Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:05:52.714Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Management, Fiber Quality, and Net Returns in No-Tillage Transgenic and Nontransgenic Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

William A. Bailey ,
John W. Wilcut  and
Robert M. Hayes
William A. Bailey
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, Box 7620, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, Box 7620, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Robert M. Hayes
Affiliation:
West Tennessee Experiment Station, University of Tennessee, Jackson, TN 38301
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies on weed management systems with bromoxynil-resistant, glyphosate-resistant, and nontransgenic cotton cultivars in a no-tillage environment were evaluated in North Carolina and Tennessee in 1997 and 1998. All weed management systems in nontransgenic and bromoxynil-resistant cotton controlled sicklepod 72 to 78%, whereas sicklepod was controlled at least 94% in glyphosate-resistant cotton. Entireleaf and pitted morningglory, smooth pigweed, and common cocklebur were controlled at least 92% with all management systems. Fiber quality was also measured in Tennessee. Micronaire and fiber strength ranged from 4.35 to 4.55 units and 28.6 to 30.1 g/tex, respectively, in bromoxynil-resistant and glyphosate-resistant cultivars that received postemergence over-the-top (POT) herbicides. Harvest trash content ranged from 0.80 to 1.15% in systems where POT and late postemergence–directed (LAYBY) herbicides were used and was 1.65% where multiple glyphosate applications were used with no LAYBY herbicides. Cotton lint yield and net returns were generally highest in systems that included bromoxynil or pyrithiobac POT followed by cyanazine plus MSMA LAYBY or multiple glyphosate treatments where no LAYBY herbicides were used.

Keywords

BromoxynilcyanazineglyphosateMSMApyrithiobaccommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #3 XANSTentireleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea var. integriuscula Gray # IPOHGpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAsicklepod, Senna obtusifolia (L.) Irwin and Barnaby # CASOBsmooth pigweed, Amaranthus hybridus L. # AMACHcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Stoneville 474’, ‘Stoneville BXN 47’, ‘Deltapine 5415RR’, ‘Paymaster 1220RR’Color gradeextraneous materialfiber lengthfiber strengthfiber uniformityharvest trashhigh-volume instrumentationgin turn outleaf grademicronairestaple lengthASN, as neededLAYBY, late postemergence–directedfbfollowed byPDS, postemergence-directed sprayPRE, preemergencePOT, postemergence over-the-top
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 117 - 126
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

