Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T05:24:06.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interaction of Buthidazole and Acetanilide Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Alan C. York  and
Fred W. Slife
Alan C. York
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Fred W. Slife
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In field and greenhouse studies, alachlor [2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide] was found to antagonize buthidazole {3-[5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl]-4-hydroxy-1-methyl-2-imidazolidinone} injury to corn (Zea mays L.) when both herbicides were preplant incorporated. Similar results were found with five of seven other acetanilide herbicides tested. The antagonism between buthidazole and alachlor also occurred with common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.) and ivyleaf morningglory [Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq.] but not with five other weed species. Preplant-incorporated applications of alachlor had little to no effect on the response of corn to postemergence applications of buthidazole, but alachlor increased the susceptibility of ivyleaf morningglory to postemergence applications of buthidazole. No antagonism was observed when alachlor was included in postemergence applications of buthidazole to corn or ivyleaf morningglory.

Keywords

Zea mayspreplanting and postemergence studiesantagonismalachlor
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , July 1981 , pp. 461 - 468
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 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. Akobundu, I. O., Sweet, R. D., Duke, W. B., and Minotti, P. L. 1975. Weed response to atrazine and alachlor combinations at low rates. Weed Sci. 23:67–70.Google Scholar
2. Bayer, D. E. and Drever, H. R. 1965. The effect of surfactants on efficiency of foliar-applied diuron. Weeds 13:222–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Behrens, R. and Elakkad, M. A. 1977. Preemergence herbicide applications in corn, Rosemount, MN-1977. Res. Rep., North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 34:176–178.Google Scholar
4. Bouse, L. F. and Bovey, R. W. 1967. A laboratory sprayer for potted plants. Weeds 15:89–91.Google Scholar
5. Buchholtz, D. L. and Lavy, T. L. 1978. Pesticide interactions on oats grown in the greenhouse. Abstr., Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 99.Google Scholar
6. Gast, A. 1970. Use and performance of triazine herbicides on major crops and major weeds throughout the world. Residue Rev. 32:11–18.Google Scholar
7. Hamilton, K. C. and Arle, H. F. 1975. Preplanting applications of diuron with and without trifluralin in cotton. Weed Sci. 23:75–77.Google Scholar
8. Hanway, J. J. 1966. How a corn plant develops. Special Report No. 48. Coop. Ext. Serv., Iowa State Univ., Ames. 17 pp.Google Scholar
9. Harvey, R. G. and Jansen, G. E. 1977. Annual weed control in field and sweet corn. Res. Rep., North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 34:194–197.Google Scholar
10. Hatzios, K. K. and Penner, D. 1980. Potential antidotes against buthidazole injury to corn (Zea mays . Weed Sci. 28:273–276.Google Scholar
11. Hill, G. D. Jr., Belasco, I. J., and Ploeg, H. L. 1965. Influence of surfactants on the activity of diuron, linuron, and bromacil as foliar sprays on weeds. Weeds 13:103–106.Google Scholar
12. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1977. Effect of trifluralin and metribuzin combinations on soybean tolerance to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 25:88–93.Google Scholar
13. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1977. Effect of atrazine on soybean tolerance to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 25:115–121.Google Scholar
14. Marsh, H. V. Jr., Woodard, K., and Bates, J. 1975. Effect of alachlor on water utilization by oat (Avena sativa L.) seedlings. Proc. Northeast. Weed Control Conf. 29:175.Google Scholar
15. Radosevich, S. R. 1977. Mechanisms of atrazine resistance in lambsquarters and pigweed. Weed Sci. 25:316–318.Google Scholar
16. Ryan, G. F. 1970. Resistance of common groundsel to simazine and atrazine. Weed Sci. 18:614–616.Google Scholar
17. Sheets, T. J. 1961. Uptake and distribution of simazine by oat and cotton seedlings. Weeds 9:1–3.Google Scholar
18. Sheets, T. J. 1970. Persistence of triazine herbicides in soils. Residue Rev. 32:287–310.Google ScholarPubMed
19. Steel, R. G. and Torrie, J. H. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. McGraw-Hill, New York. 481 pp.Google Scholar
20. Sterrett, J. P., Davis, J. T., and Hurtt, W. 1972. Antagonistic effects between picloram and bromacil with oats. Weed Sci. 20:440–444.Google Scholar
21. Vostral, H. J., Buchholtz, K. P., and Kust, C. A. 1970. Effect of root temperature on absorption and translocation of atrazine by soybean. Weed Sci. 18:115–117.Google Scholar
22. Wyse, D. L., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. The interaction of atrazine and EPTC on navy bean. Weed Sci. 24:5–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar