Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-94d59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-19T09:02:07.025Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Antagonism of Paraquat Phytotoxicity in Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) and Selected Weed Species by Naptalam

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Glenn R. Wehtje
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils and Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ.
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Georgia, Coastal Plain Exp. Stn., P.O. Box 748, Tifton, GA
Daniel P. Dylewski
Affiliation:
Dep. Bot. and Microbiol., Auburn Univ.
John A. McGuire
Affiliation:
Res. Data Analysis Dep. and Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ.
T. Vint Hicks
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils and Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849

Abstract

Greenhouse and field studies demonstrated that naptalam reduced paraquat activity by as much as 30% on sicklepod, smallflower morningglory, Florida beggarweed, and peanut Sequential application experiments, i.e. naptalam applied 2 or 24 h prior to an application of paraquat, as well as absorption studies utilizing 14C-paraquat, indicated that the antagonism was due largely to reduced paraquat absorption. Scanning electron microscopy revealed that application of naptalam, as well as naptalam applied with paraquat, resulted in amorphous deposits on the leaf surface which may account for the antagonism.

Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 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. Brian, R. C. 1969. The influence of darkness on the uptake and movement of diquat and paraquat in tomatoes, sugar beet, and potatoes. Ann. Appl. Biol. 63:117126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Buchanan, G. A., Murray, D. S., and Hauser, E. W. 1983. Weeds and their control in peanuts. Pages 206249 in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Am. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc., Yoakum, TX 77995.Google Scholar
3. Calderbank, A. and Slade, P. 1966. The behavior of paraquat in plants. Outlook Agric. 5:5559.Google Scholar
4. Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:2022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Devine, M. D. 1989. Phloem translocation of herbicides. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:191213.Google Scholar
6. Fedtke, C. 1982. Biochemistry and Physiology of Herbicide Action. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 202 pp.Google Scholar
7. Funderburke, H. H. and Lawrence, J. M. 1964. Mode of action and metabolism of diquat and paraquat Weeds 12:259264.Google Scholar
8. Elmore, C. D. 1989. Weed Survey – Southern States. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:408420.Google Scholar
9. Gerwick, C. B. III. 1988. Potential mechanisms for bentazon antagonism with haloxyfop. Weed Sci. 36:286290.Google Scholar
10. Hatzios, K. K. and Penner, D. 1988. Interaction of herbicides with other agrichemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1:163.Google Scholar
11. Hauser, E. W. and Buchanan, G. A. 1974. Control of Florida beggarweed and sicklepod in peanuts with dinoseb. Peanut Sci. 1:4044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Hess, F. D., Bayer, D. E., and Falk, R. H. 1981. Herbicide dispersal patterns: HI. As a function of formulation. Weed Sci. 29:224229.Google Scholar
13. O'Donovan, J. T. and O'Sullivan, P. A. 1982. Amine salts of growth regulator herbicides antagonize paraquat. Weed Sci. 30:605608.Google Scholar
14. O'Donovan, J. T., O'Sullivan, P. A., and Caldwell, C. D. 1983. Basis for antagonism of paraquat phytotoxicity to barley by MCPA dimethylamine. Weed Res. 23:165172.Google Scholar
15. O'Sullivan, P. A. and O'Donovan, J. T. 1982. Influence of several herbicides on broad-leaved weed control and Tween 20 on the phytotoxicity of paraquat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:445452.Google Scholar
16. Thrower, S. L., Hallam, N. D., and Thrower, L. B. 1965. Movement of diquat dibromide in leguminous plants. Ann. Appl. Biol. 55:253260.Google Scholar
17. Wehtje, G. R., McGuire, J. A., Walker, R. H., and Patterson, M. G. 1986. Texas panicum (Panicum texanum) control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) with paraquat. Weed Sci. 34:308311.Google Scholar
18. Wilcut, J. W., Wehtje, G. R., Cole, T. A., Hicks, T. V., and McGuire, J. A. 1989. Postemergence weed control systems without dinoseb for peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 38:243248.Google Scholar