Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T03:42:05.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Atrazine, Ammonium Sulfate, and Glyphosate1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Pauley R. Bradley ,
William G. Johnson  and
Reid J. Smeda
Pauley R. Bradley
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Missouri, 204 Waters Hall, Columbia, MO 65211
William G. Johnson*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Missouri, 204 Waters Hall, Columbia, MO 65211
Reid J. Smeda
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Missouri, 204 Waters Hall, Columbia, MO 65211
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: johnsonwg@missouri.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted to determine whether antagonism between atrazine and glyphosate on shattercane observed in field studies could be duplicated under greenhouse conditions on ‘Rox Orange’ forage sorghum and whether it could be overcome by the addition of ammonium sulfate, other adjuvants, or additional glyphosate. Atrazine or surfactant added to glyphosate did not significantly affect sorghum dry weights compared to glyphosate alone. The Colby equation for synergism indicated that atrazine did not antagonize sorghum control with glyphosate in the greenhouse. Glyphosate at 0.43 kg ae/ha plus ammonium sulfate provided greater control of sorghum than glyphosate at 0.43 kg/ha without ammonium sulfate; however, glyphosate at 0.84 kg/ha plus ammonium sulfate did not provide greater control of sorghum than glyphosate at 0.84 kg/ha without ammonium sulfate. Reduced activity of glyphosate at 0.43 kg/ha in the absence of ammonium sulfate was likely due to an abundance of calcium cations in the carrier water that associated with glyphosate molecules and subsequently reduced herbicide uptake by plants. Thus, antagonism observed under cool conditions in field studies was not evident in controlled-temperature greenhouse studies.

Keywords

Atrazine, 6-chloro-N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamineglyphosate, N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine‘Rox Orange’ sorghum and shattercane, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench # SORVUAntagonismsurfactant
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 15 - 18
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

1 Contribution from the Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Series 12,944.

References

Literature Cited

Appleby, A. P. and Somabhi, M. 1978. Antagonistic effect of atrazine and simazine on glyphosate activity. Weed Sci. 26: 135–139.Google Scholar
Bradley, P. R. 1999. Efficacy and Economics of Weed Management in Glufosinate and Glyphosate Tolerant Corn (Zea mays L.). . University of Missouri, Columbia, MO. 126 p.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1968. Control of wild cane in soybeans. Weed Sci. 16: 18–22.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1970. Control of wild cane in corn. Weed Sci. 18: 272–275.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C., Wicks, G. A., and Fenster, C. R. 1977. Longevity of shattercane seeds in soil across Nebraska. Weed Res. 17: 139–143.Google Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds. 15: 20–22.Google Scholar
De Ruiter, H. and Meinen, E. 1996. Adjuvant-increased glyphosate uptake by protoplasts isolated from quackgrass (Elytrigia repens (L.) Nevski.). Weed Sci. 44: 38–45.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N. and Dekker, J. D. 1988. Temperature effects on translocation patterns of several herbicides within quackgrass (Agropyron repens). Weed Sci. 36: 545–552.Google Scholar
Hayden, T. A. and Burnside, O. C. 1987. Effect of herbicide incorporation methods on shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 35: 364–372.Google Scholar
Jacques, G. L., Vesecky, J. F., Feltner, K. C., and Vanderlip, R. L. 1974. Effects of depth and duration of burial on shattercane seed. Crop Sci. 14: 787–789.Google Scholar
Johnson, B. and Kendig, A. 1999. Weed Control Guide for Missouri Field Crops. University of Missouri Cooperative Extension Guide MP575. 96 p.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D. and Matysiak, R. 1991. Salt antagonism of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 39: 622–628.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D. and Matysiak, R. 1992. Species differ in response to adjuvants with glyphosate. Weed Technol. 6: 561–566.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, P. A. and O'Donovan, J. T. 1980. Interaction between glyphosate and various herbicides for broad-leaved weed control. Weed Res. 20: 255–260.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, P. A., O'Donovan, J. T., and Hamman, W. M. 1981. Influence of non-ionic surfactants, ammonium sulfate, water quality, and spray volume on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Can. J. Plant Sci. 61: 391–400.Google Scholar
Penner, D. 1989. The impact of adjuvants on herbicide antagonism. Weed Technol. 3: 227–231.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N. and Singh, M. 1992. Organosilicone adjuvant effects on glyphosate efficacy and rainfastness. Weed Technol. 6: 361–365.Google Scholar
Retta, A., Vanderlip, R. L., Higgins, R. A., and Moshier, L. J. 1996. Application of SORKAM to simulate shattercane growth using forage sorghum. Agron. J. 88: 596–601.Google Scholar
Rosales-Robles, E. 1993. Postemergence shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) control in corn (Zea mays) in northern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Weed Technol. 7: 830–834.Google Scholar
Roynebert, T., Balke, N. E., and Lund-Hoie, K. 1992. Effects of adjuvants and temperature on glyphosate absorption by cultured cells of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik.). Weed Res. 32: 419–428.Google Scholar
Sandberg, C. L., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1978. Effect of diluent volume and calcium on glyphosate phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 26: 476–479.Google Scholar
Selleck, G. W. and Baird, D. D. 1981. Antagonism with glyphosate and residual herbicide combinations. Weed Sci. 29: 185–190.Google Scholar
Stahlman, P. W. and Phillips, W. M. 1979a. Effects of water quality and spray volume on glyphosate phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 27: 38–41.Google Scholar
Stahlman, P. W. and Phillips, W. M. 1979b. Inhibition of glyphosate phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 27: 575–577.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. J. 1998. Effect of burndown timing on weed control and corn yield in no-tillage glyphosate resistant corn. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 53: 65–66.Google Scholar
Thelen, K. D., Jackson, E. P., and Penner, D. 1995a. The basis for the hard-water antagonism of glyphosate activity. Weed Sci. 43: 541–548.Google Scholar
Thelen, K. D., Jackson, E. P., and Penner, D. 1995b. Utility of nuclear magnetic resonance for determining the molecular influence of citric acid and an organosilicone adjuvant on glyphosate activity. Weed Sci. 43: 566–571.Google Scholar
Vesecky, J. F., Feltner, K. C., and Vanderlip, R. L. 1973. Wild cane and forage sorghum competition in grain sorghum. Weed Sci. 21: 28–32.Google Scholar