Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T18:32:46.168Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grain Sorghum Response to Simulated Drift from Glufosinate, Glyphosate, Imazethapyr, and Sethoxydim1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kassim Al-Khatib ,
Mark M. Claassen ,
Phillip W. Stahlman ,
Patrick W. Geier ,
David L. Regehr ,
Stewart R. Duncan  and
William F. Heer
Kassim Al-Khatib*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Mark M. Claassen
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Phillip W. Stahlman
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Patrick W. Geier
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
David L. Regehr
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Stewart R. Duncan
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
William F. Heer
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: khatib@ksu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at four locations in Kansas in 1999 and 2000 to evaluate grain sorghum response to simulated drift rates of four herbicides. Imazethapyr, glufosinate, glyphosate, and sethoxydim were applied at 1/3, 1/10, 1/33, and 1/100 of the use rate when plants were 10 to 20 cm tall. Visible crop injury increased as rates of each herbicide increased. Glyphosate and imazethapyr caused the most injury and glufosinate the least. Data show that some plants that were significantly injured 2 wk after treatment (WAT) recovered 8 WAT. However, some plants that received the highest rate of imazethapyr or glyphosate died. Grain sorghum yields were reduced only when injury was severe. This research showed that the potential for sorghum injury from off-target herbicide drift is greater from imazethapyr and glyphosate than from sethoxydim or glufosinate.

Keywords

Glufosinateglyphosateimazethapyrsethoxydimsorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) MoenchCrop injuryherbicide driftherbicide symptomsDAT, days after treatmentWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 2003 , pp. 261 - 265
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

Ahrens, W. H. ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 352 p.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Currie, R. S., Maddux, L. D., Thompson, C. R., and Price, T. M. 2000. Corn response to simulated herbicide drift. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 55: 5–6.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Mink, G. I., Reisenauer, G., Parker, R., Westberg, H., and Lamb, B. 1993a. Development of a biologically-based system for detection and tracking of airborne herbicides. Weed Technol. 7: 404–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, E. P. 1992a. Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) response to simulated herbicide spray drift. Weed Technol. 6: 956–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, E. P. 1992b. Sweet cherry (Prunus avium) response to simulated drift from selected herbicides. Weed Technol. 6: 975–979.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., and Fuerst, E. P. 1993b. Wine grape (Vitis vinifera L.) response to simulated herbicide drift. Weed Technol. 7: 97–102.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K. and Peterson, D. E. 1999. Soybean (Glycine max) response to simulated drift from selected sulfonylurea herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Weed Technol. 13: 264–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Khatib, K. and Tamhane, A. 1999. Dry pea (Pisum sativum) response to low rates of selected foliar- and soil-applied sulfonylurea and growth regulator herbicides. Weed Technol. 13: 753–758.Google Scholar
Beyer, E. M. Jr., Duffy, M. J., Hay, J. V., and Schlueter, D. D. 1988. Sulfonylurea. In Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Volume 3. New York: Marcel Dekker. pp. 117–189.Google Scholar
Bode, L. E. 1987. Spray application technology. In McWhorter, C. G. and Gebhardt, M. R., eds. Methods of Applying Herbicides. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. pp. 85–110.Google Scholar
Coetzer, E., Al-Khatib, K., and Loughin, T. M. 2001. Glufosinate efficacy, absorption, and translocation in amaranth as affected by relative humidity and temperature. Weed Sci. 49: 8–13.Google Scholar
Devine, M. D., Duke, S. O., and Fedtke, C. 1993. Physiology of Herbicide Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. pp. 274–278.Google Scholar
Fletcher, J. S., Pfleeger, T. G., Ratsch, H. C., and Hays, R. 1996. Potential impact of low levels of chlorsulfuron and other herbicides on growth and yield of nontarget plants. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 14: 537–544.Google Scholar
Gealy, D. R., Boerboom, C. M., and Ogg, A. G. Jr. 1995. Growth and yield of pea (Pisum sativum L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris L.) sprayed with low rates of sulfonylurea and phenoxy herbicides. Weed Sci. 43: 640–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosheh, H. Z., Chandler, J. M., and Bierman, R. H. 1994. Impact of DPX-PE350 drift on corn and grain sorghum. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47: 24.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Chase, C. A., and Locascio, S. J. 2001. Crop injury from sublethal rates of herbicide. I. Tomato. Hortiscience 36: 669–673.Google Scholar
Hanks, J. E. 1995. Effect of drift retardant adjuvants on spray droplet size of water and paraffinic oil applied at ultralow volume. Weed Technol. 9: 380–384.Google Scholar
Hurst, H. R. 1982. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to simulated drift from selected herbicides. Weed Sci. 30: 311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maybank, J., Yoshida, K., and Grover, R. 1978. Spray drift from agricultural pesticide applications. Air Pollut. Control Assoc. J. 28: 1009–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, P. C. H. 1993. Spray drift and its measurement. 1993. In Metthews, G. A. and Hislop, E. C., eds. Application Technology for Crop Protection. Wallingford, UK: CABI. pp. 101–122.Google Scholar
Richard, E. P. Jr. 1995. Sugarcane (Saccharum spp) response to simulated fluzaifop-P drift. Weed Sci. 43: 660–665.Google Scholar
Richard, E. P. Jr., Hurst, H. R., and Wauchope, R. D. 1981. Effects of simulated MSMA drift on rice (Oryza sativa) growth and yield. Weed Sci. 29: 303–308.Google Scholar
Schroeder, G. L., Cole, D. F., and Dexter, A. G. 1983. Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.) response to simulated herbicide spray drift. Weed Sci. 31: 831–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snipes, C. E., Street, J. E., and Mueller, T. C. 1991. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to simulated triclopyr drift. Weed Technol. 5: 493–498.Google Scholar
Stidham, M. A. and Singh, B. K. 1991. Imidazolinone-acetohydroxyacid synthase interactions. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Conner, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicide. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. pp. 71–90.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1997. Effect of crop growth on tolerance to low doses of thifensulfuron:tribenuron. Weed Sci. 45: 538–545.Google Scholar
Zwerger, P. and Pestemer, W. 2000. Testing the phytotoxic effects of herbicides on higher terrestrial non-target plants using a plant life cycle test. Z. Pflanzenkr. Pflanzenschutz. Sonderh. 17: 711–718.Google Scholar