Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T07:23:17.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Duration of Broadleaf Weed Control with Isoxaben Using Soil Bioassays

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Rakesh S. Chandran  and
Jeffrey F. Derr
Rakesh S. Chandran
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0331
Jeffrey F. Derr
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Hampton Roads Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Beach, VA 23455
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A soil bioassay experiment was conducted in Blacksburg, VA, to determine the effect of isoxaben application timings and rates on duration of weed control. Flats containing soil were imbedded into the field. Isoxaben was applied in the spring, fall, and spring followed by fall (double application) at 0.56, 0.84, and 1.12 kg ai/ha. Flats were moved to a greenhouse at 0, 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after treatment (MAT) and seeded with yellow rocket, buckhorn plantain, and spotted spurge for the bioassays. Weed counts from treated flats were compared to those in untreated flats to determine percent control. Fall and spring followed by fall applications provided approximately 20% greater control of yellow rocket 3 MAT and 30% greater control 6 MAT, compared to a single spring application of isoxaben. Isoxaben at all rates controlled yellow rocket > 70% at 6 mo after fall application. At 3 MAT, fall and spring plus fall-applied isoxaben provided about 15 and 20% greater buckhorn plantain control, respectively, compared to spring application. The two highest rates of isoxaben controlled buckhorn plantain > 70% at 3 mo after fall application, but provided poor control at 6 MAT. Control of spotted spurge was similar among the three application timings for isoxaben and was unacceptable at most evaluation dates. Overall, isoxaben applied at 1.12 kg/ha provided better control of all three weed species for a longer time than the reference herbicide, oxadiazon, applied at 3.36 kg/ha.

Keywords

Isoxaben, N-[3-(1-ethyl-1-methylpropyl)-5-isoxazolyl]-2,6-dimethoxybenzamideoxadiazon, 3-[2,4-dichloro-5-(1-methylethoxy)phenyl]-5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1,3,4-oxadiazol-2-(3H)-onebuckhorn plantain, Plantago lanceolata L. # PLALAspotted spurge, Euphorbia maculata L. # EPHMAyellow rocket, Barbarea vulgaris R. Br. # BARVUPreemergence herbicidesresidual activityPLALAEPHMABARVUMAT, months after treatmentPRE, preemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 1998 , pp. 542 - 547
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by the 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. 1990. DowElanco specimen label. Gallery 75 DF. EPA Reg. No. 62719-145. Greenfield, IN: DowElanco. 12 p.Google Scholar
Cabanne, F., Lefebvre, A., and Scalla, R. 1987. Behaviour of herbicide EL-107 in wheat and rape grown under controlled conditions. Weed Res. 27:135–142.Google Scholar
Colbert, F. O. and Ford, D. H. 1987. Isoxaben for broad leaf weed control in ornamentals, turf and non bearing vines and trees. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 40:155–163.Google Scholar
Freund, R. J., Littell, R. C., and Spector, P. C. 1986. In SAS System for Linear Models. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. pp. 154–158.Google Scholar
Garcia, J. E., Pestemer, W., and Gunther, P. 1992. Degradation of isoxaben in a wheat culture soil under field conditions: comparative study of an instrumental (HPLC) vs. a bioassay method. Weed Res. 32:231–236.Google Scholar
Grant, D. L., Cooper, R. B., and Webster, H. L. 1990. Isoxaben for broad spectrum weed control in warm season turf. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:145–152.Google Scholar
Heim, D. R., Skomp, J. R., Waldion, C., and Larriuan, I. M. 1991. Isoxaben inhibits the synthesis of acid insoluble cell wall materials in Arabidiopsis thaliana . Plant Physiol. 93:695–700.Google Scholar
Himme, M. V. and Bulcke, R. 1988. Control of triazine resistant dicotyladenous weeds in nurseries. Mededelingen-van-de-Faculteit-landbouw-wetenschappen,-Rijksuniversiteit-Gent. 53:1261–1277.Google Scholar
Huggenberger, F., Jennings, E. A., Ryan, P. J., and Burrow, K. W. 1982. EL-107, a new selective herbicide for use in cereals. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf. Weeds 1:47–52.Google Scholar
Huggenberger, F. and Ryan, P. J. 1985. The biological activity of EL-107 and its mobility and degradation in soil. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf. Weeds 3:947–954.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, A., Maizonnier, D., Gaudry, J. C., Clair, D., and Scalla, R. 1987. Some effects of the herbicide EL-107 on cellular growth and metabolism. Weed Res. 27:125–134.Google Scholar
Mamouni, A., Schmitt, P., Mansour, M., and Schiavon, M. 1992. Abiotic degradation pathways of isoxaben in the environment. Pestic. Sci. 613:13–20.Google Scholar
Neal, J. C. and Senesac, A. F. 1988. Broadleaved weed control in woody ornamentals with isoxaben. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:124–135.Google Scholar
Rouchaud, J., Gustin, F., Callens, D., Himme, M. V., and Bulcke, R. 1993. Soil metabolism of the herbicide isoxaben in winter wheat crops. J. Agric. Food Chem. 41:2142–2148.Google Scholar
Walker, A. 1987. Evaluation of a simulation model for prediction of herbicide movement and persistence in soil. Weed Res. 27:143–152.Google Scholar
Wilson, C., Whitwell, T., and Riley, M. B. 1996. Detection and dissipation of isoxaben and trifluralin in containerized plant nursery and runoff water. Weed Sci. 44:683–688.Google Scholar