Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T15:46:29.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Turnip Tolerance to Preplant Incorporated Trifluralin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2018

Sushila Chaudhari ,
Katherine M. Jennings ,
Stanley Culpepper ,
Roger B. Batts  and
Robin Bellinder
Sushila Chaudhari*
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Research Scholar, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Katherine M. Jennings
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Stanley Culpepper
Affiliation:
Professor, Crop and Soil Science Department, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA, USA
Roger B. Batts
Affiliation:
Researcher and Field Research Director at the NC State IR-4 Field Research Center, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
Robin Bellinder
Affiliation:
Professor (deceased), Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
*
Author for correspondence: Sushila Chaudhari, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, William Hall, 101 Derieux Place, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695. (Email: schaudh@ncsu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field research was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Georgia, New York, and North Carolina to evaluate the effect of trifluralin PPI on turnip root production. Treatments included trifluralin PPI at 0, 0.42, 0.56, 0.84, 1.12, 1.68, 2.24, and 3.36 kg ai ha−1. Aboveground injury to turnip varied by location and increased from 0% to 85% as trifluralin rate increased from 0.42 to 3.36 kg ha−1. Trifluralin at 0.42 to 0.84 kg ha−1 caused ≤7% injury, except at Clayton, NC, and Freeville, NY, where injury ≤32%. Trifluralin at 0.42 to 0.84 kg ha−1 reduced turnip root yield ≤11% at all locations, except Clinton, NC, where yield was reduced 29% and 43% by 0.56 and 0.84 kg ha−1, respectively. Turnip roots were not injured internally by trifluralin. Our research results suggest that up to 0.84 kg ha−1 trifluralin PPI is safe to use in turnip roots.

Keywords

Name & Institution: Robert Nurse, Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaTrifluralinturnip, Brassica rapa L. ‘Purple Top White Globe’Crop injuryherbicideyield
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 123 - 127
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2018 

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

Cite this article: Chaudhari S, Jennings KM, Culpepper S, Batts RB, Bellinder R (2018) Turnip tolerance to preplant incorporated trifluralin. Weed Technol 33:123–127 doi: 10.1017/wet.2018.66

References

Anonymous (2010) Treflan® 4EC herbicide label. Greensboro, NC: Helena Chemical Company. 41 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2014) 2012 Census of Agriculture. Volume I, Geographic Area Series. Part 51. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service. P 695 Google Scholar
Anonymous (2015) Stinger® herbicide label. Greensboro, NC: Helena Chemical Company. 41 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016a) Section 24(C) special local need label of Dual Magnum® herbicide for Kentucky. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC. 4 pGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2016b) Section 24(C) special local need label of Dual Magnum® herbicide for Oregon. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC. 10 pGoogle Scholar
Batts, RB, Davis, J, Fernandez, G, Gunter, C, Mitchem, W, Monks, D, Schultheis, J, Spayd, S (2009) Specialty Crops in North Carolina: Acreage and Distribution. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Agricultural Research Service Technical bulletin 327. P 220 Google Scholar
Batts, RB, Monks, DW, Mitchem, WE, Jennings, KM (2008) Weed Management in North Carolina Collards, Kale, Mustard, and Turnip Greens. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension. North Carolina State University. P 4 Google Scholar
Billet, D, Ashford, R (1978) Differences in the phytotoxic response of wild oats (Avena fatua) to triallate and trifluralin. Weed Sci 26:273–276 Google Scholar
Blackshaw, RE, Harker, KN (1992) Combined post-emergence grass and broadleaved weed control in canola (Brassica napus L.). Weed Technol 6:892–897 Google Scholar
Frans, R, Talbert, R, Marx, D, Crowley, H (1986) Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. Pages 29–46 in Camper ND, ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. 3rd ed. Champaign IL: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Grover, R, Wolt, J, Cessna, A, Schiefer, H (1997) Environmental fate of trifluralin. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 153:1–16 Google Scholar
Horowitz, M, Hulin, N, Blumenfield, T (1974) Behaviour and persistence of trifluralin in soil. Weed Res 14:213–220 Google Scholar
Justen, VL, Cohen, JD, Gardner, G, Fritz, VA (2011) Seasonal variation in glucosinolate accumulation in turnip cultivars grown with colored plastic mulches. HortScience 46:1608–1614 Google Scholar
Kemble, JM (2017) Southeastern US 2017 Vegetable Crop Handbook. Lincolnshire, IL: Vance Publishing. 294 pGoogle Scholar
Kenaga, EE (1980) Predicted bioconcentration factors and soil sorption coefficients of pesticides and other chemicals. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 4:26–38 Google Scholar
Kennedy, JM, Talbert, RE (1977) Comparative persistence of dinitroaniline type herbicides on the soil surface. Weed Sci 25:371–381 Google Scholar
MacRae, AW, Culpepper, AS (2007) Cabbage, mustard greens, and turnip greens herbicide screening Fall 2005 and Spring 2006. Pages 24–29 in Brandenberger L, Wells L, eds. Screening New Herbicides for Leafy Greens, Final Report for 2005–2006. Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma State University USDA IR-4 Pub No MP-175Google Scholar
Mersie, W, Foy, CL (1985) Phytotoxicity and adsorption of chlorsulfuron as affected by soil properties. Weed Sci 33:564–568 Google Scholar
Plate, AY, Gallaher, DD (2006) Effects of indole-3-carbinol and phenethyl isothiocyanate on colon carcinogenesis induced by azoxymethane in rats. Carcinogenesis 27:287–292 Google Scholar
Rahman, A, Ashford, R (1970) Selective action of trifluralin for control of green foxtail in wheat. Weed Sci 18:754–759 Google Scholar
Rahman, A, Dyson, CB, Burney, B (1978) Effect of soil organic matter on the phytotoxicity of soil-applied herbicides—field studies. NZ J Exp Agric 6:69–75 Google Scholar
Savage, KE (1978) Persistence of several dinitroaniline herbicides as affected by soil moisture. Weed Sci 26:465–471 Google Scholar
Senseman, SA (2007) Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 458 pGoogle Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2016) United States Standards for Grades of Turnips or Rutabagas. www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/TurnipsOrRutabagasStandard.pdf. Accessed: February 15, 2018Google Scholar
Weber, JB (1990) Behaviour of dinitroaniline herbicides in soils. Weed Technol. 4:394–406 Google Scholar
Wilson, RG, Smith, JA, Yonts, CD (2004) Evaluation of herbicides for weed control in chicory (Cichorium intybus). Weed Technol 18:540–544 Google Scholar
Zandstra, B, Particka, M (2007) Weed control in leafy greens 2005. Pages 53–58 in Brandenberger L, Wells L, eds. Screening New Herbicides for Leafy Greens, Final Report for 2005–2006. Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma State University USDA IR-4 Pub No MP-175Google Scholar