Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T04:38:13.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of application timing and herbicide rate on the efficacy of tolpyralate plus atrazine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2019

Brendan A. Metzger ,
Nader Soltani Open the ORCID record for Nader Soltani [Opens in a new window] ,
Alan J. Raeder ,
David C. Hooker ,
Darren E. Robinson  and
Peter H. Sikkema
Brendan A. Metzger
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Nader Soltani*
Affiliation:
Adjunct Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Alan J. Raeder
Affiliation:
Herbicide Field Development and Technical Service Representative, ISK Biosciences Inc., Concord, OH, USA
David C. Hooker
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Darren E. Robinson
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Nader Soltani, Email: soltanin@uoguelph.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Effective POST herbicides and herbicide mixtures are key components of integrated weed management in corn; however, herbicides vary in their efficacy based on application timing. Six field experiments were conducted over 2 yr (2017–2018) in southwestern Ontario, Canada, to determine the effects of herbicide application timing and rate on the efficacy of tolpyralate, a new 4-hydroxyphenyl pyruvate dioxygenase inhibitor. Tolpyralate at 15, 30, or 40 g ai ha−1 in combination with atrazine at 500 or 1,000 g ai ha−1 was applied PRE, early POST, mid-POST, or late POST. Tolpyralate + atrazine at rates ≥30 + 1,000 g ha−1 provided equivalent control of common lambsquarters and Powell amaranth applied PRE or POST, whereas no rate applied PRE controlled common ragweed, velvetleaf, barnyardgrass, or green foxtail. Common ragweed, common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, and Powell amaranth were controlled equally regardless of POST timing. In contrast, control of barnyardgrass and green foxtail declined when herbicide application was delayed to the late-POST timing, irrespective of herbicide rate. Similarly, corn grain yield declined within each tolpyralate + atrazine rate when herbicide applications were delayed to late-POST timing. Overall, the results of this study indicate that several monocot and dicot weed species can be controlled with tolpyralate + atrazine with an early to mid-POST herbicide application timing, before weeds reach 30 cm in height, and Powell amaranth and common lambsquarters can also be controlled PRE. Additionally, this study provides further evidence highlighting the importance of effective, early-season weed control in corn.

Keywords

Aaron Hager, University of Illinoisatrazinetolpyralatebarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv., ECHCGcommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L., CHEALcommon ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L., AMBELgreen foxtail, Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv., SETVIPowell amaranth, Amaranthus powelli S. Watson, AMAPOvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik., ABUTHcorn, Zea mays L.Weed controlcritical weed-free period (CPWC)heightHPPDyield
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , June 2019 , pp. 448 - 458
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

Ahrens, H, Lange, G, Mueller, T, Rosinger, C, Willms, L, Almsick, AV (2013) 4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase inhibitors in combination with safeners: solutions for modern and sustainable agriculture. Angew Chem Int Ed 44:9388–9398 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, RE (1989) HOE-39866 use in chemical fallow systems. Weed Technol 3:420–428 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollman, SL, Kells, JJ, Penner, D (2006) Weed response to mesotrione and atrazine applied alone and in combination preemergence. Weed Technol 20:903–907 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowley, SR (2015) Variance analyses––Gaussian. Page 57 in Bowley, SR, ed., A Hitchhiker’s Guide to Statistics in Biology––Generalized Linear Mixed Model Edition. Kincardine, ON: Plants et al.Google Scholar
Coetzer, E, Al-Khatib, K, Peterson, DE (2002) Glufosinate efficacy on Amaranthus species in glufosinate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 16:326–331 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, JL, Askew, SD, Thomas, WE, Wilcut, JW (2004) Weed efficacy evaluations for bromoxynil, glufosinate, glyphosate, pyrithiobac, and sulfosate. Weed Technol 18:443–453 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diebold, RS, McNaughton, KE, Lee, EA, Tardif, FJ (2003) Multiple resistance to imazethapyr and atrazine in Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii). Weed Sci 51:312–318 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gower, SA, Loux, MM, Cardina, J, Harrison, SK (2002) Effect of planting date, residual herbicide, and postemergence application timing on weed control and grain yield in glyphosate-tolerant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 16:488–494 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J (2012) The benefits of herbicide resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 68:1323–1331 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, MR, Swanton, CJ, Anderson, GW (1992) The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 40:441–447 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkes, T (2012) Herbicides with bleaching properties. Hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD): the herbicide target. Pages 225–232 in Krämer, W, Schirmer, U, Jeschke, P, Witschel, M, eds., Modern Crop Protection Compounds. 2nd edn, Volumes 1–3. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co.Google Scholar
Janak, TW, Grichar, WJ (2016) Weed control in corn (Zea mays L.) as influenced by preemergence herbicides. Int J Agron 2016:1–9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, DB, Norsworthy, JK (2014) Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) management as influenced by herbicide selection and application timing. Weed Technol 28:142–150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kegode, GO, Fronning, BE (2005) Artemisa biennis (biennial wormwood) control is influenced by plant size and weed flora at time of herbicide application. Crop Prot 24:915–920 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kikugawa, H, Satake, Y, Tonks, DJ, Grove, M, Nagayama, S, Tsukamoto, M (2015) Tolpyralate: new post-emergence herbicide for weed control in corn. Abstract 275 in Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Weed Science Society of America. Lexington, KY: Weed Science Society of America Google Scholar
King, CA, Oliver, LR (1992) Application rate and timing of acifluorfen, bentazon, chlorimuron and imazaquin. Weed Technol 6:526–534 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Evans, SP, Blankenship, EE, Van Acker, RC, Lindquist, JL (2002) Critical period for weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Sci 50:773–786 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kropff, MJ, Spitters, CJT (1991) A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on relative leaf area of the weed. Weed Res 31:97–105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, SD, Oliver, LR (1982) Efficacy of acifluorfen on broadleaf weeds. Times and methods for application. Weed Sci 30:520–526 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, BA, Soltani, N, Raeder, AJ, Hooker, DC, Robinson, DE, Sikkema, PH (2018a) Tolpyralate efficacy: Part 1. Biologically effective dose of tolpyralate for control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in corn. Weed Technol 32:698–706 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzger, BA, Soltani, N, Raeder, AJ, Hooker, DC, Robinson, DE, Sikkema, PH (2018b) Tolpyralate efficacy: Part 2. Comparison of three group 27 herbicides applied POST for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in corn. Weed Technol 32:707–713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitich, LW (1991) Intriguing world of weeds: velvetleaf. Weed Technol 5:253–255 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Oliveira, MJ (2004) Comparison of the critical period for weed control in wide- and narrow-row corn. Weed Sci 52:802–807 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obrigawitch, TT, Kenyon, WH, Kuratle, H (1990) Effect of application timing on rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control with DPX-V9360. Weed Sci 38:45–49 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs [OMAFRA] (2018) Publication 75A. Guide to Weed Control. Field Crops. (Cowbrough, M, ed.) Guelph, ON: OMAFRAGoogle Scholar
Page, ER, Cerrudo, D, Westra, P, Loux, M, Smith, K, Foresman, C, Wright, H, Swanton, CJ (2012) Why early season weed control is important in maize. Weed Sci 60:423–430 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajcan, I, Swanton, CJ (2001) Understanding maize-weed competition: resource competition, light quality and the whole plant. Field Crop Res 71:139–150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rojano-Delgado, AM, Menendez, J, De, P rado, R (2014) Absorption and penetration of herbicides viewed in metabolism studies: case of glufosinate and imazamox in wheat. Pages 159–165 in Myung, K, Satchivi, NM, Kingston, CK, eds., Retention, Uptake and Translocation of Agrochemicals in Plants. Volume 1171. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society Google Scholar
Schabenburger, O (2007) Growing up fast: SAS® 9.2 enhancements to the GLIMMIX procedure. SAS Global Forum paper 177. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Sellers, BA, Ferrell, JA, MacDonald, GE, Kline, WN (2009) Dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium) size at application affects herbicide efficacy. Weed Technol 23:247–250 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soltani, N, Nurse, RE, Sikkema, PH (2016) Biologically effective dose of glyphosate as influenced by weed size in corn. Can J Plant Sci 96(3):455–460 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, C, Powell, G (2014) Evaluation of tolpyralate (SL-573) for weed control in corn. MSU Weed Science Research Program. Online. https://www.canr.msu.edu/weeds/research/annual-results/2014-annual-results/C05-14%20TOLPYRALATE.pdf. Accessed: December 11, 2018Google Scholar
Steckel, GJ, Wax, LM, Simmons, W, Phillips, WH II (1997) Glufosinate efficacy on annual weeds is influenced by rate and growth stage. Weed Technol 11:484–488 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoller, EW, Wax, LM, Matthiesen, RL (1975) Response of yellow nutsedge and soybeans to bentazon, glyphosate and perfluidone. Weed Sci 23:215–221 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Weise, SF (1991) Integrated weed management: the rationale and approach. Weed Technol 5:657–663 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Gulden, RH, Chandler, K (2007) A rationale for atrazine stewardship in corn. Weed Sci 55:75–81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonks, D, Grove, M, Kikugawa, H, Parks, M, Nagayama, S, Tsukamoto, M (2015) Tolpyralate: an overview of performance for weed control in US corn. Abstract 276 in Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Weed Science Society of America. Lexington, KY: Weed Science Society of America Google Scholar
Tursun, N, Datta, A, Sakinmaz, MS, Kantarci, Z, Knezevic, SZ, Chauhan, BS (2016) The critical period for weed control in three corn (Zea mays L.) types. Crop Prot 90:59–65 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, SE, Tan, CS (1983) Critical period of weed interference in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum): growth analysis. Weed Sci 31:476–481 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (2004) The effect of competition duration. Pages 109–130 in Zimdahl, RL, ed., Weed–Crop Competition––A Review. 2nd edn. Ames, IA: Blackwell Publishing CrossRefGoogle Scholar