Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:20:19.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Management in a Furrow-Irrigated Imidazolinone-Resistant Hybrid Rice Production System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jason K. Norsworthy ,
Robert C. Scott ,
Sanjeev K. Bangarwa ,
Griff M. Griffith ,
Michael J. Wilson  and
Marilyn McCelland
Jason K. Norsworthy*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Robert C. Scott
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Sanjeev K. Bangarwa
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Griff M. Griffith
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Michael J. Wilson
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Marilyn McCelland
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, 1366 West Altheimer Drive, Fayetteville, AR 72704
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jnorswor@uark.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research was conducted in 2007 and 2008 to evaluate weed-control options in an imazethapyr-resistant rice production system. Raised beds were formed, and imidazolinone-resistant hybrid rice ‘CL 730’ was drill-seeded on beds. Five herbicide programs applied up to the four- to six-leaf stage of rice were evaluated with and without additional “as-needed” herbicide at later stages. All the herbicide combinations and as-needed herbicides tested in this research were labeled for rice, and only minor transient injury (< 5%) was initially observed. Weeds emerged throughout the growing season, and as-needed herbicides were applied after the four- to six-leaf stage of rice to control these late-emerging weeds and weeds not effectively controlled with earlier applications, primarily Palmer amaranth. Most of the Palmer amaranth at this site was insensitive to imazethapyr (possibly acetolactate synthase resistant). Therefore, application of as-needed herbicides with different modes of action, such as 2,4-D, were used to improve Palmer amaranth control. Rice yields were often numerically higher in plots that received additional herbicide after the six-leaf stage of rice, but yields were not significantly improved.

Se llevó al cabo una investigación en 2007 y 2008 para evaluar las opciones de control de maleza en un sistema de producción de arroz resistente al imazethapyr. Se hicieron camas elevadas y en ellas se sembró a chorro corrido la semilla de arroz híbrido CL 730, resistente a las imidazolinonas. Se evaluaron cinco programas de herbicida aplicados al arroz hasta la etapa de 4 a 6 hojas con y sin herbicida adicional según la necesidad en las etapas posteriores. Todas las combinaciones de herbicida y de herbicidas adicionales según la necesidad que se evaluaron en esta investigación fueron etiquetados para usar en el arroz y solamente se observaron inicialmente daños menores pasajeros (<5%). Las malezas emergieron a lo largo de la estación de crecimiento y se aplicaron herbicidas adicionales después de la etapa de cuatro a seis hojas para controlar las malezas de emergencia tardía, así como también, las que no se controlaron efectivamente con las aplicaciones anteriores, principalmente, Amaranthus palmeri. La mayor parte de dicha maleza en este sitio fue insensible al imazethapyr (posiblemente resistente al acetolactato sintasa). Debido a esto, para mejorar el control de Amaranthus palmeri se aplicaron herbicidas adicionales según la necesidad con diferentes modos de acción, tales como el 2,4-D. Frecuentemente los rendimientos del arroz resultaron ser numéricamente más altos en las parcelas que recibieron herbicida adicional después de la etapa de seis hojas, pero los rendimientos no mejoraron significativamente.

Keywords

Imazethapyr2,4-DPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. AMAPArice, Oryza sativa L. ‘CL 730’ ORYSAClomazoneherbicidesquincloractank mixturewater conservationweed control
Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 25 - 29
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

Baldwin, F. and Slaton, N. 2001. Rice weed control. Pages 37–46. In Slaton, N. A. ed. Rice Production Handbook. Little Rock University of Arkansas, Division of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service.Google Scholar
Daou, H. and Talbert, R. E. 1999. Control of propanil-resistant barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in rice (Oryza sativa) with carbaryl/propanil mixtures. Weed Technol. 13:65–70.Google Scholar
Gimenez, A. E., York, A. C., Wilcut, J. W., and Batts, R. B. 1998. Annual grass control by glyphosate plus bentazon, chlorimuron, fomesafen, or imazethapyr mixtures. Weed Technol. 12:134–136.Google Scholar
[NASS] National Agriculture Statistical Service 2009. Rice value of production for 2008. Available at: http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/index2.jsp. Accessed: February 26, 2009.Google Scholar
Norworthy, J. K., Bangarwa, S. K., Scott, R. C., Still, J., and Griffith, G. M. 2010. Use of propanil and quinclorac tank mixtures for broadleaf weed control on rice (Oryza sativa) levees. Crop Prot 29:255–259.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Griffith, G. M., and Scott, R. C. 2008. Imazethapyr use with and without clomazone for weed control in furrow-irrigated, imidazolinone-tolerant rice. Weed Technol. 22:217–221.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Rutledge, J. S., Talbert, R. E., and Hoagland, R. E. 1999. Agrichemical interactions with propanil on propanil-resistant barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli). Weed Technol. 13:296–302.Google Scholar
Ockerby, S. E. and Fukai, S. 2001. The management of rice grown on raised beds with continuous furrow irrigation. Field Crops Res 69:215–226.Google Scholar
Scott, D. H., Ferguson, J. A., Hanson, L., Fugitt, T., and Smith, E. 1998a. Agricultural water management in the Mississippi Delta region of Arkansas. Arkansas Agric. Exp. Sta. Res. Bull 959:14–62.Google Scholar
Scott, R. C., Shaw, D. R., O'Neal, W. B., and Klingaman, T. D. 1998b. Spray adjuvant, formulation, and environmental effects on synergism from post-applied tank mixtures of SAN 582H with fluazifop-p, imazethapyr, and sethoxydim. Weed Technol. 12:463–469.Google Scholar
Singh, S., Bhushan, L., Ladha, J. K., Gupta, R. K., Rao, A. N., and Sivaprasad, B. 2006. Weed management in dry-seeded rice (Oryza sativa) cultivated in the furrow-irrigated raised-bed planting system. Crop Prot 25:487–495.Google Scholar
Slaton, N. A. ed. 2001. Rice Production Handbook. Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Misc. Publ. 192. Little Rock, AR University of Arkansas.Google Scholar
Vories, E. D., Counce, P. A., and Keisling, T. C. 2002. Comparison of flooded and furrow-irrigated rice on clay. Irrigation Sci 21:139–144.Google Scholar
Wilson, C. E. Jr., Runsick, S. K., and Mazzanti, R. 2009. Trends in Arkansas rice production. In. B. R. Wells Rice Research Studies 2008. Arkansas Agric. Exp. Sta. Res. Ser 571:13–23.Google Scholar
York, A. C., Wilcut, J. W., Swann, C. W., Jordan, D. L., and Walls, F. R. Jr. 1995. Efficacy of imazethapyr in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) as affected by time of application. Weed Sci. 43:107–116.Google Scholar