Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T16:19:02.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sulfonylurea Herbicides Affect Hard Red Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Forage and Grain Yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jeffrey A. Koscelny ,
Thomas F. Peeper  and
Eugene G. Krenzer Jr.
Jeffrey A. Koscelny
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Thomas F. Peeper
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Eugene G. Krenzer Jr.
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted to determine whether residual sulfonylurea herbicides applied at cheat suppression rates affect hard red winter wheat forage production and grain yield. Triasulfuron at 30 g/ha or chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron at 26 g/ha applied PRE and metribuzin applied early POST alone at 280 g/ha or tank-mixed with triasulfuron at 158 + 30 g/ha or chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron at 210 + 21 g/ha, all decreased total forage production of weed-free wheat. Conversely, all herbicide treatments except triasulfuron applied PRE increased wheat grain yield.

Keywords

Chlorsulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidemetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onemetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidtriasulfuron, 2-(2-chloroethoxy)-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidecheat, Bromus secalinus L. ♯3BROSEwheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Karl,’ ‘2180.’Chlorsulfuronmetribuzinmetsulfurontriasulfuron
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , September 1996 , pp. 531 - 534
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by the 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

1. Anderson, R. L. 1986. Metribuzin and chlorsulfuron effects on grain of treated winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 34:734–737.Google Scholar
2. Bloyd, B. L. and Cole, J. D. 1992. Oklahoma Agricultural Statistics Service, Oklahoma Dep. Agric, 2800 N. Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK. p. 27.Google Scholar
3. Denman, C. E. and Arnold, J. 1970. Seasonal forage production for small-grains species in Oklahoma. Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 680. Stillwater. 21 p.Google Scholar
4. Driver, J. E., Peeper, T. F., and Koscelny, J. A. 1993. Cheat (Bromus secalinus) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:851–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Ferreira, K. L., Baker, T. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1990. Factors influencing winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) injury from sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:724–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Ferreira, K. L. Peeper, T.F., and Epplin, F. M. 1990. Economic returns from cheat (Bromus secalinus) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 4:306–313.Google Scholar
7. Harper, H. J. 1961. Grazing and clipping experiments with small-grain pastures in South Central Oklahoma. Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 585. Stillwater. 14 p.Google Scholar
8. Johnston, R. A., Johnson, G. V., and Tucker, B. B. 1983. Guidelines for topdressing wheat in 1983. Current Rep. 2234. Coop. Ext. Serv., Div. Agric., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 4 p.Google Scholar
9. Klingaman, T. E. and Peeper, T. F. 1989. Weed control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with chlorsulfuron and CGA 131036 and comparison of mode of action. Weed Technol. 3:490–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Koscelny, J. A. and Peeper, T. F. 1994. Early postemergence cheat (Bromus secalinus) suppression in wheat with sulfonylurea herbicides tank-mixed with metribuzin. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:26.Google Scholar
11. Krenzer, E. and Doye, D. 1988. Economic evaluation of wheat varieties grown for forage plus grain. Current Rep. 2100. Coop. Ext. Serv., Div. Agric, Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK. 7 p.Google Scholar
12. Martin, D. A., Miller, S. D., and Alley, H. P. 1989. Winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) response to herbicides applied at three growth stages. Weed Technol. 3:90–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Peek, D. C. and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Phytotoxicity, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin and its ethylthio analog as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 37:419–423.Google Scholar
14. Ratliff, R. L. and Peeper, T. F. 1987. Bromus control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with ethylthio analog of metribuzin. Weed Technol. 1:235–241.Google Scholar
15. Runyan, T. J., McNeil, W. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Differential tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:94–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Scott, R. C., Peeper, T. F., and Koscelny, J. A. 1995. Winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) yield response to winter annual broadleaf weed control. Weed Technol. 9:594–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Stahlman, P. W. and El-hamid, M. A. 1994. Sulfonylurea herbicides suppress downy brome (Bromus tectorum) in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 8:812–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar