Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:07:10.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Imazethapyr and Pendimethalin on Lentil (Lens culinaris), Pea (Pisum sativum), and a Subsequent Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Crop

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Bradley D. Hanson  and
Donald C. Thill
Bradley D. Hanson
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843-2339
Donald C. Thill
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843-2339
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Lentil and pea are two important crops grown in rotation with winter wheat in the Palouse region of Idaho and Washington. Imazethapyr plus pendimethalin often is used to control weeds in lentil and pea, but the effects of these herbicides on these crops and the subsequently planted winter wheat crop are not well known. The component and combined effects of several rates of imazethapyr and pendimethalin on growth and yield of lentil and pea and the subsequently planted winter wheat crop were measured in 1997 and 1998 field experiments. No herbicide treatment reduced lentil or pea biomass or seed yield compared with the untreated control. Wheat biomass was reduced 35 to 51%, and grain yield was reduced 11 to 17% in all plots treated with 2,240 g/ha pendimethalin at the lentil hilltop site. Imazethapyr at 106 g/ha plus 1,120 g/ha pendimethalin also reduced wheat biomass 24% at the lentil hilltop site. Wheat was not injured at other sites or by other treatments at the lentil hilltop site.

Keywords

Imazethapyrpendimethalinlentil, Lens culinaris L.pea, Pisum sativum L.wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Herbicide persistencerotational crop safetyDAP, days after plantingDAT, days after treatmentPPI, preplant incorporated
Type
Note
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2001 , pp. 190 - 194
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

Anderson, J.P.E. 1984. Herbicide degradation in soil: influence of microbial biomass. Soil Biol. Biochem. 16: 483–489.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1994. Herbicide Handbook for the Weed Science Society of America. Champaign, IL: Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 301 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1998. Crop Protection Reference. 14th ed. New York: C and P Press. pp. 184–222.Google Scholar
Barua, A. S., Saha, J., Chaudhuri, S., Chowdhury, A., and Adityachaudhury, N. 1990. Degradation of pendimethalin by soil fungi. Pestic. Sci. 29: 419–425.Google Scholar
Brammer, T. A. and Thill, D. C. 1997. Broadleaf weed control in spring pea with imazethapyr and pendimethalin combinations. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep. p. 81.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. and Thill, D. C. 1998. Pre-emergence and postemergence herbicides in lentil and pea. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep. p. 114.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. R., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. R. 1989. Biodegradation characteristics of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 37: 815–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Che, M., Loux, M. M., Traina, S. J., and Logan, T. J. 1992. Effect of pH on sorption and desorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on clays and humic acid. J. Environ. Qual. 21: 698–703.Google Scholar
Cook, R. J. and Veseth, R. J. 1991. Wheat Health Management. St. Paul, MN: The American Phytopathological Society. pp. 87–136.Google Scholar
Flint, J. L. and Witt, W. W. 1997. Microbial degradation of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 45: 586–591.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gbur, E. E. Jr. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38: 421–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, B. D. 1999. Effects of imazethapyr and pendimethalin on lentil (Lens culinaris), pea (Pisum sativum), and a subsequent winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) crop. . University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. 52 p.Google Scholar
Kulshrestha, G. and Singh, S. B. 1992. Influence of soil moisture and microbial activity on pendimethalin degradation. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 48: 269–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loux, M. M. and Reese, K. D. 1993. Effect of soil type and pH on persistence and carryover of imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 7: 452–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahler, R. L. and McDole, R. E. 1987. The relationship of soil pH and crop yields in northern Idaho. Coop. Ext. Serv. Bull. 811. Moscow, ID: Univ. of Idaho College of Agriculture. 4 p.Google Scholar
Mangles, G. 1991. Behavior of the imidazolinone herbicides in soil—A review of the literature. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 191–209.Google Scholar
Murray, G. A., Kephart, K. D., O'Keeffe, L. E., Auld, D. L., and Callihan, R. H. 1987. Dry pea, lentil, and chickpea production in northern Idaho. Coop. Ext. Serv. Bull. 664. Moscow, ID: Univ. of Idaho College of Agriculture. 15 p.Google Scholar
Neider, T. L. and Thill, D. C. 1996. Broadleaf weed control in lentil with imazethapyr combinations. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep. p. 76.Google Scholar
Parochetti, J. V. and Dec, G. W. Jr. 1978. Photodecomposition of eleven dinitroanaline herbicides. Weed Sci. 26: 153–156.Google Scholar
Renner, K. A. and Powell, G. E. 1992. Response of navy bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) grown in rotation to clomazone, imazethapyr, bentazon, and acifluorfen. Weed Sci. 40: 127–133.Google Scholar
Savage, K. E. 1978. Persistence of several dinitroanaline herbicides as affected by soil moisture. Weed Sci. 26: 465–471.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems. 1991. SAS/STAT® Users's Guide: Statistics. 5th ed. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 582 p.Google Scholar
Shinn, S. L. and Thill, D. C. 1997. Bugloss control in lentil with imazethapyr and pendimethalin combinations. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Res. Prog. Rep. p. 80.Google Scholar
Singh, S. B. and Kulshrestha, G. 1991. Microbial degradation of pendimethalin. J. Environ. Sci. Health B. 26: 309–321.Google Scholar
Stougaard, R. N., Shea, P. J., and Martin, A. R. 1990. Effect of soil type and pH on adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38: 67–73.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1994. Response of flax and lentil to seeding rates, depths and spring applications of dinitroaniline herbicides. Can. J. Plant Sci. 74: 875–882.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L., Catizone, P., and Butcher, A. C. 1984. Degradation of pendimethalin in soil. Weed Sci. 32: 408–412.Google Scholar