Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T00:41:48.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential Susceptibility of Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Biotypes to Glyphosate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Francis P. Degennaro  and
Stephen C. Weller
Francis P. Degennaro
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Stephen C. Weller
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biotypes of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L. ♯3 CONAR) identified in Indiana varied widely in susceptibility to glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine] but not to 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] or bentazon [3-isopropyl-1H-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-4(3H)-one 2,2-dioxide] in field tests. Significant differences in injury to two of the biotypes occurred with glyphosate applied at 1.12 to 4.48 kg ai/ha in greenhouse tests. Differences of greater than 70% in injury rating, root and shoot dry weight, and shoot regrowth dry weight occurred between the two biotypes at 2.24 kg/ha glyphosate. The susceptibility of the tolerant biotype at 2.24 kg/ha glyphosate was decreased by 40% as it increased in age, while the susceptible biotype sustained complete foliar necrosis when treated at all plant ages tested. Susceptibility differences between the two biotypes could not be correlated to differences in leaf stomatal or epidermal cell number. These studies suggested that the variable control of field bindweed observed in the field may be due to the occurrence of biotypes within a given population of this weed which differ in their susceptibility to glyphosate.

Keywords

N-(phosphonomethyl)glycineherbicide toleranceCONVAR
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , July 1984 , pp. 472 - 476
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 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. Alley, H. P. and Humburg, N. E. 1981. Vegetative top growth control of field bindweed resulting from selected herbicides and/or combinations as individual and/or multiple treatments. Res. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Page 14.Google Scholar
2. Currier, H. B. and Dybing, C. D. 1959. Foliar penetration of herbicides. Review and present status. Weeds 7:195–213.Google Scholar
3. DeGennaro, F. P. and Weller, S. C. 1984. Growth and reproductive characteristics of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) biotypes. Weed Sci. 32:0000.Google Scholar
4. Dybing, C. D. and Currier, H. B. 1959. A fluorescent dye method for foliar penetration studies. Weeds 7:214–222.Google Scholar
5. Humburg, N. E. and Alley, H. P. 1979. Field bindweed control obtained with glyphosate, with and without 2,4-D and dicamba added. Res. Rep. Soc. West. Weed Sci. Page 16.Google Scholar
6. Kamimura, S. and Goodman, R. N. 1964. Influence of foliar characteristics on the absorption of radioactive model compound by apple leaves. Physiol. Plant. 17:805–813.Google Scholar
7. Meyer, L. J. 1978. The influence of environment on growth and control of field bindweed. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Special Session on Field Bindweed. 33:141–142.Google Scholar
8. Phillips, W. 1978. Field Bindweed: The weed and the problem. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Special Session on Field Bindweed. 33:140–141.Google Scholar
9. Rashed-Mohassel, M. H. 1982. Chemical control, physiology, anatomy, and glyphosate absorption-translocation in field bindweed under water stress. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Dissertation Abstr. International. Vol. 42(8):3041B.Google Scholar
10. Rashed-Mohassel, M. H. and Haderlie, L. C. 1980. Control of field bindweed with glyphosate and growth regulator combinations. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 35:86.Google Scholar
11. Weaver, S. E. and Riley, W. R. 1982. The biology of Canadian weeds. 53. Convolvulus arvensis L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:461–472.Google Scholar
12. Whitworth, J. W. 1964. The reaction of strains of field bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 12:57–58.Google Scholar
13. Whitworth, J. W. and Muzik, T. J. 1967. Differential response of selected clones of bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 15:275–280.Google Scholar