Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T11:47:47.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Penetration, Translocation, and Metabolism of Acifluorfen in Soybean (Glycine max), Common Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), and Common Cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ronald L. Ritter  and
Harold D. Coble
Ronald L. Ritter
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
Harold D. Coble
Affiliation:
Crop Science Dep., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27650
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Penetration, translocation, and metabolism of acifluorfen {5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid} in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Ransom’], common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.), and common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.) were studied. Using liquid scintillation spectrometry and autoradiography, little movement of 14C-acifluorfen from the leaf surfaces of the two weed species could be detected in 24 h. After 48 h, less 14C was recovered from the leaf surface and more was found within the leaves of the two weed species. Autoradiographs of the weed showed limited acropetal movement of 14C from leaves 24 and 48 h after treatment. For soybean, most of the 14C still remained on the leaf surface after 48 h. Autoradiographs of soybean plants showed no movement from the treated leaflet. Studies using thin layer chromatography suggested that acifluorfen was metabolized within the plants. Rate of metabolism was inversely related to plant susceptibility (common ragweed and common cocklebur>soybean). The more rapid penetration and translocation, coupled with slower metabolism of acifluorfen by the weed species in comparison to soybean, may account for the difference in susceptibility of the weeds and soybean to acifluorfen.

Keywords

Diphenylether herbicideherbicide selectivitymode of action
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , July 1981 , pp. 474 - 480
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. Eastin, E. F. 1969. Movement and fate of p-nitrophenyl-α,α,α-trifluoro-2-nitro-p-tolyl ether-1-14C in peanut seedlings. Plant Physiol. 44:1397–1401.Google Scholar
2. Eastin, E. F. 1971. Degradation of fluorodifen 1-14C by peanut seedling roots. Weed Res. 11:120–123.Google Scholar
3. Eastin, E. F. 1971. Fate of fluorodifen in resistant peanut seedlings. Weed Sci. 19:261–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Eastin, E. F. 1971. Movement and fate of fluorodifen-1-14C in cucumber seedlings. Weed Res. 11:63–68.Google Scholar
5. Eastin, E. F. 1972. Fate of fluorodifen in susceptible cucumber seedlings. Weed Sci. 20:255–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hanson, C. L. and Rieck, C. E. 1977. Cocklebur control systems in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:47.Google Scholar
7. Hartnett, J. P. 1978. RH-6201 – A new postemergence soybean herbicide. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:28–29.Google Scholar
8. Hawton, D. and Stobbe, E. H. 1971. Selectivity of nitrofen among rape, redroot pigweed and green foxtail. Weed Sci. 19:42–44.Google Scholar
9. Johnson, W. O., Kollman, G. T., Swithenbank, C., and Yih, R. Y. 1978. RH-6201 (Blazer): A new broad spectrum herbicide for postemergence use in soybeans. J. Agric. Food Chem. 26:285–286.Google Scholar
10. Mangeot, B. L. and Rieck, C. E. 1979. Metabolism of 14C-acifluorfen in soybean. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 32:326.Google Scholar
11. Mangeot, B. L., Rieck, C. E., and Downs, J. P. 1977. Weed control in soybeans with RH-6201. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:50.Google Scholar
12. Mangeot, B. L., Rieck, C. E., and Martin, J. R. 1978. Absorption and translocation of 14C-RH-6201. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 31:240.Google Scholar
13. Mathis, W. D. and Oliver, L. R. 1977. Control of six morningglory species in soybeans. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 30:38.Google Scholar
14. Matsunaka, S. 1969. Acceptor of light energy in photoactivation of diphenylether herbicides. J. Agric. Food Chem. 17:171–175.Google Scholar
15. Matsunaka, S. 1969. Activation and inactivation of herbicides by higher plants. Residue Rev. 25:45–58.Google Scholar
16. Moreland, D. E., Blackmon, W. J., Todd, H. G., and Farmer, F. S. 1970. Effects of diphenylether herbicides on reactions of mitochondria and chloroplasts. Weed Sci. 18:636–641.Google Scholar
17. Rogers, R. L. 1971. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of p-nitrophenyl-α,α,α-trifluoro-2-nitro-p-tolyl ether by soybeans. J. Agric. Food Chem. 19:32–35.Google Scholar
18. Weber, J. B. 1977. Soil properties, herbicide sorption, and model soil systems. Pages 59–72 in Truelove, B., ed., Research Methods in Weed Science. South. Weed Sci. Soc., Auburn, Alabama.Google Scholar