Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T10:13:11.271Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Growth Stage on Spring Barley (Hordeum vulgare) Tolerance to Chlorsulfuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Deirdre Lemerle  and
Roger D. Cousens
Deirdre Lemerle
Affiliation:
NSW Agric., Agric. Res. Inst., Wagga Wagga, New South Wales 2650, Australia
Roger D. Cousens
Affiliation:
School of Crop Sci., Univ. Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tolerance of barley to chlorsulfuron at various stages of crop development was studied in weed-free field and pot experiments. Five barley crops were sown between mid-May and mid-July in the field in 1988 and sprayed simultaneously with four rates of chlorsulfuron when the corresponding stages of crop development ranged from growth stage 7 (GS 7) to GS 31. Early-sown barley yielded more than late-sown barley, but percent grain yield reduction from chlorsulfuron was similar for all planting dates. In a field experiment in 1989, barley was sown at three dates (May, June, and July) and each was treated with chlorsulfuron at 0, 15, 30, and 60 g ai ha−1 at either GS 12 or GS 15. Grain yield of barley sown in May and treated with 15 g ha−1 chlorsulfuron at GS 12 was reduced 35%, compared with no effect when applied at GS 15; this yield reduction was related to spike size and number. Application of chlorsulfuron at GS 12 and GS 15 to barley sown in June caused yield reductions of 20 and 11%, respectively. In contrast, barley sown in mid-July was not affected by chlorsulfuron. Applications of chlorsulfuron at GS 12,13,14, and 15 led to reductions of 75,35,15, and 5% shoot dry matter (DM) of plants grown in pots and measured at GS 33. Root DM was more sensitive to chlorsulfuron than shoot DM. Tolerance of barley to chlorsulfuron increased with age of the plant at the time of application.

Keywords

Chlorsulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidespring barley, Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Schooner’ and ‘Grimmett’Differential cultivar toleranceZadoks growth stagesymptoms of injurycrop damagestage of developmentselective herbicide
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 127 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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. 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.Google Scholar
2. Fryer, J. D. and Makepeace, R. J. 1977. Pages 261–281 in Weed Control Handbook 1. Blackwell Scientific Publications, London.Google Scholar
3. Gleeson, A. C. and Cullis, B. R. 1987. Residual maximum likelihood (REML) estimation of a neighbour model for field experiments. Biometrics 43:277–288.Google Scholar
4. Johnstone, P., Michington, I., Amor, R. L., Code, G., and Incerti, M. 1986. The long-term persistence effects of trifluralin, chlorsulfuron and diclofop-methyl in three Victorian soils. Pages 35–43 in Proc. Nat. Workshop on Persistence of Herbicide Residues in Soil in Wheat Cropping Systems in Australia. Rutherglen, Victoria.Google Scholar
5. Lemerle, D. 1993. Influence of rainfall and temperature on sensitivity of barley (Hordeum vulgare) to chlorsulfuron. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 44:23–32.Google Scholar
6. Lemerle, D., Fisher, J. A., and Hinkley, R. B. 1993. Radiometry accurately measures chlorsulfuron injury to barley. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 44:13–21.Google Scholar
7. Lemerle, D., Kidd, C. R., and Read, B. J. 1986. Tolerances of barley cultivars to post-emergence herbicides. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 26:383–392.Google Scholar
8. Lemerle, D., Leys, A. R., Kidd, C. R., and Cullis, B. R. 1990. Influences of soil pH and climate on the tolerance of barley and wheat to chlorsulfuron. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 30:629–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Martin, D. A., Miller, S. D., and Alley, H. P. 1988. Barley (Hordeum vulgare) response to herbicides applied at three growth stages. Weed Technol. 2:41–45.Google Scholar
10. Reid, D. A. 1985. Morphology and anatomy of the barley plant. Pages 75–100 in Rasmussen, I.D.C., ed. Barley, Agronomy Monograph 26. Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A. Google Scholar
11. Robson, A. D. and Snowball, K. 1990. The effect of chlorsulfuron on the uptake and utilization of copper and zinc in wheat. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 41:19–28.Google Scholar
12. Snowball, K. and Robson, A. D. 1983. Symptoms of nutrient deficiencies: subterranean clover and wheat. Univ. Western Australia, Perth.Google Scholar
13. Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T., and Konzak, C. F. 1974. A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res. 14:415–421.Google Scholar