Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T16:09:59.059Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of MSMA-Resistant and-Susceptible Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) Biotypes to Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Herbicides and Cross-Resistance to Arsenicals and Membrane Disrupters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Chandrashekhar I. Nimbal ,
David R. Shaw ,
Stephen O. Duke  and
John D. Byrd Jr.
Chandrashekhar I. Nimbal
Affiliation:
Horticulture Dep., Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546 Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
David R. Shaw
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Stephen O. Duke
Affiliation:
South. Weed Sci. Lab., USDA, ARS, Stoneville, MS 38776
John D. Byrd Jr.
Affiliation:
Ext. Weed Spec., Dep. Plant and Soil Sci., Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted to evaluate PRE and POST cotton herbicides for control of MSMA-resistant (R) and -susceptible (S) common cocklebur biotypes, and to determine potential cross-resistance of the R biotype to other arsenical and membrane disruptor herbicides. Cyanazine and clomazone applied PRE were the most effective herbicides for control of R populations. Lactofen or cyanazine in combination with MSMA controlled R and S biotypes better than fluometuron or pyrithiobac combined with MSMA. MSMA-resistant common cocklebur was not cross-resistant to other arsenical herbicides. Significant differences in cellular electrolyte leakage and chlorophyll content of the treated leaf between biotypes were not evident for paraquat, acifluorfen, and MSMA.

Keywords

Acifluorfen, 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acidclomazone, 2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinonecyanazine, 2-[[4-chloro-6-(ethylamino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-2-methylpropanenitrilefluometuron, N,N-dimethyl-N′-[3-(trifluoromethyl)]-phenylurealactofen, (±)-2-ethoxy-1-methyl-2-oxoethyl 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoateMSMA, monosodium salt of methylarsonic acidparaquat, 1,1′-dimethyl-4,4′-bipyridinium ionpyrithiobac, 2-chloro-6-[4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)thio]benzoic acidcommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. # XANSTAcifluorfencacodylateclomazonecyanazinediuronDSMAfluometuronlactofennorflurazonparaquatpyrithiobacsodium arsenatesodium arseniteXANST
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , September 1995 , pp. 440 - 445
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. Anonymous. 1994. 1994 Weed control guidelines for Mississippi. Publ. 1532, Mississippi Coop. Ext. Ser., Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS.Google Scholar
2. Bandeen, L. D. and McLaren, R. D. 1976. Resistance of Chenopodium album L. to triazine herbicides. Can. J. Plant Sci. 56:411–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Barker, F. G., Griffin, J. L., and Sanders, D. E. 1993. Evaluation of potential MSMA resistant cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) in cotton. p. 1525 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1993. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
4. Bloomberg, J. R., Kirkpatrick, B. L., and Wax, L. M. 1982. Competition of common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum) with soybean (Glycine max L.). Weed Sci. 30:507–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Crawford, S. H., Leake, K. D., Vidrine, P. R., and Sanders, D. E. 1993. Command preemergence weed control studies in cotton. p. 1528 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1993. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
6. Duke, S. O. 1992. Modes of action of herbicides used in cotton. p. 403–437 in McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. L., eds. Weeds of Cotton. The Cotton Foundation, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
7. Duke, S. O. and Kenyon, W. H. 1993. Peroxidizing activity determined by cellular leakage. p. 61–66 in Böger, P. and Sandmann, G., eds. Target assays for modern herbicides and related phytotoxic compounds. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
8. Fuerst, E. P., Arntzen, C. J., Pfister, K., and Penner, D. 1986. Herbicide cross-resistance in triazine-resistant biotypes of four species. Weed Sci. 34:344–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Haigler, W. E., Gossett, B. J., Harris, J. R., and Toler, J. E. 1988. Resistance of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) to the organic arsenical herbicides. Weed Sci. 36:24–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Haigler, W. E., Gossett, B. J., Harris, J. R., and Toler, J. E. 1994. Growth and development of organic arsenical-susceptible and -resistant common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) biotypes under noncompetitive conditions. Weed Technol. 8:154–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Hayes, R. M., Shankle, M. W., and Shelby, P. P. 1993. Documentation and control of MSMA/DSMA resistant common cocklebur. p. 1526 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1993. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
12. Heap, I. and Knight, R. 1986. The occurrence of herbicide cross-resistance in a population of annual ryegrass, Lolium rigidum, resistant to diclofop-methyl. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 37:149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Hiscox, J. D. and Israelstam, G. F. 1979. A method for extraction of chlorophyll from leaf tissues without maceration. Can. J. Bot. 57:1332–1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1991. Economics and efficiency of herbicides applied postemergence directed in cotton. p. 954 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1991. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
15. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Total postemergence herbicide programs in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) with sethoxydim and DPX-PE350. Weed Technol. 7:196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Jordan, D. L., McClelland, M. R., Frans, R. E., and Kendig, J. A. 1993. Effect of MSMA on entireleaf morningglory (Ipomoea hederacea var. integriuscula) control with postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Keese, R. J. and Camper, N. D. 1994. MSMA affects amino acid and glutathione content in MSMA-resistant and susceptible common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Proc. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 34:59.Google Scholar
18. Keese, R. J. and Camper, N. D. 1994. Membrane action of MSMA? Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:174.Google Scholar
19. Nimbal, C. I., Shaw, D. R., Byrd, J. D., Wills, G. D., Heitholt, J. J., and Duke, S. O. 1993. Physiological differences in wild-type and arsenical herbicide-resistant common cocklebur. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46:381.Google Scholar
20. Sachs, R. M. and Michael, J. L. 1971. Comparative phytotoxicity among four arsenical herbicides. Weed Sci. 19:558–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Snipes, C. E., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1982. Competition of common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum L.) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Weed Sci. 30:553–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Radosevich, L. E. and Appleby, A. P. 1973. Relative susceptibility of two common groundsel (Senecio vulgaris L.) biotypes to six S-triazines. Agron. J. 65:553–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Wills, G. D., Byrd, J. D., and Hurst, H. R. 1992. Herbicide resistant and susceptible weeds in Mississippi. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:58.Google Scholar