Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T00:44:20.153Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preemergence Herbicide and Glyphosate Effects on Seedling Diseases in Glyphosate-Resistant Cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Joseph H. Pankey ,
James L. Griffin ,
Patrick D. Colyer ,
Raymond W. Schneider  and
Donnie K. Miller
Joseph H. Pankey
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, LSU AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
James L. Griffin
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, LSU AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Patrick D. Colyer
Affiliation:
LSU Red River Research Station, LSU AgCenter, Bossier City 71113
Raymond W. Schneider
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, LSU AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Donnie K. Miller*
Affiliation:
LSU Northeast Research Station, St. Joseph, LA 71366
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: dmiller@agctr.lsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted to evaluate the influence of preemergence (PRE) herbicides metolachlor at 1,700 g ai/ha, pyrithiobac at 70 g ai/ha, or pendimethalin at 840 g ai/ha applied alone or with fluometuron at 1,300 g ai/ha and glyphosate postemergence (POST) at 840 g ai/ha on seedling diseases in glyphosate-resistant cotton. Hypocotyl disease severity both years averaged across PRE herbicide treatments was greater after glyphosate application to four-leaf cotton than cotyledon cotton. The PRE herbicide treatments, particularly those including fluometuron, increased root and hypocotyl disease ratings compared with a nontreated control, and a sequential application of glyphosate did not further increase disease severity. Greenhouse experiments using soil infested with Rhizoctonia solani confirmed findings from the field study showing that PRE herbicides can predispose cotton to greater seedling disease injury with no increased seedling disease severity associated with application of glyphosate. In the field study, glyphosate applied at cotyledon or four-leaf growth stages decreased disease severity on cotton hypocotyls both years. This inhibitory effect of glyphosate was less evident in the greenhouse study and may have been related to species of fungi present, infestation level, and differences in environmental conditions when compared with the field.

Keywords

FluometuronglyphosatemetolachlorpendimethalinpyrithiobacRhizoctonia solanicotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Gossypium hirsutum L.‘D&PL 5690 RR’‘D&PL 5415 RR’‘D&PL 436 RR’herbicide–pathogen interactionsseedling diseasesEPSP, enolpyruvylshikimate phosphatefb, followed byPDA, potato dextrose agarPRE, preemergencePOST, postemergence
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 2005 , pp. 312 - 318
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: 25 S. Lake, Monroe, LA 71203.

