Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:37:23.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Rainfall Effects on Desmedipham and Phenmedipham Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Monte D. Anderson
Affiliation:
Plant Sci. Dep., South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007
W. Eugene Arnold
Affiliation:
Plant Sci. Dep., South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007

Abstract

The effect of rainfall on the performance of a tank mixture of desmedipham [ethyl m-hydroxycarbanilate carbanilate(ester)] and phenmedipham (methyl m-hydroxycarbanilate m-methylcarbanilate) applied postemergence to redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L. ♯ AMARE), wild mustard (Sinapsis arvensis L. ♯ SINAR) and sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) was evaluated in field studies. The occurrence of 1 mm of rain immediately after herbicide application significantly decreased the control of redroot pigweed and wild mustard. A rainfall quantity of 1 mm also reduced injury symptoms on sunflower. Simulating a 12.7-mm rain less than 18 h after desmedipham and phenmedipham application effectively reduced toxicity to redroot pigweed and sunflower. Toxicity to these two species increased at a lesser rate than for wild mustard as the time interval prior to rain was increased. A rain-free period of 6 h was predicted for near-maximum control of wild mustard with these herbicides.

Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 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. Anderson, M. D. and Arnold, W. E. 1984. Weed control in sunflowers (Helianthus annuus) with desmedipham and phenmedipham. Weed Sci. 32:310314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Behrens, R. and Elakkad, M. A. 1981. Influence of rainfall on the phytotoxicity of foliarly applied 2,4-D. Weed Sci. 29:349355.Google Scholar
3. Bovey, R. W. and Diaz-Colon, J. D. 1969. Effect of simulated rainfall on herbicide performance. Weed Sci. 17:154157.Google Scholar
4. Doran, D. L. and Andersen, R. N. 1975. Effects of simulated rainfall on bentazon activity. Weed Sci. 23:105109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Eshel, Y., Zimdahl, R. L., and Schweizer, E. E. 1976. Basis for interactions of ethofumesate and desmedipham on sugarbeets and weeds. Weed Sci. 24:619626.Google Scholar
6. Flore, J. A. and Bukovac, M. J. 1974. Pesticide effects on the plant cuticle: I. Response of Brassica oleracea L. to EPTC as indexed by epicuticular wax production. J. Amer. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 99(1):3437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Flore, J. A. and Bukovac, M. J. 1976. Pesticide effects on the plant cuticle: II. EPTC effects on leaf cuticle morphology and composition in Brassica oleracea L. J. Amer. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 101(5):586590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Gentner, W. A. 1966. The influence of EPTC on external foliage wax deposition. Weeds 14:2731.Google Scholar
9. Hendrick, L. W., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1974. Basis for selectivity of phenmedipham and desmedipham on wild mustard, redroot pigweed, and sugarbeet. Weed Sci. 22:179184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Nalewaja, J. D. and Miller, S. D. 1982. Postemergence wild mustard control in sunflower. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Res. Rep. 39:160161.Google Scholar
11. Schweizer, E. E. and Weatherspoon, D. M. 1971. Response of sugarbeets and weeds to phenmedipham and two analogues. Weed Sci. 19:635639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Strand, O. E. and Wiersma, J. V. 1982. Weed control in sunflowers at Crookston, MN in 1982. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Res. Rep. 39:152153.Google Scholar
13. Upchurch, R. P., Coble, H. D., and Keaton, J. A. 1969. Rainfall effects following herbicidal treatment of woody plants. Weed Sci. 17:9498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar