Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T20:53:13.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rice (Oryza sativa) Cultivar Tolerance to Clomazone in Water-Seeded Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Christopher R. Mudge ,
Eric P. Webster ,
Chris T. Leon  and
Wei Zhang
Christopher R. Mudge
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 M. B. Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Eric P. Webster*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 M. B. Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Chris T. Leon
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 M. B. Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Wei Zhang
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management, 104 M. B. Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: ewebster@agcenter.lsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A field study was conducted in 2002 and 2003 to evaluate tolerance of eight rice cultivars to clomazone at 896 g ai/ha impregnated onto urea fertilizer. Rice foliar bleaching was 16 to 20% at 14 d after rice rooting (DAR) for long-grain cultivars ‘Ahrent’, ‘Cheniere’, ‘Cocodrie’, ‘Cypress’, ‘Francis’, and ‘Wells’ and 23 and 30% for medium-grain ‘Bengal’ and short-grain ‘Pirogue’, respectively, when clomazone was impregnated onto urea. Clomazone reduced the number of tillers/ m2 21 DAR for all cultivars. Early season height reductions occurred for all cultivars; however, Pirogue was the only cultivar shorter than the nontreated at harvest. There were no yield reductions with regard to the medium and long-grain cultivars when compared with respective nontreated cultivars. However, yield of short-grain Pirogue treated with clomazone was 1,740 kg/ha less than the nontreated.

Keywords

Clomazoneherbicide-coated fertilizerrice, Oryza sativa L., ‘Ahrent’, ‘Cheniere’, ‘Cocodrie’, ‘Cypress’, ‘Francis’, ‘Wells’, ‘Bengal’, ‘Pirogue’Herbicide toleranceDAE, days after emergenceDAPRE, days after preemergenceDAR, days after rice rootingDAT, days after treatmentDPRE, delayed preemergenceME, microencapsulated
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , December 2005 , pp. 907 - 911
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 Published with approval of the Director of the Agricultural Experiment Station, Louisiana State University AgCenter, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, under manuscript number 05-14-0001.
Current address: University of Florida, IFAS, 7922 NW 71st Street, Gainesville, FL 32653.

References

Literature Cited

Baker, J. B., Dunand, R. T., and Zeringue, F. J. 1988. Rice weed control studies. Louisiana Rice Res. Stn. Annu. Res. Report 80:217–234.Google Scholar
Bollich, P. K., Jordan, D. L., Walker, D. M., and Burns, A. B. 2000. Rice (Oryza sativa) response to the microencapsulated formulation of clomazone. Weed Technol. 14:89–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmer, S. G., Nyquist, W. E., and Walker, W. M. 1989. Least significant differences for combined analysis of experiments with two- or three-factor treatment designs. Agron. J. 81:665–672.Google Scholar
Duke, S. O., Kenyon, W. H., and Paul, R. N. 1985. FMC 5702 effects on chloroplast development in pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) cotyledons. Weed Sci. 33:786–794.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. J., Barrentine, W. L., and Kilen, T. C. 1976. Inheritance of sensitivity of soybean cultivars to metribuzin. Crop Sci. 16:119–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, C. T. and Ogg, A. G. Jr. 1976. Differential response of potato cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:137–139.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. L. and Baker, J. B. 1990. Tolerance of rice (Oryza sativa) cultivars to fenoxaprop, sethoxydim, and haloxyfop. Weed Sci. 38:528–531.Google Scholar
Hager, A. G., Wax, L. M., Bollero, G. A., and Stoller, E. W. 2003. Influence of diphenylether herbicide application rate and timing on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 17:14–20.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Bollich, P. K., Burns, A. B., and Walker, D. M. 1998. Rice (Oryza sativa) response to clomazone. Weed Sci. 46:374–380.Google Scholar
Lanclos, D. Y., Webster, E. P., and Zhang, W. 1999. Glufosinate-resistant rice lines treated with glufosinate at intervals throughout the season. Proc South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:213.Google Scholar
Linscombe, S. D., Saichuk, J. K., Seilhan, K. P., Bollich, P. K., and Funderburg, E. R. 1999. General agronomic guidelines. in Anonymous ed. Louisiana Rice Production Handbook. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University AgCenter Publication 2321. Pp. 5–11.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. R. and Gage, E. V. 1999. Command 3 ME: weed control in southern rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:186.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. R. and Hatfield, L. D. 1996. Grass control in rice with clomazone. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:46.Google Scholar
Mudge, C. R., Webster, E. P., Zhang, W., and Leon, C. T. 2003. Potential safeners for command in water-seeded rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 56:302.Google Scholar
Newsom, L. J. and Shaw, D. R. 1992. Soybean (Glycine max) cultivar tolerance to chlorimuron and imazaquin with varying hydroponic solution pH. Weed Technol. 6:382–388.Google Scholar
Pantone, D. J. and Baker, J. B. 1992. Varietal tolerance of rice (Oryza sativa) to bromoxynil and triclopyr at different growth stages. Weed Technol. 6:968–974.Google Scholar
Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1988. Response of corn (Zea mays) cultivars to imazaquin. Weed Sci. 36:625–628.Google Scholar
Runyan, W. K., McNeil, W. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Differential tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:94–97.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 2002. SAS/STAT Users Guide (Version 9). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. Pp. 2083–2226.Google Scholar
Scherder, E. F., Talbert, R. E., Schmidt, L. A., and Rutledge, J. S. 1999. Spectrum of weed control in rice with clomazone programs. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:251.Google Scholar
Scherder, E. F., Talbert, R. E., and Clark, S. D. 2004. Rice (Oryza sativa) cultivar tolerance to clomazone. Weed Technol. 18:140–144.Google Scholar
Talbert, R. E., Schmidt, L. A., Rutledge, J. S., Wheeleer, C. C., and Scherder, E. F. 1999. Factors affecting the performance of clomazone for weed control in rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:47–48.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P., Leon, C. T., Pellerin, K. J., and Zhang, W. 2002. Weed Science Annual Research Report. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University AgCenter Pub. Pp. 252–260.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P., Baldwin, F. L., and Dillon, T. L. 1999. The potential for clomazone use in rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 13:390–393.Google Scholar
Wixson, M. B. and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Differential response of soybean (Glycine max) cultivars to AC 263,222. Weed Technol. 5:430–433.Google Scholar
Zhang, W. and Webster, E. P. 2002. Shoot and root growth of rice (Oryza sativa) in response to bispyribac. Weed Technol. 16:768–772.Google Scholar
Zhang, W., Webster, E. P., Blouin, D. C., and Linscombe, S. D. 2004. Differential tolerance of rice (Oryza sativa) varieties to clomazone. Weed Technol. 18:73–76.Google Scholar