Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:18:01.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Glyphosate and Glufosinate on Weed Control and Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) Yield in Herbicide-Tolerant Sugarbeet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert G. Wilson ,
C. Dean Yonts  and
John A. Smith
Robert G. Wilson*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
C. Dean Yonts
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Nebraska, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
John A. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Nebraska, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: rwilson1@unl.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field trials were conducted in 1999 and 2000 to determine the influence of weed size and the number of glyphosate or glufosinate applications on weed control and sugarbeet yield. Glyphosate at 840 g/ha or glufosinate at 390 g/ha was applied one, two, or three times, beginning when the average weed height was 3, 10, 15, or 25 cm. Two sequential applications of glyphosate applied to 10-cm weeds or three sequential applications of glufosinate applied to 3-cm weeds provided weed control comparable to three sequential applications of desmedipham plus phenmedipham plus triflusulfuron plus clopyralid. Weed control and sugarbeet root yield were optimal for two postemergence applications of glyphosate and for three applications of glufosinate. Glyphosate provided greater control of redroot pigweed and common lambsquarters than glufosinate. Sugarbeet sucrose yield with both glyphosate and glufosinate weed control programs was nearly 10,000 kg/ha. Compared with two sequential applications of glyphosate, sucrose yield of glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet was reduced 15% by three sequential applications of desmedipham plus phenmedipham plus triflusulfuron plus clopyralid. Sucrose yields were similar between three sequential applications of glufosinate and three applications of desmedipham plus phenmedipham plus triflusulfuron plus clopyralid.

Keywords

Clopyraliddesmediphamglufosinateglyphosatephenmediphamtriflusulfuroncommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. #3 CHEALredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREsugarbeet, Beta vulgaris L. ‘HM 1605RR’, ‘HM 1640RR’, ‘Beta 1399LL’, ‘Beta 4546LL’Setaria viridisSETVISolanum sarrachoidesSOLSA
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 2002 , pp. 66 - 73
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

Association of Official Agriculture Chemists. 1955. Official Methods of Analysis. 8th ed. Washington. pp. 564–568.Google Scholar
Beyers, J. T. and Smeda, R. J. 1998. Influence of light duration and intensity on glufosinate activity. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:114.Google Scholar
Bjork, K. L., Durgan, B. R., Gunsolus, J. L., and Koukkari, W. L. 1999. Time of day of application effect on glyphosate and glufosinate efficacy. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 54: 23–24.Google Scholar
Coetzer, E., Al-Khatib, K., and Anderson, M. D. 2000. Glufosinate efficacy, absorption, and translocation in pigweed species as affected by relative humidity. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 53: 16–18.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., Batts, R. B., and Jennings, K. M. 1999. Weed management systems in liberty link and roundup ready soybean (Glycine max). Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52: 56–57.Google Scholar
Dexter, A. G. and Luecke, J. L. 1999. Conventional herbicides at micro-rates, glyphosate and glufosinate for weed control in sugarbeet. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 54: 158–159.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., Kirkland, K. J., Derksen, D. A., and Wall, D. 2000. Herbicide-tolerant canola: weed control and yield comparisons in western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 80: 647–654.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., Matthews, J. L., Baldwin, J. L., and Maschoff, J. 1999. Evaluation of glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) and glufosinate: efficacy on annual weeds. Weed Technol. 13: 691–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madsen, K. H. and Jensen, J. E. 1995. Weed-control in glyphosate-tolerant sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.). Weed Res. 35: 105–111.Google Scholar
Martin, A. R., Roeth, F. W., Wilson, R. G., Wicks, G. A., Klein, R. N., Lyon, D. J., and Knezevic, S. Z. 2001. 2001 Guide for Weed Management in Nebraska. Nebraska Cooperative Extension EC01-130D. 106 p.Google Scholar
Mesbah, A., Miller, S. D., Fornstrom, K. J., and Legg, D. E. 1994. Kochia (Kochia scoparia) and green foxtail (Setaria vividis) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Technol. 8: 754–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, G. J., Wax, L. M., Simmons, F. W., and Phillips, W. H. II. 1997. Glufosinate efficacy on annual weeds is influenced by rate and growth stage. Weed Technol. 11: 484–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. J. 1999. Influence of herbicide application rate, timing, and interrow cultivation on weed control in corn (Zea mays) yield in glufosinate-resistant and glyphosate-resistant corn. Weed Technol. 13: 807–813.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E., Schabenberger, O., and Kells, J. J. 1999. Response of annual weed species to glufosinate and glyphosate. Weed Technol. 13: 542–547.Google Scholar
Wicks, G. A. and Wilson, R. G. 1983. Control of weeds in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris) with hand hoeing and herbicides. Weed Sci. 31: 493–499.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G. 1999a. Glyphosate and glufosinate for weed control in herbicide tolerant sugarbeet. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol. Abstr. 49.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G. 1999b. Response of nine sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) cultivars to postemergence herbicide applications. Weed Technol. 13: 25–29.Google Scholar