Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:44:51.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Insecticide Seed Treatments as Safeners to Drift Rates of Herbicides in Soybean and Grain Sorghum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2017

Nicholas R. Steppig ,
Jason K. Norsworthy ,
Robert C. Scott  and
Gus M. Lorenz
Nicholas R. Steppig*
Affiliation:
Graduate Assistant, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
Jason K. Norsworthy
Affiliation:
Professor and Elms Farming Chair of Weed Science, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
Robert C. Scott
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Lonoke, AR, USA
Gus M. Lorenz
Affiliation:
Extension Entomologist, Department of Entomology, Lonoke Extension Center, University of Arkansas, Lonoke, AR, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Nicholas R. Steppig, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701. (Email: nsteppig@uark.edu).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous research has shown that some insecticide seed treatments provide safening effects in rice following exposure to low rates of the herbicides glyphosate and imazethapyr. However, no research has been conducted to determine whether a similar effect may be seen in soybean or grain sorghum, two important rotational crops across the Midsouth. To evaluate the potential safening effects of insecticide seed treatments in these two crops, field trials were conducted in Marianna, AR, in 2015 and 2016, and near Colt, AR, in 2016. In soybean, glyphosate, glufosinate, 2,4-D, dicamba, halosulfuron, mesotrione, tembotrione, and propanil were applied at low rates to simulate drift events, in combination with the insecticide seed treatments thiamethoxam and clothianidin at labeled rates. In grain sorghum, glyphosate, imazethapyr, and quizalofop were applied at low rates in combination with the insecticide seed treatments thiamethoxam, clothianidin, and imidacloprid at labeled rates. Injury reduction was seen at 1 site-year for glyphosate, glufosinate, 2,4-D, dicamba, mesotrione, and tembotrione, and at 2 of 3 site-years for halosulfuron. At 1 site-year, the safening in halosulfuron resulted in increases in both crop height and yield. In grain sorghum, reducing injury via seed treatments was generally more successful. All three herbicides applied in sorghum displayed instances of injury reduction when seed treatments were used at 1 or more site-years, including reducing injury upward of 40% in the case of quizalofop+clothianidin at Marianna in 2016. For 2 site-years, injury reduction through the use of insecticides resulted in increases in crop height and grain yield in grain sorghum compared with no insecticide use. Although the degree of safening seen varied depending on site-year in both crops, growers who use insecticide seed treatments on an annual basis may expect to see a safening effect from drift events of most herbicides evaluated in both soybean and grain sorghum.

Keywords

Prashant Jha, Montana State University2,4-Dclothianidindicambaglyphosateglufosinatehalosulfuronimazethapyrimidaclopridmesotrionepropanilquizalofoptembotrionethiamethoxamrice, Oryza sativa L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merrgrain sorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) MoenchHerbicide driftherbicide safeners
Type
Weed Management-Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 150 - 158
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2017 

