Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T14:15:01.880Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Alachlor and 1,8-Naphthalic Anhydride Effects on Sorghum Seedling Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. Stephen Hickey
Affiliation:
Dep. of Plant and Soil Sci., Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37901
W. A. Krueger
Affiliation:
Dep. of Plant and Soil Sci., Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37901

Abstract

Time of coleorhiza emergence through the per carp of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench ‘AKS 614′] germinated on blotters in the dark was not affected by 1, 5, or 25 ppmw of alachlor [2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl) acetanilide], by 2% w/w 1,8-naphthalic anhydride (hereafter referred to as NA) seed treatment, or their combinations. Coleoptile emergence was delayed slightly by NA alone and in combination with alachlor, but not by alachlor alone. Emergence of the primary leaf from the coleoptile was inhibited by alachlor treatments in the presence of NA and even more so in its absence. Various degrees of leaf distortion resulted when plants not exhibiting leaf emergence were placed in light. Severity of distortion was less with 1 ppmw of alachlor than with 5 ppmw, and the alachlor-induced distortion was less when in combination with 150 ppmw of NA. After 4 weeks the primary leaves were still distorted, but subsequent emerging leaves were normal in all treatments. More complete emergence and unrolling of the primary leaf were observed when terminal segments (3.5 cm long, including the coleoptile and part of the first internode) from plants grown in the presence of 150 ppmw of NA were vacuum infiltrated with 15, 25, and 50 ppmw of alachlor than in the controls. From these results we conclude that the protective action of alachlor is of a physiological nature and not one of physical deactivation of the herbicide.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 by the 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. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1969. Suggested guide for weed control. Agr. Handbook No. 332. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 70 pp.Google Scholar
2. Devlin, R.M. and Cunningham, R.P. 1970. The inhibition of gibberellic acid induction of α-amylase activity in barley endosperm by certain herbicides. Weed Res. 10:316320.Google Scholar
3. Dhillon, N.S. and Anderson, J.L. 1972. Morphological, anatomical and biochemical effects of propachlor on seedling growth. Weed Res. 12:182189.Google Scholar
4. Edmondson, J.B. 1969. Effects of 2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide on cucumber seedling growth. Ph.D. Thesis. Univ. Illinois. (Diss. Abstr. 19:1146).Google Scholar
5. Hahn, R.R. and Merkle, M.G. 1973. Altering sorghum tolerance to alachlor. Proc. S. Weed Conf. 26:173.Google Scholar
6. Hoagland, D.R. and Arnon, D.I. 1938. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. California Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 347. 32 p.Google Scholar
7. Jordan, L.S. and Jolliffe, V.A. 1971. Protection of plants from herbicides with 1,8-naphthalic anhydride as illustrated with sorghum. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 6:417421.Google Scholar
8. Paleg, L.G. 1965. Physiological effects of gibberellins. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 16:291322.Google Scholar
9. Rutledge, A.D. 1970. A study of the factors affecting the herbicidal control of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus). Ph.D. Thesis. Univ. Tennessee. (Diss. Abstr. 21:3801-B).Google Scholar