Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:48:00.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preharvest Applications of Glyphosate Affect Emergence and Seedling Growth of Field Pea (Pisum sativum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Mirza N. Baig ,
A. Lloyd Darwent ,
K. Neil Harker  and
John T. O'Donovan
Mirza N. Baig*
Affiliation:
Monsanto Canada Inc., Edmonton, AB, Canada T6M 1V7
A. Lloyd Darwent
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Beaverlodge, AB, Canada TOH 0C0
K. Neil Harker
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
John T. O'Donovan
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Beaverlodge, AB, Canada TOH 0C0
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: mnbaig@telusplanet.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 at Vegreville, Legal, and Lacombe, AB, to determine the effects of a preharvest application of glyphosate on seedling emergence and growth of field pea. Glyphosate was applied at 0.9 kg ai/ha at each of the three crop development stages, as determined by seed moisture content (SMC), to determinate (‘Ascona’ and ‘Radley’) and indeterminate (‘Miko’ and ‘Trapper’) cultivars. Applying glyphosate when the SMC was less than 30% had little to no effect on seedling emergence but reduced seedling shoot fresh weight in two of six experiments. Applying glyphosate at SMC above 40% reduced seedling emergence and shoot fresh weight in two and three of the six experiments, respectively. Reductions in seedling emergence and shoot fresh weight were greater from seeds collected from the top than from seeds collected from the bottom one-third of sprayed plants. Differences in response between determinate and indeterminate cultivars occurred, but there was no consistent trend. Given the variable maturity in most fields and on individual pea plants, applications of preharvest glyphosate to peas destined for seed production may decrease seed germination and biomass accumulation.

Keywords

Glyphosatefield pea, Pisum sativum L. ‘Ascona’, ‘Miko’, ‘Radley’, ‘Trapper’Crop desiccationdeterminate and indeterminate pea cultivarsharvest aidSMC, seed moisture content
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , December 2003 , pp. 655 - 665
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

Ali, S. 2002. Crop Protection 2002. Agdex 606-1. Edmonton, Canada: Publishing Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. 500 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2002. Alberta 2002 Specialty Crop Report. Edmonton, Canada: Publishing Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. 35 p.Google Scholar
Azlin, W. R. and McWhorter, C. G. 1981. Preharvest effects of applying glyphosate to soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 29:123–127.Google Scholar
Baur, J. R., Miller, F. R., and Bovey, R. W. 1977. Effects of preharvest desiccation with glyphosate on grain sorghum seed. Agron. J. 69:1015–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, A. C. and Shaw, D. R. 2000. Effect of preharvest desiccants on group IV Glycine max seed viability. Weed Sci. 48:426–430.Google Scholar
Bovey, R. W., Miller, F. R., and Baur, J. R. 1975. Preharvest desiccation of grain sorghum with glyphosate. Agron. J. 67:618–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerdeira, A. L., Cole, A. W., and Luthe, D. S. 1985. Cow pea (Vigna unguiculata) seed protein response to glyphosate. Weed Sci. 33:1–6.Google Scholar
Cessna, A. J., Darwent, A. L., Kirkland, K. J., Townley-Smith, L., Harker, K. N., and Lefkovitch, L. P. 1994. Residues of glyphosate and its metabolite AMPA in wheat seed and foliage following preharvest applications. Can. J. Plant Sci 74:653–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cessna, A. J., Darwent, A. L., Townley-Smith, L., Harker, K. N., and Kirkland, K. J. 2000. Residues of glyphosate and its metabolite AMPA in canola seed following preharvest applications. Can. J. Plant Sci 80:425–431.Google Scholar
Cessna, A. J., Darwent, A. L., Townley-Smith, L., Harker, K. N., and Kirkland, K. 2002. Residues of glyphosate and its metabolite AMPA in field pea, barley and flax seed following preharvest applications. Can. J. Plant Sci 82:485–489.Google Scholar
Cole, A. W. and Cerdeira, A. L. 1982. Southernpea response to glyphosate desiccation. Hortscience 17:244–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwent, A. L., Kirkland, K. J., Townley-Smith, L., Harker, K. N., and Cessna, A. J. 2000. Effect of preharvest applications of glyphosate on drying, yield and quality of canola. Can. J. Plant Sci 80:443–439.Google Scholar
Darwent, A. L., Kirkland, K. J., Townley-Smith, L., Harker, K. N., Cessna, A. J., Lukow, O. M., and Lefkovitch, L. P. 1994. Effect of preharvest application of glyphosate on drying, yield and quality of wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci 74:221–230.Google Scholar
Doliner, L. A. and Stewart, M. 1992. Decision Document E92-02. Preharvest use of glyphosate. Web page: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/pmra-arla/english/pdf/rdd/rdd_e9202-e.pdf. Accessed: September 13, 2002.Google Scholar
Don, R., Bartz, J., Bryant, G. F. M., Geffen, A. V., Lunn, G., Overaa, P., and Steiner, A. M. 1990. Germination and tetrazolium testing of treated barley seed samples from glyphosate treated crops in seven IST stations. Seed Sci. Technol 18:641–652.Google Scholar
Franz, J. E., Mao, M. K., and Sikorski, J. A. 1997. Glyphosate—A Unique Global Herbicide. Monograph 189. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. 653 p.Google Scholar
Hampton, J. G. and Hebblethwaite, P. D. 1982. The preharvest use of glyphosate in the ryegrass seed crop. Grass Forage Sci 37:243–248.Google Scholar
Hanson, K. M. and Graf, R. J. 2001. A Practical Guide for Malt Barley Production:. Web page: http://www.agpro.com/images/maltbarleyguide.pdf. Accessed: September 13, 2002.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., and Clayton, G. W. 2001. Timing weed removal in field pea (Pisum sativum). Weed Technol. 15:277–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassan, E. A. 1988. The influence of glyphosate on germination behavior of wheat (Triticum aestivum L). Z. Acker-Pflanzenb 161:73–78.Google Scholar
Jeffery, L. S., English, J. R., and Connell, J. 1981. The effects of fall application of glyphosate on corn (Zea mays), soybeans (Glycine max) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Sci. 29:190–195.Google Scholar
Klingman, D. L. and Murray, J. J. 1976. Germination of seeds of turfgrasses as affected by glyphosate and paraquat. Weed Sci. 24:191–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1990. GENSTAT—A Generalized Statistical Program. Oxford: The Numerical Algorithms Group.Google Scholar
Lefkovitch, L. P. 1993. Some fundamental concepts in planning and analyzing field experiments. Suppl. J. Appl. Seed Prod 11:26–39.Google Scholar
Locke, D., Landivar, J. A., and Moseley, D. 1995. The effects of rate and timing of glyphosate application on defoliation efficacy, regrowth inhabitation, lint, yield, fiber quality, and seed quality. in Dugger, C. P. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences; San Antonio, TX. Memphis, TN: National Cotton Council. Pp. 1088–1090.Google Scholar
McCullagh, P. and Nelder, J. A. 1989. Generalized Linear Models. London: Chapman and Hall. 409 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWhorther, C. G., Jordan, T. N., and Wills, G. D. 1980. Translocation of 14C-glyphosate in soybeans (Glycine max) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Sci. 28:113–118.Google Scholar
Moore, J. and Jettner, R. 2002. The effect of glyphosate, paraquat and diquat as a crop topping application on the germination of barley. Department of Agriculture, Western Australia: Web page: http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/cropupdates/2002/weeds/article51.pdf. Accessed: September 13, 2002.Google Scholar
Moshier, L., Turgeon, A. J., and Penner, D. 1976. Effects of glyphosate and siduron on turfgrass establishment. Weed Sci. 24:445–448.Google Scholar
O'Keefe, M. G. and Makepeace, R. J. 1985. Efficacy of glyphosate in arable situations. in Grossbard, E. and Atkinson, D., eds. The Herbicide Glyphosate. Toronto, Canada: Butterworths. Pp. 418–434.Google Scholar
Park, R. and Lopetinsky, K. 1999. Pulse Crops in Alberta. Edmonton, Canada: Publishing Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. Pp. 37–86.Google Scholar
Ratnayake, S. and Shaw, D. R. 1992. Effects of harvest-aid glyphosate on soybean (Glycine max) seed yield and quality. Weed Technol. 6:339–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, M. E. and Burnside, O. C. 1980. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in hemp dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum). Weed Sci. 28:13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shuma, J. M. and Raju, M. V. S. 1993. A histological study of the effect of glyphosate on seed development in wild oats (Avena fatua L). Weed Res. 33:43–51.Google Scholar
Whigham, D. K. and Stroller, E. W. 1979. Soybean desiccation by paraquat, glyphosate, and ametryn to accelerate harvest. Agron. J. 71:630–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yenish, J. P. and Young, F. L. 2000. Effect of preharvest glyphosate application on seed and seedling quality of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 14:212–217.Google Scholar
Young, F. L., Gealy, D. R., and Morrow, L. A. 1984. Effect of herbicides on germination and growth of four grass weeds. Weed Sci. 32:489–495.Google Scholar