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

Al-Khatib, K, Claassen, MM, Stahlman, PW, Geier, PW, Regehr, DL, Duncan, SR Heer, WF (2003) Grain sorghum response to simulated drift from glufosinate, glyphosate, imazethapyr, and sethoxadim. Weed Technol 17:261–265 Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K, Peterson, D (1999) Soybean (Glycine max) response to simulated drift from selected sulfonylurea herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Weed Technol 13:264–270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auch, DE, Arnold, WE (1978) Dicamba use and injury on soybeans in South Dakota. Weed Sci 26:471–475 Google Scholar
Bailey, W, DiFonzo, C, Hodgson, E, Hunt, T, Jarvi, K, Jensen, B, Knodel, J, Koch, R, Krupke, C, McCornack, B, Michel, A, Peterson, J, Potter, B, Szczepaniec, A, Tilmon, K, Tooker, J, Zukoff, S (2015) The Effectiveness of Neonicotinoid Seed Treatments in Soybean. https://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/soybean/pest/docs/effectiveness-of-neonicotinoid-seed-treatments-in-soybean.pdf. Accessed: February 15, 2017Google Scholar
Barrett, M (1989) Protection of corn (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from imazethapyr toxicity with antidotes. Weed Sci 37:296–301 Google Scholar
Davies, J, Caseley, JC (1999) Herbicide safeners: a review. Pestic Sci 55:1043–1058 Google Scholar
Douglas, MR, Tooker, JF (2015) Large-scale deployment of seed treatments has driven rapid increase in use of neonicotinoid insecticides and preemptive pest management in U.S. field crops. Environ Sci Technol 49:5088–5097 Google Scholar
Droog, F (1997) Plant glutathione S-transferases, a tale of theta and tau. J Plant Growth Regul 14:95–107 Google Scholar
Durrant, WE, Dong, X (2004) Systemic acquired resistance. Annu Rev Pytopathol 42:185–209 Google Scholar
Ellis, JM, Griffin, JL (2002) Soybean (Glycine max) and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to drift of glyphosate and glufosinate. Weed Technol 16:580–586 Google Scholar
Espinosa, L, Kelley, J (2004) Arkansas Grain Sorghum Production Handbook. Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Miscellaneous Publications 297. Little Rock, AR: University of Arkansas Google Scholar
Ford, KA, Casida, JE, Chandran, D, Gulevich, AG, Okrent, RA, Durkin, KA, Sarpong, R, Bunnelle, EM, Wildermuth, MC (2010) Neonicotinoid insecticides induce salicylate-associated plant defense responses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:17527–17532 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatzios, K, Burgos, N (2004) Metabolism-based herbicide resistance: regulation by safeners. Weed Sci 52:454–467 Google Scholar
Hatzios, KK (1989) Mechanisms of action of herbicide safeners: an overview. Pages 65–101 in Hatzios KK & Hoagland RE eds, Crop Safeners for Herbicides: Development, Uses, and Mechanisms of Action. San Francisco: Academic Press Google Scholar
Heap, I (2017) International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.com/summary/home.aspx. Accessed: February 9, 2017Google Scholar
Hoagland, RE (1987) Isolation and some properties of an aryl acylamidase from red rice, Oryza sativa L., that metabolizes 3′,4′,-dichloropropionanilide. Plant Cell Physiol 19:1019–1029 Google Scholar
Hoagland, RE, Norsworthy, JK, Carey, F, Talbert, RE (2004) Metabolically based resistance to the herbicide propanil in Echinochloa species. Weed Technol 52:475–486 Google Scholar
Marrs, KA (1996) The functions and regulation of glutathione S-transferases in plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 47:127–158 Google Scholar
Miller, MR, Scott, RC, Lorenz, G, Hardke, J, Norsworthy, JK (2016) Effect of insecticide seed treatment on safening rice from reduced rates of glyphosate and imazethapyr. Int J Agron. doi: 10.1155/2016/7623743 Google 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(SP1): 31–62 Google Scholar
North, JH, Gore, J, Catchot, AL, Stewart, SD, Lorenz, GM, Musser, FR, Cook, DR, Kerns, DL, Dodds, DM (2016) Value of neonicotinoid insecticide seed treatments in Mid-south soybean (Glycine max) production systems. J Econ Entomol 2016:1–5 Google Scholar
Purcell, L, Salmeron, M, Ashlock, L (2014) Soybean Growth and Development. Arkansas Soybean Production Handbook. Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Miscellaneous Publications 197. Little Rock, AR: University of Arkansas Google Scholar
Riar, DS, Norsworthy, JK, Steckel, LE, Stephenson, DO, Bond, JA (2013a) Adoption of best management practices for herbicide-resistant weeds in midsouthern United States cotton, rice, and soybean. Weed Technol 27:788–797 Google Scholar
Riar, DS, Norsworthy, JK, Steckel, LE, Stephenson, DO, Bond, JA (2013b) Consultant perspectives on weed management needs in midsouthern United States cotton: A follow-up survey. Weed Technol 27:778–787 Google Scholar
Riechers, DE, Kreuz, K, Zhang, Q (2010) Detoxification without intoxication: herbicide safeners activate plant defense gene expression. Plant Phys 153:3–13 Google Scholar
Roider, CA, Griffin, JL, Harrison, SA, Jones, CA (2007) Wheat response to simulated glyphosate drift. Weed Technol 21:1010–1015 Google Scholar
Ryals, JA, Neuenschwander, UH, Willits, MG, Molina, A, Steiner, HY, Hunt, MD (1996) Systemic acquired resistance. Plant Cell 6:1809–1819 Google Scholar
Spotanski, RF, Burnside, OC (1973) Reducing herbicide injury to sorghum with crop protectants. Weed Sci 21:531–536 Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2016) Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed: February 9, 2017Google Scholar
Vlot, CA, Dempsey, DA, Klessig, DF (2009) Salicylic acid, a multifaceted hormone to combat plant disease. Annu Rev Phytopathol 2009 47:177–206 Google Scholar
Wolf, TM, Grover, R, Wallace, K, Shewchuk, SR, Maybank, J (1993) Effect of protective shields on drift and deposition characteristics of field sprayers. Pages 29–52 in The Role of Application Factors in the Effectiveness and Drift of Herbicides. Regina, SK: Agriculture Canada Research Station Google Scholar
York, AC, Jordan, DL, Frans, RE (1991) Insecticides modify cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to clomazone. Weed Technol. 5:729–735 Google Scholar
Yuan, S, Lin, HH (2007) Role of salicylic acid in abiotic stress. Z Naturforsch 63:318–320 Google Scholar