Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T23:58:00.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interactions of Colletotrichum truncatum with Herbicides for Control of Scentless Chamomile (Matricaria perforata)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

G. L. Graham ,
G. Peng ,
K. L. Bailey  and
F. A. Holm
G. L. Graham
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 107 Science Place, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0X2, Canada
G. Peng*
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 107 Science Place, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0X2, Canada
K. L. Bailey
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A8, Canada
F. A. Holm
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A8, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: pengg@agr.gc.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A host-specific fungus Colletotrichum truncatum strain 00-3B1 (Ct) was mixed with herbicides to improve the control of scentless chamomile, a noxious weed in western Canada. The compatibility of Ct conidia (spores) with herbicides was evaluated in vitro, and varying effects were observed with different products on spore germination. Clodinafop, glufosinate, MCPA, and 2,4-D ester were relatively benign and delayed the germination slightly, whereas dicamba, imazethapyr, metribuzin, and 2,4-D amine were noticeably more inhibitive. Bromoxynil, glyphosate, sethoxydim, and Merge® (spray adjuvant) were most inhibitive, showing >50% inhibition after 24 h. To determine potential synergy, Ct was applied at 7 × 106 spores/ml in tank mixtures with selected herbicides at 1× and 0.1× registered rates under greenhouse conditions. Combining Ct with MCPA, 2,4-D ester, clopyralid, or metribuzin at 1× rate resulted in synergistic or additive interaction on scentless chamomile, increasing weed control significantly when compared to Ct or herbicides applied alone. Similar applications of Ct with imazethapyr, 2,4-D amine, dicamba, or glyphosate were antagonistic. Treatments with Ct plus 1× metribuzin killed scentless chamomile completely, whereas neither Ct nor the herbicide alone caused plant death, suggesting the value of this tank mixture.

Keywords

Bromoxynilclodinafopclopyraliddicamba2,4-DglufosinateglyphosateimazethapyrMCPAmetribuzinsethoxydimscentless chamomile, Matricaria perforata Mérat, #3 MATINcausal agent of anthracnose, Colletotrichum truncatum (Schwein.) Andrus & W.D. MooreBiocontrolbioherbicidesynergyCt, Colletotrichum truncatum strain 00-3B1 (from scentless chamomile)
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , December 2006 , pp. 877 - 884
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

