Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-k78ct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-05T00:47:58.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Response of acetyl-CoA carboxylase-resistant rice cultivars and advanced lines to florpyrauxifen-benzyl

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2020

Tameka L. Sanders
Affiliation:
Research Associate, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS, USA
Jason A. Bond*
Affiliation:
Research/Extension Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS, USA
Benjamin H. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Assistant Extension/Research Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS, USA
Bobby R. Golden
Affiliation:
Associate Extension/Research Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS, USA
Thomas W. Allen Jr.
Affiliation:
Extension/Research Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS, USA
Adam Famoso
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Rice Research Station, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Crowley, LA, USA
Taghi Bararpour
Affiliation:
Assistant Research/Extension Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Jason A. Bond, Research/Extension Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 197, Stoneville, MS38776. E-mail: jbond@drec.msstate.edu

Abstract

Florpyrauxifen-benzyl and quizalofop were available for POST applications in 2018; however, little is known about the response of acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACCase)–resistant rice cultivars and advanced lines to POST herbicides. A field study was conducted in 2017 and 2018 at Stoneville, MS, to characterize the response of ACCase-resistant rice cultivars and advanced lines to POST applications of florpyrauxifen-benzyl. The imidazolinone-resistant (IR) rice cultivars ‘CL163’ and ‘CLXL 745’, and ACCase-resistant rice cultivars ‘PVL01’, ‘PVL013’, ‘PVL024-B’, ‘PVL038’, ‘PVL080’, and ‘PVL081’were treated with florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 0 (nontreated control for each cultivar) and 58 g ai ha–1 at the four-leaf to one-tiller (LPOST) growth stage. At 14 d after treatment (DAT), PVL01 was injured 5% to 6% greater than CLXL 745, PVL013, and PVL081; however, injury was ≤10% at that evaluation for all cultivars. Similarly, injury was ≤13% for all cultivars 28 DAT. Mature heights were reduced for all cultivars except PVL013 and PVL081. Rough rice yield was ≥100% of the control for all cultivars except PVL081, PVL013, and CL163. Results suggest that florpyrauxifen-benzyl can safely be applied POST to rice cultivars grown in Mississippi as well as ACCase-resistant cultivars that are currently under development.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2020

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Eric Webster, Louisiana State University AgCenter

References

Adair, CR, Bollich, CN, Bowman, DH, Jodon, NE, Johnston, TH, Webb, BD, Atkins, JG (1972) Rice breeding and testing methods in the United States. Pages 25–75 in Rice in the United States: Varieties and Production. USDA–Agricultural Research Service Agricultural Handbook 289. Washington, DC: USDA–Agricultural Research Service. 124 pGoogle Scholar
Ampong-Nyarko, K, De-Datta, SK (1991) A Handbook for Weed Control in Rice. Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute Google Scholar
Anonymous (2017) Provisia herbicide label. http://www.cdms.net/Label-Database. Accessed: June 29, 2020Google Scholar
Anonymous (2018a) RiceTec management guidelines. https://www.ricetec.com/grower-resources/management-guidelines/. Accessed: April 1, 2019Google Scholar
Anonymous (2018b) Loyant herbicide label. http://www.cdms.net/ldat/ldE6F000.pdf. Accessed: February 19, 2019Google Scholar
Blouin, DC, Webster, EP, Bond, JA (2011) On the analysis of combined experiments. Weed Technol 25:165169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, JA, Walker, TW (2011) Differential tolerance of Clearfield cultivars to imazamox. Weed Technol 25:192197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, JA, Walker, TW (2012) Effect of postflood quinclorac application on commercial rice cultivars. Weed Technol 26:183188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, JA, Walker, TW, Webster, EP, Buehring, NW, Harrell, DL (2007) Rice cultivar response to penoxsulam. Weed Technol 21:961965 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buehring, N (2008) Mississippi Rice Grower’s Guide. Starkville, MS: Mississippi State University Extension Service. 80 pGoogle Scholar
Corban, NG, Bond, JA, Golden, BR, Sanders, TL, Lawrence, BH, Edwards, HM (2018) Rice cultivar tolerance to florpyrauxifen-benzyl. Page 114 in Proceedings of the 37th Rice Technical Working Group, February 19–22, Long Beach, CAGoogle Scholar
Epp, JB, Alexander, AL, Balko, TW, Buysse, AM, Brewster, WK, Bryan, K, Daeuble, JF, Fields, SC, Gast, RE, Green, RA, Irvine, NM, Lo, WC, Lowe, CT, Renga, JM, Richburg, JS, Ruiz, JM, Satchivi, NM, Schmitzer, PR, Siddall, TL, Webster, JD, Weimer, MR, Whiteker, GT, Yerkes, CN (2016) The discovery of ArlyexTM active and RinskorTM active: two novel auxin herbicides. Bioorgan Med Chem 24:362371 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffin, JL, Baker, JB (1990) Tolerance of rice (Oryza sativa) cultivars to fenoxaprop, sethoxydim, and haloxyfop. Weed Sci 38:528531 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossmann, K (2010) Auxin herbicides: current status of mechanism and mode of action. Pest Manag Sci 66:113120 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jordan, DL, Sanders, DE, Linscombe, SD, Williams, BJ (1998) Response of four rice (Oryza sativa) cultivars to triclopyr. Weed Technol 12:254257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, ZD, Norsworthy, JK, Scott, RC (2018) Evaluation of quizalofop-resistant rice for Arkansas rice production systems. Int J Agron 2018:18, 10.1155/2018/6315865 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanclos, DY, Webster, EP, Zhang, W, Linscombe, SD (2003) Response of glufosinate-resistant rice (Oryza sativa) to glufosinate application timings. Weed Technol 17:157160 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, GB, Bond, JA, Golden, BR, Gore, J, Edwards, HM, Eubank, TW, Walker, TW (2014) Response of commercial rice cultivars to postemergence applications of saflufenacil. Weed Technol 28:679684 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, RJ, Slaton, NA, Roberts, TL (2013) Soil fertility. Pages 69–102 in Hardke TJ, ed, Rice Production Handbook. University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Cooperative Extension Service MP192. Fayetteville, AR: Univ. of ArkansasGoogle Scholar
Saxton, AM (1998) A macro for converting mean separation output into letter grouping in ProcMixed. Pages 1243–1246 in Proceedings of the 23rd SAS users Group International. Cary, NC: SAS InstituteGoogle Scholar
Scherder, EF, Talbert, RE, Clark, SD (2004) Rice (Oryza sativa) cultivar tolerance to clomazone. Weed Technol 18:140144 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaner, DL, ed (2014) Herbicide Handbook. 10th ed. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America. Pp 401402 Google Scholar
Willingham, SD, McCaulet, GN, Senseman, SA, Chandler, JM, Richburg, JS, Lassiter, RB, Mann, RK (2008) Influence of flood interval and cultivar on rice tolerance to penoxsulam. Weed Technol 22:114118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W, Webster, EP (2002) Shoot and root growth of rice (Oryza sativa) in response to V-10029. Weed Technol 16:768772 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W, Webster, EP, Blouin, DC, Linscombe, SD (2004) Differential tolerance of rice (Oryza sativa) varieties to clomazone. Weed Technol 18:7376 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, WP, Webster, EP, Leon, CT (2005) Response of rice cultivars to V-10029. Weed Technol 19:307311 CrossRefGoogle Scholar