Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T17:36:30.259Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the foliar activity of mesotrione

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Bradley C. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and General Agriculture, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-4415

Abstract

Greenhouse studies were conducted to examine the influence of temperature and relative humidity (RH) on the foliar activity of mesotrione on five weed species. Regression analysis was performed allowing for comparison of estimated GR50 (herbicide dose to inhibit growth by 50%) values for each weed response at either temperature (18 or 32 C) or RH level (30 or 85%). Temperature and relative humidity did not influence the response of ivyleaf morningglory, common cocklebur, and velvetleaf to mesotrione markedly. An increase in temperature or relative humidity increased the efficacy of mesotrione on common cocklebur and velvetleaf up to threefold. Conversely, common waterhemp and large crabgrass were six- and sevenfold more susceptible at 18 C than at 32 C, respectively. Common waterhemp and large crabgrass were four- and twofold more susceptible to mesotrione at 85% compared with 30% RH, respectively. The influence of temperature and RH on the efficacy of mesotrione in foliar applications is species dependent and may be an important consideration for field applications.

Type
Research Article
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

Anderson, D. M., Swanton, C. J., Hall, J. C., and Mersey, B. G. 1993. The influence of temperature and relative humidity on the efficacy of glufosinate-ammonium. Weed Res. 33:139147.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1998. ZA1296 experimental herbicide technical bulletin. Wilmington, DE: Zeneca Ag. Products.Google Scholar
Bayer, D. E. 1987. Temperature as a modifying environmental factor of herbicidal response. Proc. Calif. Weed Conf. 39:114116.Google Scholar
Cudney, D. W. 1987. Herbicide interactions with soil moisture, rain, and humidity. Proc. Calif. Weed Conf. 39:117119.Google Scholar
Elmore, C. D. and Paul, R. N. 1983. Composite list of C4 weeds. Weed Sci. 31:686692.Google Scholar
Hull, H. M. 1970. Leaves structure as related to absorption of pesticides and other compounds. Pages 1155 In Gunther, F. A. and Gunther, J. D., eds. Residue Reviews, Volume 31. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Johnson, B. C., Young, B. G., and Matthews, J. L. 1999. Influence of application timing and atrazine on the postemergence broadleaf activity of mesotrione. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc., Res. Rep. 56:230231.Google Scholar
Jordan, T. N. 1977. Effects of temperature and relative humidity on the toxicity of glyphosate to bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon). Weed Sci. 25:448451.Google Scholar
Kells, J. J., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1984. Absorption, translocation, and activity of fluazifop-butyl as influenced by plant growth stage and environment. Weed Sci. 32:143149.Google Scholar
Lee, D. L., Prisbylla, M. P., Cromartie, T. H., Dagarin, D. P., Howard, S. W., Provan, W. M., Ellis, M. K., Fraser, T., and Mutter, L. C. 1997. The discovery and structural requirements of inhibitors of p-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase. Weed Sci. 45:601609.Google Scholar
Legg, B. J. 1983. Micrometeorology and the influence of local variations of environment on plant growth and herbicide performance. Asp. Appl. Biol. 4:1531.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Azlin, W. R. 1978. Effects of environment on the toxicity of glyphosate to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 26:605608.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Jordan, T. N. 1976. Effects if adjuvants and environment on the toxicity of dalapon to johnsongrass. Weed Sci. 24:257260.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D., Pudelko, J., and Adamczewski, K. A. 1975. Influence of climate and additives on bentazon. Weed Sci. 23:504507.Google Scholar
Prasad, R., Foy, C. L., and Crafts, A. S. 1967. Effects of relative humidity on absorption and translocation of foliarly applied dalapon. Weeds 15:149156.Google Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose-response relationships. Weed Technol. 9:218227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, C. L., Maxwell, D. J., and Wax, L. M. 1999. Comparisons of ZA1296 and RPA 201772 for weed control in corn. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc., Res. Rep. 56:223224.Google Scholar
Tiaz, L. and Zeiger, E. 1991. Plant Physiology. New York: The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company. pp. 219248.Google Scholar
Viger, P. R., Eberlein, C. V., and Fuerst, E. P. 1991. Influence of available soil water content, temperature, and CGA-154281 on metolachlor injury to corn. Weed Sci. 39:227231.Google Scholar
Wichert, R. A., Bartlett, D. W., and Townson, J. K. 1999. Mode of action, absorption, translocation and metabolism of mesotrione in weeds and corn. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:9495.Google Scholar
Wills, G. D. 1978. Factors affecting toxicity and translocation of glyphosate in cotton. Weed Sci. 26:509513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wills, G. D. 1984. Toxicity and translocation of sethoxydim in bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) as affected by environment. Weed Sci. 32:2024.Google Scholar
Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1981. Effect of environment on the translocation and toxicity of acifuorfen to showy crotalaria (Crotalaria spectabilis). Weed Sci. 29:397401.Google Scholar
Young, B. G., Johnson, B. C., and Matthews, J. L. 1999. Preemergence and sequential weed control with mesotrione in conventional corn. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc., Res. Rep. 56:226227.Google Scholar