Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T06:02:42.952Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigation into interactions of environmental and application time effects on 2,4-D and dicamba-induced phytotoxicity and hydrogen peroxide formation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2019

Christopher R. Johnston Open the ORCID record for Christopher R. Johnston [Opens in a new window] ,
William K. Vencill ,
Timothy L. Grey ,
A. Stanley Culpepper ,
Gerald M. Henry  and
Mark A. Czarnota
Christopher R. Johnston*
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA; current: BioDiscovery Institute, Department of Biological Sciences, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA
William K. Vencill
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
Timothy L. Grey
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA, USA
A. Stanley Culpepper
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA, USA
Gerald M. Henry
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
Mark A. Czarnota
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Horticulture, University of Georgia, Griffin, GA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Christopher R. Johnston, BioDiscovery Institute, Department of Biological Sciences, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203, Email: cjohnst@uga.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Application timing and environmental factors reportedly influence the efficacy of auxinic herbicides. In resistance-prone weed species such as Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson), efficacy of auxinic herbicides recently adopted for use in resistant crops is of utmost importance to reduce selection pressure for herbicide-resistance traits. Growth chamber experiments were conducted comparing the interaction of different environmental effects with application time to determine the influence of these factors on visible phytotoxicity and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) formation in A. palmeri. Temperature displayed a high degree of influence on 2,4-D and dicamba efficacy in general, with applications at the low-temperature treatment (31/20 C day/night) resulting in an increase in phytotoxicity compared with high-temperature treatments (41/30 C day/night). Application time across temperature treatments significantly affected 2,4-D–induced phytotoxicity, resulting in a ≥30% increase across rates with treatments at 4:00 PM compared with 8:00 AM. Temperature differential had a significant influence on dicamba efficacy based on visible phytotoxicity data, with a ≥46% increase with a high (37/20 C day/night) compared with a low differential (41/30 C day/night). Concentration of H2O2 in herbicide-treated plants was 34% higher under a high temperature differential compared with the low differential. Humidity treatments and application time interactions displayed undetected or inconsistent effects on visible phytotoxicity and H2O2 production. Overall, temperature-related influences seem to have the largest environmental effect on auxinic herbicides within conditions evaluated in this study. Leaf concentration of H2O2 appears to be generally correlated with phytotoxicity, providing a potentially useful tool in determining efficacy of auxinic herbicides in field settings.

Keywords

Vijay Nandula, USDA–ARSApplication timeauxinic herbicideenvironmental effectshumiditytemperaturetemperature differential
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 67 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 613 - 621
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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

Al-Khatib, K, Parker, R, Fuerst, EP (1992) Foliar absorption and translocation of herbicides from aqueous solution and treated soil. Weed Sci 40:281–287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Khatib, K, Peterson, D (1999) Soybean (Glycine max) response to simulated drift from selected sulfonylurea herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Weed Technol 13:264–270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, SM, Clay, SA, Wrage, LJ, Matthees, D (2004) Soybean foliage residues of dicamba and 2,4-D and correlation to application rates and yield. Agron J 96:750–760 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, DM, Swanton, CJ, Hall, JC, Mersey, BG (1993) The influence of temperature and relative humidity on the efficacy of glufosinate-ammonium. Weed Res 33:139–147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Assad, R, Reshi, ZA, Snober, J, Rashid, I (2017) Biology of amaranths. Bot Rev 83:382–436 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auch, DE, Arnold, WE (1978) Dicamba use and injury on soybeans (Glycine max) in South Dakota. Weed Sci 26:471–475 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauerle, MJ, Griffin, JL, Alford, JL, Curry, AB, Kenty, MM (2015) Field evaluation of auxin herbicide volatility using cotton and tomato as bioassay crops. Weed Technol 29:185–197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrens, R, Lueschen, WE (1979) Dicamba volatility. Weed Sci 27:486–493 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernards, ML, Crespo, RJ, Kruger, GR, Gaussoin, R, Tranel, PJ (2012) A waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population resistant to 2,4-D. Weed Sci 60:379–384 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cranston, HJ, Kern, AJ, Hackett, JL, Miller, EK, Maxwell, BD, Dyer, WE (2001) Dicamba resistance in kochia. Weed Sci 49:164–170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, AS, Grey, TL, Vencill, WK, Kichler, JM, Webster, TM, Brown, SM, York, AC, Davis, JW, Hanna, WW (2006) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Sci 54:620–626 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, AS, York, AC (1998) Weed management in glyphosate-tolerant cotton. J Cotton Sci 2:174–185 Google Scholar
Dalazen, G, Merotto, A (2016) Physiological and genetic bases of the circadian clock in plants and their relationship with herbicides efficacy. Planta Daninha 34:191–198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, JF, Barlow, KM, Mortensen, DA (2014) A meta-analysis on the effects of 2,4-D and dicamba drift on soybean and cotton. Weed Sci 62:193–206 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueiredo, MRA, Leibhart, LJ, Reicher, ZJ, Tranel, PJ, Nissen, SJ, Westra, P, Bernards, ML, Kruger, GR, Gaines, TA, Jugulam, M (2017) Metabolism of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid contributes to resistance in a common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population. Pest Manag Sci 74:2356–2362 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foes, MJ, Tranel, PJ, Wax, LM, Stoller, EW (1998) A biotype of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) resistant to triazine and ALS herbicides. Weed Sci 46:514–520 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friesen, HA, Dew, DA (1966) The influence of temperature and soil moisture on the phytotoxicity of dicamba, picloram, bromoxynil, and 2,4-D ester. Can J Plant Sci 46:653–660 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaines, TA, Zhang, W, Wang, D, Bukun, B, Chisholm, ST, Shaner, DL, Nissen, SJ, Patzoldt, WL, Tranel, PJ, Culpepper, AS, Grey, TL, Webster, TM, Vencill, WK, Sammons, RD, Jiang, J, Preston, C, Leach, JE, Westra, P (2010) Gene amplification confers glyphosate resistance in Amaranthus palmeri . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:1029–1034 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giacomini, DA, Umphres, AM, Nie, H, Mueller, TC, Steckel, LE, Young, BG, Scott, RC, Tranel, PJ (2017) Two new PPX2 mutations associated with resistance to PPO-inhibiting herbicides in Amaranthus palmeri . Pest Manag Sci 73:1559–1563 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grossmann, K, Kwiatkowski, J, Tresch, S (2001) Auxin herbicides induce H2O2 overproduction and tissue damage in cleavers (Galium aparine L.). J Exp Bot 52:1811–1816 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, I (2014) Herbicide resistant weeds. Pages 281–301 in Pimentel, D, Peshin, R, eds. Integrated Pest Management. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Dordrecht CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horak, MJ, Loughin, TM (2000) Growth analysis of four Amaranthus species. Weed Sci 48:347–355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansen, LL, Center, WA, Shaw, WC (1961) Effects of surfactants on the herbicidal activity of several herbicides in aqueous spray systems. Weeds 9:381–405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasieniuk, M, Morrison, IN, Brûlé-Babel, AL (1995) Inheritance of dicamba resistance in wild mustard (Brassica kaber). Weed Sci 43:192–195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, BC, Young, BG (2002) Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the foliar activity of mesotrione. Weed Sci 50:157–161 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, CR, Eure, PM, Grey, TL, Culpepper, AS, Vencill, WK (2018) Time of application influences translocation of auxinic herbicides in Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri). Weed Sci 66:4–14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, KB, Wax, LM, Hager, AG, Riechers, DE (2005) Soybean response to plant growth regulator herbicides is affected by other postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci 53:101–112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kittock, DL, Arle, HF (1977) Termination of late season cotton fruiting with plant growth regulators. Crop Sci 17:320–324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leon, RG, Ferrell, JA, Brecke, BJ (2014) Impact of exposure to 2,4-D and dicamba on peanut injury and yield. Weed Technol 28:465–470 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manalil, S, Busi, R, Renton, M, Powles, SB (2011) Rapid evolution of herbicide resistance by low herbicide dosages. Weed Sci 59:210–217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marple, ME, Al-Khatib, K, Shoup, D, Peterson, DE, Claassen, M (2007) Cotton response to simulated drift of seven hormonal-type herbicides. Weed Technol 21:987–992 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nandula, VK, Manthey, FA (2002) Response of kochia (Kochia scoparia) inbreds to 2,4-D and dicamba. Weed Technol 16:50–54 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neve, P, Powles, S (2005) Recurrent selection with reduced herbicide rates results in the rapid evolution of herbicide resistance in Lolium rigidum . Theor Appl Genet 110:1154–1166 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llewellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR, Witt, WW, Barrett, M (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci 60:31–62 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ou, J, Stahlman, PW, Jugulam, M (2018) Reduced absorption of glyphosate and decreased translocation of dicamba contribute to poor control of kochia (Kochia scoparia) at high temperature. Pest Manag Sci 74:1134–1142 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pallas, JE (1960) Effects of temperature and humidity on foliar absorption and translocation of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and benzoic acid. Plant Physiol 35:575–580 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, ET, Wehtje, GR, McElroy, JS, Flessner, ML, Panizzi, P (2015) Physiological basis for differential selectivity of four grass species to aminocyclopyrachlor. Weed Sci 63:788–798 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pazmino, DM, Rodriguez-Serrano, M, Romero-Puertas, MC, Archilla-Ruiz, A, Del Rio, LA, Sandalio, LM (2011) Differential response of young and adult leaves to herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid in pea plants: role of reactive oxygen species. Plant Cell Environ 34:1874–1889 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prasad, R, Foy, CL, Crafts, AS (1967) Effects of relative humidity on absorption and translocation of foliarly applied dalapon. Weeds 15:149–156 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radosevich, SR, Bayer, DE (1979) Effect of temperature and photoperiod on triclopyr, picloram, and 2,4,5-T translocation. Weed Sci 27:22–27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, RL, Coble, HD (1981) Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the activity of acifluorfen. Weed Sci 29:480–485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romero-Puertas, MC, McCarthy, I, Gómez, M, Sandalio, LM, Corpas, FJ, Del Rio, LA, Palma, JM (2004) Reactive oxygen species-mediated enzymatic systems involved in the oxidative action of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. 2004. Plant Cell Environ 27:1135–1148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, ME, Burnside, OC (1980) Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in hemp dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum). Weed Sci 28:13–20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellers, BA, Smeda, RJ, Johnson, WG (2003) Diurnal fluctuations and leaf angle reduce glufosinate efficacy. Weed Technol 17:302–306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoup, DE, Al-Khatib, K, Peterson, DE (2003) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) resistance to protoporphyrinogen oxidase-inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci 51:145–150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, Y (2014) Insight into the mode of action of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) as an herbicide. J Integr Plant Biol 56:106–113 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, CL, Nurse, RE, Sikkema, PH (2009) Time of day impacts postemergence weed control in corn. Weed Technol 23:346–355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tehranchian, P, Norsworthy, JK, Powles, S, Bararpour, MT, Bagavathiannan, MV, Barber, T, Scott, RC (2017) Recurrent sublethal-dose selection for reduced susceptibility of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to dicamba. Weed Sci 65:206–212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tranel, PJ, Wright, TR (2002) Resistance of weeds to ALS-inhibiting herbicides: what have we learned? Weed Sci 50:700–712 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, SM, Webster, TM, Steckel, LE (2013) Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri): a review. Weed Technol 27:12–27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, SR, Hall, JC (1995) Auxinic herbicide-resistant and -susceptible wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) biotypes: effect of auxin herbicides on seedling growth and auxin-binding activity. Pestic Biochem Physiol 52:137–148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, TM, Grey, TL (2015) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth morphology, growth, and seed production in Georgia. Weed Sci 63:264–272 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weidenhamer, JD, Triplett, GB, Sobotka, FE (1989) Dicamba injury to soybean. Agron J 81:637–643 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, B, Wang, J, Guo, Z, Tan, H, Zhu, X (2006) A simple colorimetric method for determination of hydrogen peroxide in plant tissues. Plant Growth Regul 49:113–118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Johnston et al. supplementary material

Johnston et al. supplementary material

Download Johnston et al. supplementary material(File)
File 164.2 KB