 pGoogle Scholar
Vaughn, LG, Bernards, ML, Arkebauer, TJ, Lindquist, JL (2016) Corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) growth and transpiration efficiency under varying water supply. Weed Sci 64:596604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, SI, Black, LD (1988) The biology of Canadian weeds. 90. Abutilon theophrasti. Can J Plant Sci 68:10691085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, EL, Curran, WS, Harper, JK, Roth, GW, Knievel, DP (2004) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference and seed production in corn silage and grain. Weed Technol 18:779783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiles, LJ, Wilkerson, GG, Gold, HJ, Coble, HD (1992) Modeling weed distribution for improved postemergence control decisions. Weed Sci 40:546553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkerson, GG, Modena, SA, Coble, HD (1991) HERB: decision model for postemergence weed control in soybean. Agron J 83:413417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wortman, SE (2014) Integrating weed and vegetable crop management with multifunctional air-propelled abrasive grits. Weed Technol 28: 243252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J, Jaeck, O, Menegat, A, Zhang, Z, Gerhards, R, Hanwen, Ni (2013) The mechanism of methylated seed oil on enhancing biological efficacy of topramezone on weeds. PLoS One 8:e74280CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziegler, KE (2001) Popcorn. Pages 199234in Hallauer, AR, ed. Specialty Corns. Boca Raton, FL: CRC PressGoogle Scholar
Zollinger, RK, Howatt, K, Bernards, ML, Young, BG (2016) Ammonium sulfate and dipotassium phosphate as water conditioning adjuvants. Pages 4251in Goss, G, ed. Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems: 35th Volume, Pesticide Formulations, Adjuvants, and Spray Characterization in 2014. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM InternationalCrossRefGoogle Scholar