Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T21:26:14.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) Response to Simulated Fluazifop-P Drift

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Edward P. Richard Jr.
Edward P. Richard Jr.*
Affiliation:
Sugarcane Res. Unit, Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., P.O. Box 470, Houma, LA 70361
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The impact of POST applications of fluazifop-P on sugarcane grown in Louisiana was determined for 3, 6,11, 22, and 44% of the lowest rate recommended for the control of johnsongrass in soybean (100 g ai ha−1). In field studies, sugarcane injury 4 WAT increased as the rate of fluazifop-P increased. Injury in excess of 80% was observed when fluazifop-P at 44 g ha−1 was applied in May and June and 54% when applied in August Sugarcane stalks treated with fluazifop-P were fewer in number, shorter and lighter, and immature at harvest This resulted in lower Brix and sucrose levels, higher fiber content, and ultimately lower sugar yields. Reductions in sugar yields associated with an application of fluazifop-P closely paralleled visual injury 4 WAT. Injury from application of fluazifop-P was also evident in the subsequent ratoon crop where reductions in spring shoot counts of 14 to 25% were obtained even when fluazifop-P had been applied at 6 g ha−1 the previous year. Greenhouse studies indicated that the response observed in the field with CP 70-321 sugarcane was indicative of the major cultivars grown, with the possible exception of CP 74-383.

Keywords

Fluazifop-P, (R)-2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]oxy]phenoxy]propanoic addjohnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. #3 SORHAsoybean, Glycine max L. Merr.sugarcane, interspecific hybrids of Saccharum ‘CP 65-357,’ ‘CP 70-321,’ ‘CP 72-370,’ ‘CP 74-383,’ ‘CP 76-331,’ and ‘CP 79-318.’Crop injuryherbicide misapplicationSACOF
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , December 1995 , pp. 660 - 665
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. Ali, A. D., Reagan, T. E., Kitchen, L. M., and Flynn, J. L. 1986. Effects of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) density on sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) yield. Weed Sci. 34:381–383.Google Scholar
2. Al-Khatib, K., Parker, R., Fuerst, E. P. 1993. Wine grape (Vitis vinifera L.) response to simulated herbicide drift. Weed Technol. 7:97–102.Google Scholar
3. Anonymous. 1994. Controlling weeds in sugarcane. Pub. 2314(5M). Louisiana State Univ. Agric. Center's Coop. Ext. Ser. Google Scholar
4. Bailey, J. A. and Kapusta, G. 1993. Soybean (Glycine max) tolerance to simulated drift of nicosulfuron and primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 7:740–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bryson, C. T. 1987. Effects of rainfall on foliar herbicides applied to rhizome johnsongrass. Weed Sci. 35:115–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Bryson, C. T. and Wills, G. D. 1985. Susceptibility of bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) biotypes to several herbicides. Weed Sci. 33:848–852.Google Scholar
7. Carter, C. E., Irvine, J. E., McDaniel, V., and Dunckelman, J. W. 1985. Yield response of sugarcane to stalk density and subsurface drainage treatment. Trans. ASAE 28:172–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Chen, J.C.P. and Chou, C. 1993. Cane Sugar Handbook. 12th ed. Pages 852–867. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
9. Legendre, B. L. 1992. The core/press method for predicting the sugar yield from cane for use in cane payment. Sugar J. 54(9):2–7.Google Scholar
10. Legendre, B. L. and Henderson, M. T. 1972. The history and development of sugar yield calculations. Proc. Am. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 2(NS):10–18.Google Scholar
11. Millhollon, R. W. 1976. Asulam for johnsongrass control in sugarcane. Weed Sci. 24:496–499.Google Scholar
12. Millhollon, R. W. 1985. Progressive kill of rhizomatous johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) from repeated treatment with dalapon, MSMA, or asulam. Weed Sci. 33:216–221.Google Scholar
13. Millhollon, R. W. and Koike, H. 1985. Combined effects of disease and herbicide treatment on yield of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum). Weed Sci. 34:137–142.Google Scholar
14. Millhollon, R. W. and Fanguy, H. P. 1989. Growth response of six sugarcane cultivars to the herbicide asulam, dalapon, and MSMA. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 9:91–96.Google Scholar
15. Richard, E. P. Jr. 1989. Response of sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) cultivars to preemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 3:358–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Richard, E. P. Jr. 1990. Timing effects on johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control with asulam in sugarcane (Saccharum sp.). Weed Technol. 4:81–86.Google Scholar
17. Richard, E. P. Jr. 1991. Sensitivity of sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) to glyphosate. Weed Sci. 39:73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Richard, E. P. Jr. 1992. Postemergence bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) control in sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) with dalapon. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 12:171–181.Google Scholar
19. Richard, E. P. Jr. 1993. Preemergence herbicide effects on bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) interference in sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Weed Technol. 7:578–584.Google Scholar
20. Richard, E. P. Jr. and Viator, H. P. 1989. Crop-herbicide management options for johnsongrass control in fallowed sugarcane fields. J. Am. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 9:38–43.Google Scholar
21. Richard, E. P. Jr. and Griffin, J. L. 1993. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) with asulam applied alone and in mixtures. Weed Technol. 7:657–662.Google Scholar
22. Richard, E. P. Jr., Hurst, H. R., and Wauchope, R. D. 1981. Effects of simulated MSMA drift on rice (Oryza sativa) growth and yield. Weed Sci. 29:303–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Schroeder, G. L., Cole, D. F., and Dexter, A. G. 1983. Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.) response to simulated herbicide spray drift. Weed Sci. 31:831–836.Google Scholar
24. Shaw, D. R., Ratnayake, S., and Smith, C. A. 1990. Effects of herbicide application timing on johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and pitted morningglory (Ipomea lacunosa) control. Weed Technol. 4:900–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Winton-Daniels, K., Frans, R., and McClelland, M. 1990. Herbicide systems for johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 4:115–122.Google Scholar