Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T02:47:30.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effectiveness of a New Safener for Protecting Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from Metolachlor Injury

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. F. Ellis ,
J. W. Peek ,
J. Boehle Jr.  and
G. Müller
J. F. Ellis
Affiliation:
Research and Develop. Dep., Agric. Div., CIBA-GEIGY Corp., Greensboro, NC 27409
J. W. Peek
Affiliation:
Research and Develop. Dep., Agric. Div., CIBA-GEIGY Corp., Greensboro, NC 27409
J. Boehle Jr.
Affiliation:
Research and Develop. Dep., Agric. Div., CIBA-GEIGY Corp., Greensboro, NC 27409
G. Müller
Affiliation:
Research and Develop. Dep., Agric. Chem. Div., CIBA GEIGY Ltd., Basle, Switzerland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A herbicide safener, CGA-43089 [α-(cyanomethoximino)-benzacetonitrile], has been discovered which will allow the safe use of metolachlor [2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethylacetamide] in grain sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. Experiments revealed that sorghum is protected from injury by metolachlor when it is applied at rates as high as 4 kg/ha. Better protection was achieved when sorghum seed were treated directly with the safener than when it was mixed with the herbicide. A CGA-43089 rate of 1.25 to 1.5 g per kg of sorghum seed was adequate for protection. Sorghum tolerance to metolachlor was maintained with CGA-43089 when metolachlor was combined with several s-triazine herbicides. Metolachlor effectively controlled several annual grasses with an increase in sorghum yield.

Keywords

Herbicide antidoteherbicide safenergrass controlCGA-43089
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 1980 , pp. 1 - 5
Copyright
Copyright © 1980 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. Bardsley, C. E., Savage, K. E., and Walker, J. C. 1968. Trifluralin behavior in soil. II. Volatilization as influenced by concentration, time, soil moisture content, and placement. Agron. J. 60:89–92.Google Scholar
2. Harper, L. A., White, A. W. Jr., Bruce, R. B., Thomas, A. W., and Leonard, R. A. 1976. Soil and microclimate effects on trifluralin volatilization. J. Environ. Qual. 5:236–242.Google Scholar
3. Kennedy, J. M. and Talbert, R. E. 1977. Comparative persistence of dinitroaniline-type herbicides on the soil surface. Weed Sci. 25:373–381.Google Scholar
4. Parochetti, J. V. and Hein, E. R. 1973. Volatility and photodecomposition of trifluralin, benefin, and nitralin. Weed Sci. 21:469–473.Google Scholar
5. Savage, K. E. and Barrentine, W. L. 1969. Trifluralin persistence as affected by depth of soil incorporation. Weed Sci. 17:349–352.Google Scholar
6. Smith, D. T. and Wiese, A. F. 1973. Delayed incorporation of trifluralin and nitralin. Weed Sci. 21:163–165.Google Scholar
7. Spencer, W. F. and Cliath, M. M. 1974. Factors affecting vapor loss of trifluralin from soil. J. Agric. Food Chem. 22:987–991.Google Scholar
8. Wright, W. L. and Warren, G. F. 1965. Photochemical decomposition of trifluralin. Weeds 13:329–331.Google Scholar