References

Literature Cited

Ahrens, W. H. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. Pp. 245–247.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2002. Roundup Ultra Max: Supplemental Labeling For Cotton With The Roundup Ready Gene In-Crop Applications. Web page: www.cdms.net/ldat/ld3HB028.pdf. Accessed: January 27, 2005.Google Scholar
Ashton, F. M. and Crafts, A. S. 1981. Mode of Action of Herbicides. 2nd ed. New York: J. Wiley. Pp. 239–245.Google Scholar
Berner, D. K., Berggren, G. T., and Snow, J. P. 1991. Effects of glyphosate on Calonectria crotalariae and red crown rot of soybean. Plant Dis. 75:809–813.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, L. D., Padgette, S. R., Kimball, S. L., and Wells, B. H. 1997. Perspectives on glyphosate resistance. Weed Technol. 11:189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, J. M. and Santelmann, P. W. 1968. Interactions of four herbicides with Rhizoctonia solani on seedling cotton. Weed Sci. 16:453–456.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. 1985. Mode of action of glyphosate—a literature analysis. in Grossbard, E. and Atkinson, D., eds. The Herbicide Glyphosate. London: Butterworth. Pp. 48–74.Google Scholar
Colyer, P. D. 1988. Frequency and pathogenicity of Fusarium spp. associated with seedling diseases of cotton in Louisiana. Plant Dis. 72:400–402.Google Scholar
Dade, H. A. and Gunnell, J. 1969. Classwork with Fungi. 2nd ed. Kew, England: Commonwealth Mycological Institute. 64 p.Google Scholar
Devine, M., Duke, S. O., and Fedtke, C. editors. 1993. Inhibition of Amino Acid Biosynthesis. Physiology of Herbicide Action. Englewoods Cliff, NJ: PTR Prentice Hall. Pp. 251–294.Google Scholar
El-Khadem, M., El-Kazzaz, M., and Hassan, M. A. 1984. Influence of different preemergence herbicides on cotton diseases caused by Rhizoctonia solani and Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum . Plant Soil 79:29–36.Google Scholar
El-Khadem, M. and Papavizas, G. C. 1984. Effect of the herbicides EPTC and linuron on cotton diseases caused by Rhizoctonia solani and Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum . Plant Pathol. 33:411–416.Google Scholar
El-Khadem, M., Zahran, M., and El-Kazzaz, M. E. 1979. Effect of the herbicides trifluralin, dinitramine and fluometuron on Rhizoctonia disease in cotton. Plant Soil 51:463–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heydari, A. and Misaghi, I. J. 1998. The impact of herbicides on the incidence and development of Rhizoctonia solani-induced cotton seedling damping-off. Plant Dis. 82:110–113.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. E. and Guinn, G. 1968. Effect of root temperature on hypocotyls of cotton seedlings as a source of nutrition for Rhizoctonia solani . Phytopathology 58:981–984.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. E., Halloin, J. M., Veech, J. A., and Carter, W. W. 1978. Terpenoid accumulation in hypocotyls of cotton seedlings during aging and after infection by Rhizoctonia solani . Phytopathology 68:347–350.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. M. 1996. Roundup Ready gene in cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. 1:51.Google Scholar
Johnson, L. F., Baird, D. D., Chambers, A. Y., and Shamiyeh, N. B. 1978. Fungi associated with postemergence seedling disease of cotton in three soils. Phytopathology 68:917–920.Google Scholar
Kawate, M. K., Kawate, S. C., Ogg, A. G. Jr., and Kraft, J. M. 1992. Response of Fusarium solani f.sp. pisi and Pythium ultimum to glyphosate. Weed Sci. 40:497–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levesque, C. A. and Rahe, J. E. 1987. Effects of glyphosate on Fusarium spp.: its influence on root colonization of weeds, propagule density in the soil, and crop emergence. Can. J. Microbiol. 33:354–360.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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, J. A. and Papavizas, J. C. 1979. Influence of the herbicides EPTC and prometryn on cotton seedling diseases caused by Thielaviopsis basiciola . Can. J. Plant Pathol. 1:100–106.Google Scholar
Miller, J. H., Carter, C. H., Garber, R. H., and DeVay, J. E. 1979. Weed and disease responses to herbicides in single- and double-row cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 27:444–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moustafa-Mahmoud, S. M. and Sumner, D. R. 1993. Interactions of fungicides, herbicides, and planting date with seedling disease of cotton caused by Rhizoctonia solani AG-4. Plant Dis. 77:79–86.Google Scholar
Neubauer, R. and Avizohar-Hershenson, Z. 1973. Effect of the herbicide, trifluralin, on Rhizoctonia disease in cotton. Phytopathology 63:651–652.Google Scholar
Paul, V. and Schonbeck, F. 1976. Untersuchungen uber den einfluss des herbicides diallat auf einige getreide k rankheiten. Phytopathol. Z. 85:353–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinckard, J. A. and Standifer, L. C. 1966. An apparent interaction between cotton herbicidal injury and seedling blight. Plant Dis. Rep. 50:172–177.Google Scholar
Quilty, S. P. and Geoghegan, M. J. 1975. Effects of glyphosate on fungi. Proc. Soc. Gen. Microbiol. 2:87.Google Scholar
Rothrock, C. S. 1994. Report of the cottonseed treatment committee for 1993. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. 1:216–217.Google Scholar
Roy, K. W. and Bourland, F. M. 1982. Epidemiological and mycofloral relationships in cotton seedling disease in Mississippi. Phytopathology 72:868–872.Google Scholar
Sharma, U., Adee, E. A., and Pfender, W. F. 1989. Effect of glyphosate herbicide on pseudothecia formation by Pyrenophora tritici-repentis in infested wheat straw. Plant Dis. 73:647–650.Google Scholar
Standifer, L. C., Melville, D. R., and Phillips, S. A. 1966. A possible interaction between herbicidal injury and the incidence of seedling disease in cotton plantings. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 20:126.Google Scholar
Taiz, L. and Zeiger, E. 1998. Plant defenses: surface protectants and secondary metabolites. in Plant Physiology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Assoc. Pp. 347–376.Google Scholar
Wardle, D. A. and Parkinson, D. 1990. Influence of the herbicide glyphosate on soil microbial community structure. Plant Soil 122:29–37.Google Scholar
Wyse, D. L., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of herbicides on the development of root rot on navy bean. Weed Sci. 24:11–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar