Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:24:48.144Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trifloxysulfuron Plus Pyrithiobac Mixtures for Broadleaf Weed Control in Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert J. Richardson ,
Henry P. Wilson ,
Gregory R. Armel  and
Thomas E. Hines
Robert J. Richardson
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Tech, Painter, VA 23420
Henry P. Wilson*
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Tech, Painter, VA 23420
Gregory R. Armel
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Tech, Painter, VA 23420
Thomas E. Hines
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Tech, Painter, VA 23420
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: hwilson@vt.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies were conducted in 1999, 2000, and 2001 to evaluate broadleaf weed control in cotton from POST applications of trifloxysulfuron plus pyrithiobac. Trifloxysulfuron was applied at 2.5, 5, and 7.5 g ai/ha, and pyrithiobac was applied at 0, 17, and 35 g ai/ha in a factorial treatment arrangement. Cotton injury was affected by rates of both herbicides at 7 and 14 d after treatment (DAT) with injury ranging from 19 to 26%. Broadleaf weed control at 28 DAT from mixtures of the herbicides was generally commercially acceptable. Combinations of 17 or 35 g/ha pyrithiobac plus trifloxysulfuron controlled common ragweed, velvetleaf, common lambsquarters, annual morningglory species (ivyleaf morningglory, pitted morningglory, and tall morningglory), common cocklebur, spurred anoda, and jimsonweed at least 73% at 28 DAT. Trifloxysulfuron applied alone failed to control velvetleaf, spurred anoda, and jimsonweed. Cotton yield reflected weed control and yields increased with pyrithiobac rates. It is concluded that the spectra of the weeds controlled by trifloxysulfuron and pyrithiobac were highly complementary in these studies.

Keywords

Trifloxysulfuronpyrithiobacannual morningglory species, Ipomoea sppcommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #3 XANSTcommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALcommon ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L # AMBELivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq. # IPOHEjimsonweed, Datura stramonium L. # DATSTpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAspurred anoda, Anoda cristata (L.) Schlecht. # ANVCRtall morningglory, Ipomoea purpurea (L.) Roth # PHBPUvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medicus # ABUTHcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Acetolactate synthase (ALS)herbicide mixturesALS, acetolactate synthase enzyme (EC 4.1.3.18)POSD, postdirected
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , March 2006 , pp. 130 - 136
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

Anonymous. 2002. Published estimates for cotton acreage, yield and production, 2000–2001. Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service: Web page: http://www.nass.usda.gov/va. Accessed: October 9, 2004.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2003. Envoke® herbicide label. Greensborough, NC: Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. 16 p.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 2002. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of foliar-applied trifloxysulfuron in cotton, peanut and selected weeds. Weed Sci. 50:293–298.Google Scholar
Branson, J. W., Smith, K. L., Barrentine, J. L., and Namenek, R. C. 2002. Cotton phytotoxicity with trifloxysulfuron as influenced by soil moisture, temperature, and tank mixes. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:29.Google Scholar
Brecke, B. J., Bridges, D. C., and Grey, T. 2000. Trifloxysulfuron for postemergence weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:28–29.Google Scholar
Burke, I. C. and Wilcut, J. W. 2004. Weed management in cotton with trifloxysulfuron, fluometuron, and pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 18:268–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crooks, H. L., York, A. C., Culpepper, A. S., and Brownie, C. 2003. CGA-362622 antagonizes annual grass control by graminicides in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 17:373–380.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1997. Weed management in no-tillage bromoxynil-tolerant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 11:335–345.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 2000. Weed management in ultra-narrow row cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 14:19–29.Google Scholar
Donohue, S. J. and Heckendorn, S. E. 1994. Soil test recommendations for Virginia. Virginia Coop. Ext. Serv. Publ. 834. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2005. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds: Web page: http://www.weedscience.org. Accessed: March 18, 2005.Google Scholar
Hudetz, M., Foery, W., Wells, J., and Soares, J. E. 2000. Trifloxysulfuron, a new low rate Novartis post-emergent herbicide for cotton and sugarcane. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:163–166.Google Scholar
Jennings, K. M., Culpepper, A. S., and York, A. C. 1999. Cotton response to temperature and pyrithiobac. J. Cotton Sci. 3:132–138.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993a. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7:159–162.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993b. Influence of application rate and timing on efficacy of DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7:216–219.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993c. Influence of application variables on efficacy of postemergence applications of DPX-PE350. Weed Technol. 7:619–624.Google Scholar
Keeling, J. W., Henninger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1993. Effects of DPX-PE350 on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) growth, yield, and fiber quality. Weed Technol. 7:930–933.Google Scholar
Manley, B. S., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 1998. Characterization of imidazolinone-resistant smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus). Weed Technol. 12:575–584.Google Scholar
Nezu, Y., Saito, Y., Takahashi, S., and Tomoda, Y. 1999. Development of a new cotton herbicide, pyrithiobac sodium. J. Pestic. Sci. 24:217–229.Google Scholar
Paulsgrove, M. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 2001. Weed management with pyrithiobac preemergence in bromoxynil-resistant cotton. Weed Sci. 49:567–570.Google Scholar
Porterfield, D., Wilcut, J. W., and Askew, S. D. 2002a. Weed management with trifloxysulfuron, fluometuron, and prometryn in cotton. Weed Sci. 50:642–647.Google Scholar
Porterfield, D., Wilcut, J. W., Clewis, S. B., and Edmisten, K. L. 2002b. Weed-free response of seven cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) cultivars to trifloxysulfuron postemergence. Weed Technol. 16:180–183.Google Scholar
Poston, D. H., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 2000. Imidazolinone resistance in several Amaranthus hybridus populations. Weed Sci. 48:508–513.Google Scholar
Richardson, R. J., Wilson, H. P., Armel, G. R., and Hines, T. E. 2003a. Combinations of CGA 362622 and bromoxynil for broadleaf weed control in bromoxynil-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 17:496–502.Google Scholar
Richardson, R. J., Hatzios, K. K., and Wilson, H. P. 2003b. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of trifloxysulfuron in cotton, spurred anoda, and smooth pigweed. Weed Sci. 51:157–162.Google Scholar
Richardson, R. J., Wilson, H. P., Armel, G. R., and Hines, T. E. 2004. Influence of adjuvants on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to postemergence applications of CGA 362622. Weed Technol. 18:9–15.Google Scholar
Shankle, M. W., Hayes, R. M., Reich, V. H., and Mueller, T. C. 1996. MSMA and pyrithiobac effects on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) development, yield, and quality. Weed Sci. 44:137–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimzu, T., Nakayama, I., Nakao, T., Nezu, Y., and Abe, H. 1994. Inhibition of plant acetolactate synthase by herbicides, pyrimidinylsalicylic acids. J. Pestic. Sci. 19:59–67.Google Scholar
Smith, M. C., McClelland, M. R., Carter, P. C., Corkern, C. B., and Reynolds, D. B. 1996. Weed control and cotton varietal sensitivity with Staple herbicide. in Dugger, C. P. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., Nashville, TN. January 9–12, 1996. Memphis, TN: National Cotton Council of America. Pp. 1536.Google Scholar
Sunderland, S. L. and Coble, H. D. 1994. Differential tolerance of morningglory species (Ipomoea sp.) to DPX-PE350. Weed Sci. 42:227–232.Google Scholar
Sunderland, S. L., Burton, J. D., Coble, H. D., and Maness, E. P. 1995. Physiological mechanism for tall morningglory (Ipomoea purpurea) resistance to DPX-PE350. Weed Sci. 43:21–27.Google Scholar
Tredaway, J. A., Patterson, M. G., and Wehtje, G. R. 1997. Efficacy of pyrithiobac and bromoxynil applied with low volume spray systems. Weed Technol. 11:725–730.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P., Shaw, D. R., Baughman, T. A., Snipes, C. E., and Bryson, C. T. 2000. Influence of cultivation timing on pyrithiobac performance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 14:116–121.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. 1998. Influence of pyrithiobac sodium on purple (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow nutsedge (C. esculentus). Weed Sci. 46:111–115.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Jordan, D. L. 1995. Weed management systems from oil seed crops. in Smith, A. E., ed. Handbook of Weed Management Systems. New York: Marcel Dekker. Pp. 343–400.Google Scholar