Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:29:12.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Palmer Amaranth and Sweetpotato to Flumioxazin/Pyroxasulfone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2018

Shawn C. Beam ,
Sushila Chaudhari ,
Katherine M. Jennings ,
David W. Monks ,
Stephen L. Meyers ,
Jonathan R. Schultheis ,
Mathew Waldschmidt  and
Jeffrey L. Main
Shawn C. Beam
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Sushila Chaudhari*
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Research Scholar, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Katherine M. Jennings
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
David W. Monks
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Stephen L. Meyers
Affiliation:
Assistant Extension/Research Professor, North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Pontotoc Ridge–Flatwoods Branch Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Pontotoc, MS, USA
Jonathan R. Schultheis
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Mathew Waldschmidt
Affiliation:
Research Technician, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Jeffrey L. Main
Affiliation:
Senior Research Associate, North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Pontotoc Ridge–Flatwoods Branch Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Pontotoc, MS, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Sushila Chaudhari, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, William Hall, 101 Derieux Place, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695. (E-mail: schaudh@ncsu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies were conducted to determine the tolerance of sweetpotato and Palmer amaranth control to a premix of flumioxazin and pyroxasulfone pretransplant (PREtr) followed by (fb) irrigation. Greenhouse studies were conducted in a factorial arrangement of four herbicide rates (flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone PREtr at 105/133 and 57/72 g ai ha–1, S-metolachlor PREtr 803 g ai ha–1, nontreated) by three irrigation timings [2, 5, and 14 d after transplanting (DAP)]. Field studies were conducted in a factorial arrangement of seven herbicide treatments (flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone PREtr at 40/51, 57/72, 63/80, and 105/133 g ha–1, 107 g ha–1 flumioxazin PREtr fb 803 g ha–1S-metolachlor 7 to 10 DAP, and season-long weedy and weed-free checks) by three 1.9-cm irrigation timings (0 to 2, 3 to 5, or 14 DAP). In greenhouse studies, flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone reduced sweetpotato vine length and shoot and storage root fresh biomass compared to the nontreated check and S-metolachlor. Irrigation timing had no influence on vine length and root fresh biomass. In field studies, Palmer amaranth control was≥91% season-long regardless of flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone rate or irrigation timing. At 38 DAP, sweetpotato injury was≤37 and≤9% at locations 1 and 2, respectively. Visual estimates of sweetpotato injury from flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone were greater when irrigation timing was delayed 3 to 5 or 14 DAP (22 and 20%, respectively) compared to 0 to 2 DAP (7%) at location 1 but similar at location 2. Irrigation timing did not influence no.1, jumbo, or marketable yields or root length-to-width ratio. With the exception of 105/133 g ha–1, all rates of flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone resulted in marketable sweetpotato yield and root length-to-width ratio similar to flumioxazin fb S-metolachlor or the weed-free checks. In conclusion, flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone PREtr at 40/51, 57/72, and 63/80 g ha–1 has potential for use in sweetpotato for Palmer amaranth control without causing significant crop injury and yield reduction.

Keywords

Peter J. Dittmar, University of FloridaFlumioxazinpyroxasulfoneS-metolachlorPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri (S.) Watson AMAPAsweetpotato, Ipomoea batatas (L.) LamApplication ratecrop injuryherbicide efficacystorage root shapetiming
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 128 - 134
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2018. 

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.)

Footnotes

Cite this article: Beam SC, Chaudhari S, Jennings KM, Monks DW, Meyers SL, Schultheis JR, Waldschmidt M, Main JL (2018) Response of palmer amaranth and sweetpotato to flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone. Weed Technol 33:128–134. doi: 10.1017/wet.2018.80

References

Anonymous (2016a) Fierce herbicide label. Walnut Creek, CA: Valent U.S.A Corporation. 15 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016b) Valor SX herbicide label. Walnut Creek, CA: Valent U.S.A Corporation. 31 pGoogle Scholar
Barkley, SL, Chaudhari, S, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Meyers, SL, Monks, DW (2016) Fomesafen programs for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control in sweetpotato. Weed Technol 30:506–515 Google Scholar
Cahoon, CW, York, AC, Jordan, DL (2012) Cotton tolerance and Palmer amaranth control with Zidua, Warrant, and Dual Magnum herbicides. Page 1535 in 2012 Beltwide Cotton Conferences. Orlando, FL: National Cotton Council of AmericaGoogle Scholar
Coleman, LB, Chaudhari, S, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Meyers, SL, Monks, DW (2016) Evaluation of herbicide timings for Palmer amaranth control in a stale seedbed sweetpotato production system. Weed Technol 30:725–732 Google Scholar
Frans, R, Talbert, R, Marx, D, Crowley, H (1986) Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. Pages 29–46 in Camper ND, ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. 3rd edn. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Sci Soc Google Scholar
Heap, I (2018) The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/summary/MOA.aspx?MOAID=12. Accessed: March 26, 2018.Google Scholar
Kemble, JM (2017) Southeastern U.S. Vegetable Crop Handbook. Lincolnshire IL: Vance, p 286Google Scholar
Mahoney, KJ, Shropshire, C, Sikkema, PH (2014) Weed management in conventional- and no-till soybean using flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone. Weed Technol 28:298–306 Google Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW (2012) Response of sweetpotato cultivars to S-metolachlor rate and application time. Weed Technol 26:474–479 Google Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Monks, DW (2013) Herbicide-based weed management programs for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in sweetpotato. Weed Technol 27:331–340 Google Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Monks, DW (2010a) Evaluation of flumioxazin and S-metolachlor rate and timing for palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control in sweetpotato. Weed Technol 24:495–503 Google Scholar
Meyers, SL, Jennings, KM, Schultheis, JR, Monks, DW (2010b) Interference of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in sweetpotato. Weed Sci 58:199–203 Google Scholar
Miller, DK, Smith, TP, Mathews, MM (2013) Evaluation of weed control and sweet potato tolerance to alternative herbicides. Page 216 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society. Houston, TX: Southern Weed Science Society.Google Scholar
Monks, DW, Shankle, MW, Jennings, KM, Meyers, SL (2013) Herbicide Injury. Pages 110–119 in Clark CA, Ferrin DM, Smith TP, Holmes GJ, eds. Compendium of Sweetpotato Diseases, Pests, and Disorders. 2nd edn. St. Paul, MN: The American Phytopathological Society Google Scholar
Mueller, TC, Steckel, LE (2011) Efficacy and dissipation of pyroxasulfone and three chloroacetamides in a Tennessee field soil. Weed Sci 59:574–579 Google Scholar
[NCDACS] North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (2015) Research Stations Annual Report 2015. http://www.ncagr.gov/Research/documents/2015_Annual_Report_000.pdf. Accessed May 29, 2017Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Meyer, CJ, Stepanovic, S, Steckel, LE, Young, B, Bradley, KW, Johnson, WG, Loux, MM, Davis, VM, Eubank, TW, Kruger, GR (2014) Program approaches for managing Palmer amaranth and waterhemp using new soybean technologies. Page 188 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society. Birmingham, AL: Southern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Nurse, RE, Sikkema, PH, Robinson, DE (2011) Weed control and sweet maize (Zea mays L.) yield as affected by pyroxasulfone dose. Crop Prot 30:789–793 Google Scholar
Prostko, EP, Grey, TL, Webster, TM, Kemerait, RC (2011) Peanut tolerance to pyroxasulfone. Peanut Sci 38:111–114 Google Scholar
Refsell, DE, Ott, EJ, Dale, TM, Pawlak, JA (2009) V-10233 performance in midwest soybean fields. Page 82 in Proceedings of the North Central Weed Science Society. Champaign, IL: North Central Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Rolston, LH, Riley, EG, Wilson, PW, Robbins, ML, Clark, CA, Cannon, JM, Randle, WM (1987) ‘Beauregard’ sweet potato. HortScience 22:1338–1339 Google Scholar
Shankle, MW, Garrett, TF, Abukari, IA (2013) Weed management in sweetpotato with flumioxazin and pyroxasulfone. Page 217 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society. Houston, TX: Southern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Tanetani, Y, Kaku, K, Kawai, K, Fujioka, T, Shimizu, T (2009) Action mechanism of a novel herbicide, pyroxasulfone. Pestic Biochem Physiol 95:47–55 Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2005) United States Standards for Grades of Sweet Potatoes. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 5 pGoogle Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2018) Crop Production 2017 Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Deptartment of Agriculture. 50 pGoogle Scholar
Wauchope, RD, Baker, DB, Balu, K, Nelson, H (1994) Pesticides in surface and ground waters. Issue Paper No. 2 https://www.iatp.org/files/Pesticides_in_Surface_and_Ground_Water.htm. Accessed: August 10, 2017Google Scholar
Westra, EP, Shaner, DL, Barbarick, KA, Khosla, R (2015) Evaluation of sorption coefficients for pyroxasulfone, S-metolachlor, and dimethenamid-p. Air, Soil Water Res, 10.4137/ASWR.S19682Google Scholar
Yencho, GC, Pecota, KV, Schultheis, JR, VanEsbroeck, Z, Holmes, GJ, Little, BE, Thornton, AC, Truong, V (2008) ‘Covington’ sweetpotato. HortScience 43:1911–1914 Google Scholar