Allen, R. L., Snipes, C. E., and Crowder, S. H. 1997. Fruiting response of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 11: 59–63.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1998. Summary of Annual Ownership Costs, Performance Rates, and Hourly Operation Costs by Machines. 1998 Field Crop Budgets. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University. 3 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2001a. Buctril 4EC herbicide label. EPA Registration No. 264-540. Research Triangle Park, NC: Aventis CropScience.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2001b. Roundup Ultra herbicide label. EPA Registration No. 524-475. St. Louis, MO: Monsanto Co.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D., Bailey, W. A., Scott, G. H., and Wilcut, J. W. 2002. Economic assessment of weed management for transgenic and non-transgenic cotton in tilled and non-tilled systems. Weed Sci. 50: 512–520.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 1999. Cost and weed management in glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 13: 308–313.Google Scholar
Batts, R. B., York, A. C., and Yelverton, F. H. 1998. Potential for Cotoran carryover to flue-cured tobacco. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 2: 873.Google Scholar
Brown, B., Cole, T., and Edmisten, K. 1997. Cotton. In Edmisten, K. L., ed. North Carolina Farm Enterprise Budget Guidelines. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. 76 p.Google Scholar
Buchanan, G. A. 1992. Reduced-tillage systems. In McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. R., eds. Weeds of Cotton: Characterization and Control. Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation. pp. 323–341.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. and York, A. C. 1987. Interaction of fluometuron and MSMA with sethoxydim and fluazifop. Weed Sci. 35: 270–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coble, H. D. and Byrd, J. D. 1992. Interference of weeds with cotton. In McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. R., eds. Weeds of Cotton: Characterization and Control. Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation. pp. 73–82.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. 1999. Weed management and net returns with transgenic, herbicide-resistant, and nontransgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 13: 411–420.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., and Brownie, C. 1998a. Influence of bromoxynil on annual grass control by graminicides. Weed Sci. 47: 123–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., Jennings, K. M., and Batts, R. B. 1998b. Interaction of bromoxynil and postemergence graminicides on large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis). Weed Technol. 12: 554–559.Google Scholar
Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1996. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and devil's-claw (Proboscidea louisianica) control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) with pyrithiobac. Weed Technol. 10: 7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmisten, K. L. 1998. Cotton classification. In Edmisten, K. L., ed. 1998 Cotton Information. Publication No. AG-417. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. pp. 198–206.Google Scholar
Edmisten, K. L. 2001. 2001 Cotton Information. Edmisten, K. L., ed. Publication No. AG-417. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. 215 p.Google Scholar
Frans, R., Talbert, R., Marx, D., and Crowley, H. 1986. Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. In Camper, N. D., ed. Research Methods in Weed Science, 3rd ed. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society. p. 37.Google Scholar
Guthrie, D. S. and York, A. C. 1993. Cotton development and yield following fluometuron applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 3: 501–504.Google Scholar
Jones, M. A. and Snipes, C. E. 1999. Tolerance of transgenic cotton to topical applications of glyphosate. J. Cotton Sci. 3: 19–26.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Weed Technol. 7: 159–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeling, J. W., Henniger, 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
Klee, H. J., Muskopf, Y. M., and Gasser, C. S. 1987. Cloning of an Arabidopsis thaliana gene encoding 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase: sequence analysis and manipulation to obtain glyphosate-tolerant plants. Mol. Gen. Genet. 210: 437–442.Google Scholar
Koskinen, W. C. and McWhorter, C. G. 1986. Weed control in conservation tillage. J. Soil Water Conserv. 41: 365–370.Google Scholar
Matthews, S. G., Rhodes, G. N. Jr., Mueller, T. C., and Hayes, R. M. 1998. Effects of Roundup Ultra on Roundup Ready cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1: 850.Google Scholar
McCloskey, W. B., Baker, P. B., and Sherman, W. 1998. Weeds and herbicides in Arizona: surveys of plant populations and grower practices. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1: 869–870.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, R. D. 1992. Review of the 1991 field trial results on bromoxynil-tolerant cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 2: 1316.Google Scholar
Monks, C. D., Patterson, M. G., Wilcut, J. W., and Delaney, D. P. 1999. Effect of pyrithiobac, MSMA, and DSMA on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) growth and yield. Weed Technol. 13: 6–11.Google Scholar
Naderman, G. C., Edmisten, K. L., York, A. C., and Bachelor, J. S. 1997. Cotton production with conservation tillage. In Edmisten, K. L., ed. 1998 Cotton Information. Publication No. AG-417. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. pp. 166–172.Google Scholar
Paulsgrove, M. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 1999. Weed management in bromoxynil-resistant Gossypium hirsutum . Weed Sci. 47: 596–601.CrossRefGoogle 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
Pline, W. A., Price, A. J., Wilcut, J. W., Edmisten, K. L., and Wells, R. 2001. Absorption and translocation of glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant cotton as influenced by application methods and growth stage. Weed Sci. 49: 460–467.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Viator, R., Wilcut, J. W., Edmisten, K. L., Thomas, J. F., and Wells, R. 2002a. Reproductive abnormalities in glyphosate-resistant cotton caused by lower CPH-EPSPS levels in male reproductive tissue. Weed Sci. 50: 438–447.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Wilcut, J. W., Duke, S. O., Edmisten, K. L., and Wells, R. 2002b. Tolerance and accumulation of shikimic acid in response to glyphosate applications in glyphosate-resistant and non-glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). J. Agric. Food Chem. 50: 506–512.Google Scholar
Sasser, P. E. 1981. The basics of high volume instruments for fiber testing. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 2: 191–193.Google Scholar
Scott, G. H., Askew, S. D., Bennett, A. C., and Wilcut, J. W. 2001. Economic evaluation of HADSS™ computer program for weed management in nontransgenic and transgenic cotton. Weed Sci. 49: 549–557.Google Scholar
Shelby, P. P. 2001. Cotton production in Tennessee. Publication No. PB1514. Knoxville, TN: Agriculture Extension Service, University of Tennessee. 51 p.Google Scholar
Smith, D. T., Baker, R. V., and Steele, G. L. 2000. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) impacts on yield, harvesting, and ginning in dryland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 14: 122–126.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E. and Byrd, J. D. Jr. 1994. The influence of fluometuron and MSMA on cotton yield and fruiting characteristics. Weed Sci. 42: 210–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stalker, D. M. and McBride, K. E. C. 1987. Cloning and expression in Escherichia coli of a Klebsella ozaenae plasmid borne gene encoding a nitrilase specific for the herbicide bromoxynil. J. Bacteriol. 169: 955–960.Google Scholar
Stalker, D. M., McBride, K. E., and Malyj, L. D. 1988. Herbicide resistance in transgenic plants expressing a bacterial detoxification gene. Science 242: 419–423.Google Scholar
Stapleton, G. S., Murdock, E. C., and Toler, J. E. 1994. Response of broadleaf weeds to Staple (DPX-PE350), bromoxynil, and glyphosate. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47: 39.Google Scholar
Suh, H., Hepburn, A. G., Kriz, A. L., and Widholm, J. M. 1993. Structure of the amplified 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase gene in glyphosate-resistant carrot cells. Plant Mol. Biol. 22: 195–205.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. A., Hiatt, W. R., Facciotti, D., Stalker, D. M., and Comai, L. 1987. Expression in plants of a bacterial gene encoding for glyphosate resistance. Weed Sci. 35:(Suppl. 1). 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, H. F., York, A. C., Morey, A. E., Padmore, J. M., and Rudo, K. M. 1998. The impact of pesticide use on groundwater in North Carolina. J. Environ. Qual. 27: 1018–1026.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Coble, H. D., York, A. C., and Monks, D. W. 1996. The niche for herbicide-resistant crops in U.S. Agriculture. In Duke, S. O., ed. Herbicide-Resistant Crops: Agricultural, Environmental, Economic, Regulatory, and Technical Aspects. New York: CRC and Lewis. pp. 213–230.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Patterson, M. G., Wehtje, G. R., and Whitwell, T. 1988. Efficacy and economics of pendimethalin herbicide combinations for weed control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Appl. Agric. Res. 3: 203–208.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Snipes, C. E., Nichols, R. L., Hayes, R. M., Chandler, M., Bridges, D. C., and Brecke, B. J. 1998. A regional evaluation of new technologies for weed management in conventional-tillage cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51: 52–53.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Jordan, D. L. 1993. Weed management for reduced-tillage southeastern cotton. In McClelland, M. R., Valco, T. D., and Frans, R. E., eds. Conservation-Tillage Systems for Cotton: A Review of Research and Demonstration Results from Across the Cotton Belt. Arkansas Agric. Exp. Sta. Special Report 160. pp. 29–35.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Jordan, D. L. 1995. Weed management systems for oil-seed crops. In Smith, A. E., ed. Handbook of Weed Management Systems. New York: Marcel-Dekker. pp. 343–400.Google Scholar
York, A. C. 1993. Peanut response to fluometuron applied to a preceding cotton crop. Peanut Sci. 20: 111–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar