Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T05:26:49.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aberrations in Sugarbeet Roots as Induced by Trifluralin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

E. E. Schweizer
E. E. Schweizer*
Affiliation:
Crops Research Division, Agr. Res. Serv., U. S. Dep. of Agr. in cooperation with the Botany and Plant Pathology Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sixty percent of the roots of sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L.) at harvest were aberrant in the zone of the hypocotyledonary neck when 0.84 kg/ha of α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine (trifluralin) was sprayed primarily on the hypocotyledonary tissues of seedlings in the 10 to 12-leaf stage, compared to 7% when soil surrounded most of the hypocotyledonary tissues at the time of application. Trifluralin did not reduce the yield of roots or kilograms of sucrose per hectare in either treatment. Sucrose content and purity were lower, and total nitrogen was more than twice as high in sections of neck and root tissues where the aberrations were the most severe as compared to normal sections of neck and root tissues from the untreated plots. In the greenhouse, trifluralin inhibited the growth of primary and lateral roots in sugarbeet seedlings.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 1970 , pp. 131 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Anderson, W. Powell, Richards, Anna Beth, and Whitworth, J. Wayne 1967. Trifluralin effects on cotton seedlings. Weeds 15:224–227.Google Scholar
2. Arle, H. Fred. 1968. Trifluralin-systemic insecticide interactions on seedling cotton. Weed Sci. 16:430–432.Google Scholar
3. Artschwager, Ernst. 1926. Anatomy of the vegetative organs of the sugar beet. J. Agr. Res. 33:143–176.Google Scholar
4. Artschwager, Ernst. 1937. Observations of the effect of environmental conditions on the structure of the lateral roots in sugar beet. J. Agr. Res. 55:81–86.Google Scholar
5. Feeny, R. W. 1966. Effect of trifluralin on the growth of oat seedlings and respiration of excised oat roots. Proc. North East. Weed Contr. Conf. 20:595–603.Google Scholar
6. Fischer, B. B. 1966. The effect of trifluralin on the root development of seedling cotton. Australian J. Exp. Agr. Anim. Husb. 6:214–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Gorter, C. J. and van der Zweep, W. 1964. Morphogenetic effects of herbicides, p. 235–275. In Audus, L. J. (ed.). The Physiology and Biochemistry of Herbicides. Academic Press, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
8. Hacskaylo, Joseph and Amato, V. A. 1968. Effect of trifluralin on roots of corn and cotton. Weed Sci. 16:513–515.Google Scholar
9. Maag, Grace W. 1969. Rapid digestion procedures for determination of metallic ions and total nitrogen in sugarbeet samples. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Beet Tech. 15:361–367.Google Scholar
10. Oliver, Lawrence R. and Frans, R. E. 1968. Inhibition of cotton and soybean roots from incorporated trifluralin and persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 16:199–203.Google Scholar
11. Talbert, Ronald E. 1965. Effects of trifluralin on soybean root development. Proc. So. Weed. Conf. 18:652.Google Scholar