Blackshaw, R. E. and Harker, K. N. 1997. Scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata) growth, development, and seed production. Weed Sci. 45:701–705.Google Scholar
Bowes, G. G., Spurr, D. T., Thomas, A. G., Peschken, D. P., and Douglas, D. W. 1994. Habitats occupied by scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata Mérat) in Saskatchewan. Can. J. Plant Sci. 74:383–386.Google Scholar
inventors. Mycogen Corp., assignee. 1988 Oct 4. Synergistic herbicidal compositions comprising Colletotrichum truncatum and chemical herbicides. U.S. patent 4,775,405.Google Scholar
Charudattan, R. 1985. The use of natural and genetically altered strains of pathogens for weed control. in Hoy, M. A. and Herzog, D. C., eds. Biological Control in Agricultural IPM Systems. New York: Academic Press. Pp. 347–372.Google Scholar
Christy, A. L., Herbst, K. A., Kostka, S. J., Mullen, J. P., and Carlson, P. S. 1993. Synergizing weed biocontrol agents with chemical herbicides. in Duke, S. O., Menn, J. J., and Plimmer, J. R., eds. Pest Control with Enhanced Environmental Safety. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. Pp. 87–100.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. A., Amsellen, Z., Maor, R., Sharon, A., and Gressel, J. 2002. Transgenically enhanced expression of indole-3-acetic acid confers hypervirulence to plant pathogens. Phytopathology 92:590–596.Google Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:20–22.Google Scholar
Davies, M. E. 1972. Effects of auxin on polyphenol accumulation and the development of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase activity in darkgrown suspension cultures of Paul's Scarlet Rose [Rosa]. Planta 104:66–77.Google Scholar
Douglas, D. W., Thomas, A. G., Peschken, D. P., Bowes, G. G., and Derksen, D. A. 1991. Effects of summer and winter annual scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata Mérat) interference on spring wheat yield. Can. J. Plant Sci. 71:841–850.Google Scholar
Fung, K. 1999. Atlas of Saskatchewan. 2nd ed. Saskatoon, Canada: University of Saskatchewan.Google Scholar
Graham, G. L., Peng, G., Bailey, K. L., and Holm, F. A. 2006. Effect of dew temperature, post-inoculation condition, and pathogen dose on suppression of scentless chamomile by Colletotrichum truncatum . Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 16:271–280.Google Scholar
Grant, N. T., Prusinkiewicz, E., Mortensen, K., and Makowski, R. M. D. 1990a. Herbicide interactions with Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp. malvae, a bioherbicide for round-leaved mallow (Malva pusilla) control. Weed Technol. 4:716–723.Google Scholar
Grant, N. T., Prusinkiewicz, E., Makowski, R. M. D., Holmstrom-Ruddick, B., and Mortensen, K. 1990b. Effect of selected pesticides on survival of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp. malvae, a bioherbicide for round-leaved mallow (Malva pusilla). Weed Technol. 4:701–715.Google Scholar
Hatzios, K. K. and Penner, D. 1985. Interactions of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1:1–63.Google Scholar
Heiny, D. K. 1994. Field survival of Phoma proboscis and synergism with herbicides for control of field bindweed. Plant Dis. 78:1156–1164.Google Scholar
Hoagland, R. E. 1990. Biochemical responses of plants to pathogens. in Hoagland, R. E., ed. Microbes and Microbial Products as Herbicides. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. Pp. 87–113.Google Scholar
Hoagland, R. E. 1996. Chemical interaction with bioherbicides to improve efficacy. Weed Technol. 10:651–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, R. H., Wymore, L. A., Watson, A. K., Snyder, R. H., and Collette, A. 1988. Efficacy of Colletotrichum coccodes and thidiazuron for velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 2:473–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hydrick, D. E. and Shaw, D. R. 1994. Effects of tank-mix combinations of non-selective foliar and selective soil-applied herbicides on three weed species. Weed Technol. 8:129–133.Google Scholar
Klerk, R. A., Smith, R. J. J., and TeBeest, D. O. 1985. Integration of a microbial herbicide into weed and pest control programs in rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Sci. 33:95–99.Google Scholar
Koger, C. H., Price, A. J., and Reddy, K. N. 2005. Weed control and cotton response to combinations of glyphosate and trifloxysulfuron. Weed Technol. 19:113–121.Google Scholar
Lanclos, D. Y., Webster, E. P., and Zhang, W. 2002. Glufosinate tank-mix combinations in glufosinate-resistant rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 16:659–663.Google Scholar
Levesque, C. A. and Rahe, J. E. 1992. Herbicide interactions with fungal root pathogens, with special reference to glyphosate. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 30:579–602.Google Scholar
Morse, P. M. 1978. Some comments on the assessment of joint action in herbicide mixtures. Weed Sci. 26:58–71.Google Scholar
Peng, G., Bailey, K. L., Hinz, H. L., and Byer, K. N. 2005a. Colletotrichum sp.: A potential candidate for biocontrol of scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata) in western Canada. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 15:497–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peng, G. and Byer, K. N. 2005. Interactions of Pyricularia setariae with herbicides for control of green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Technol. 19:589–598.Google Scholar
Peng, G., Wolf, T. M., Byer, K. N., and Caldwell, B. 2005b. Spray retention on green foxtail (Setaria viridis) and its impact on weed control efficacy by Pyricularia setariae . Weed Technol. 19:86–93.Google Scholar
Reade, J. P. H. and Cobb, A. H. 2002. Herbicides: modes of action and metabolism. in Naylor, R.E.L., ed. Weed Management Handbook. 9th ed. Ames, IA: Blackwell Science. Pp. 134–170.Google Scholar
[SAF] Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food. 2002. Guide to Crop Protection— Weeds, Plant Diseases, Insects. Regina, Canada: Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food. 330 p.Google Scholar
Sharon, A., Amsellem, Z., and Gressel, J. 1992. Glyphosate suppression of an elicited defense response. Plant Physiol. 98:654–659.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1982. Integration of microbial herbicides with existing pest management programs. in Charudattan, R. and Walker, H. L., eds. Biological Control of Weeds with Plant Pathogens. Toronto, Canada: Wiley. Pp. 189–203.Google Scholar
Templeton, G. E. 1982. Biological herbicides: Discovery, development and deployment. Weed Sci. 30:430–433.Google Scholar
Vurro, M., Zonno, M. C., Evidente, A., Andolfi, A., and Montemurro, P. 2001. Enhancement of efficacy of Ascochyta caulina to control Chenopodium album by use of phytotoxins and reduced rates of herbicides. Biol. Control 21:182–190.Google Scholar
Wymore, L. A., Watson, A. K., and Gotlieb, A. R. 1987. Interaction between Colletotrichum coccodes and thidiazuron for control of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 35:377–383.Google Scholar
Zhang, W., Wolf, T. M., Bailey, K. L., Mortensen, K., and Boyetchko, S. M. 2003. Screening of adjuvants for bioherbicide formulations with Colletotrichum spp. and Phoma spp. Biol. Control 26:95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar