Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-8r4lv Total loading time: 0.246 Render date: 2021-07-28T10:33:50.553Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Droplet size impact on lactofen and acifluorfen efficacy for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 December 2019

Lucas X. Franca
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Mississippi State University, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State, MS, USA
Darrin M. Dodds
Affiliation:
Professor and Extension Specialist, Mississippi State University, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State, MS, USA
Thomas R. Butts
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, North Platte, NE, USA
Greg R. Kruger
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, North Platte, NE, USA
Daniel B. Reynolds
Affiliation:
Professor and Endowed Chair, Mississippi State University, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State, MS, USA
J. Anthony Mills
Affiliation:
Weed Management Technology Development Representative, Bayer CropScience, Collierville, TN, USA
Jason A. Bond
Affiliation:
Professor and Extension Specialist, Mississippi State University, Delta Research and Extension Center, Stoneville, MS, USA
Angus L. Catchot
Affiliation:
Professor and Extension Specialist, Mississippi State University, Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State, MS, USA
Daniel G. Peterson
Affiliation:
Director and Professor, Mississippi State University, Institute for Genomics, Biocomputing and Biotechnology, and Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State, MS, USA
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Herbicide applications performed with pulse width modulation (PWM) sprayers to deliver specific spray droplet sizes could maintain product efficacy, minimize potential off-target movement, and increase flexibility in field operations. Given the continuous expansion of herbicide-resistant Palmer amaranth populations across the southern and midwestern United States, efficacious and cost-effective means of application are needed to maximize Palmer amaranth control. Experiments were conducted in two locations in Mississippi (2016, 2017, and 2018) and one location in Nebraska (2016 and 2017) for a total of 7 site-years. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of a range of spray droplet sizes [150 (Fine) to 900 μm (Ultra Coarse)] on lactofen and acifluorfen efficacy for Palmer amaranth control. The results of this research indicated that spray droplet size did not influence lactofen efficacy on Palmer amaranth. Palmer amaranth control and percent dry-biomass reduction remained consistent with lactofen applied within the aforementioned droplet size range. Therefore, larger spray droplets should be used as part of a drift mitigation approach. In contrast, acifluorfen application with 300-μm (Medium) spray droplets provided the greatest Palmer amaranth control. Although percent biomass reduction was numerically greater with 300-μm (Medium) droplets, results did not differ with respect to spray droplet size, possibly as a result of initial plant injury, causing weight loss, followed by regrowth. Overall, 900-μm (Ultra Coarse) droplets could be used effectively without compromising lactofen efficacy on Palmer amaranth, and 300-μm (Medium) droplets should be used to achieve maximum Palmer amaranth control with acifluorfen.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: William Johnson, Purdue University

References

Alves, GS, Kruger, GR, da Cunha, JP, de Santana, DG, Pinto, LA, Guimarães, F, Zaric, M (2017) Dicamba spray drift as influenced by wind speed and nozzle type. Weed Technol 31:724731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anglund, EA, Ayers, PD (2003) Field evaluation of response times for a variable rate (pressure-based and injection) liquid chemical applicator. Appl Eng Agric 19:273282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ASABE (2009) Spray nozzle classification by droplet spectra, ANSI/ASAE S572.2. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. Pp 13Google Scholar
Berger, ST, Dobrow, MH, Ferrell, JA, Webster, TM (2014) Influence of carrier volume and nozzle selection on Palmer amaranth control. Peanut Sci 41:120123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, SL, Esterly, DM, Perry, SG (1996) Atmospheric pollutants and trace gases. Off-target deposition of pesticides from agricultural aerial spray applications. J Environ Qual 25:10951104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blouin, DC, Webster, EP, Bond, JA (2011) On the analysis of combined experiments. Weed Technol 25:165169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, JA, Reynolds, DB, Irby, T (2016) Managing PPO-resistant Palmer amaranth in Mississippi soybean. Mississippi State University Extension. http://www.mississippi-crops.com/2016/03/25/managing-ppo-resistant-palmer-amaranth-in-mississippi-soybean/. Accessed: January 14, 2019Google Scholar
Bouse, LF (1994) Effect of nozzle type and operation on spray droplet size. T ASABE 37:13891400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, L, Soltani, N, Shrosphire, C, Spieser, H, Sikkema, PH (2007) Efficacy of four corn (Zea mays L.) herbicides when applied with flat fan and air induction nozzles. Weed Biol Manag 7:5561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, EC, Smith, DB (1974) Effects of droplet sizes on deposition of ULV spray. J Econ Entomol 67:751754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler Ellis, MC, Tuck, CR, Miller, PCH (1997) The effect of some adjuvants on sprays produced by agricultural flat fan nozzles Crop Prot 16:4150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butts, TR, Samples, CA, Franca, LX, Dodds, DM, Reynolds, DB, Adams, JW, Zollinger, RK, Howatt, KA, Fritz, BK, Hoffmann, CW, Luck, JD, Kruger, GR (2019a) Droplet size impact on efficacy of a dicamba-plus-glyphosate mixture. Weed Technol 33:6674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butts, TR, Samples, CA, Franca, LX, Dodds, DM, Reynolds, DB, Adams, JW, Zollinger, RK, Howatt, KA, Fritz, BK, Hoffmann, WC, Luck, JD, Kruger, GR (2019b) Optimum droplet size using a pulse-width modulation sprayer for applications of 2,4-D choline plus glyphosate. Agron J 111:14251432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butts, TR, Samples, CA, Franca, LX, Dodds, DM, Reynolds, DB, Adams, JW, Zollinger, RK, Howatt, KA, Fritz, BK, Hoffmann, CW, Kruger, GR (2018) Spray droplet size and carrier volume effect on dicamba and glufosinate efficacy. Pest Manag Sci 74:20202029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byass, JB, Lake, JR (1977) Spray drift from a tractor-powered field sprayer. Pestic Sci 8:117126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlsen, SCK, Spliid, NH, Svensmark, B (2006) Drift of 10 herbicides after tractor spray application. 2. Primary drift (droplet drift). Chemosphere 64:778786CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carmer, SG, Nyquist, WE, Walker, WM (1989) Least significant differences for combined analyses of experiments with two- or three-factor treatment designs. Agron J 81:665672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chahal, PS, Aulakh, JS, Jugulam, M, Jhala, AJ (2015) Herbicide-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) in the United States––mechanisms of resistance, impact, and management. Chapter in Price, A, Kelton, J, Sarunaite, L, eds., Herbicides, Agronomic Crops, and Weed Biology. InTechOpen. doi: 10.5772/61512Google Scholar
Combellack, JH (1982) Loss of herbicides from ground sprayers. Weed Res 22:193204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creech, CF, Henry, RS, Fritz, BK, Kruger, GR (2015) Influence of herbicide active ingredient, nozzle type, orifice size, spray pressure, and carrier volume rate on spray droplet size characteristics. Weed Technol 29:298310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creech, CF, Moraes, JG, Henry, RS, Luck, JD, Kruger, GR (2016) The impact of spray droplet size on the efficacy of 2,4-D, atrazine, chlorimuron-methyl, dicamba, glufosinate, and saflufenacil. Weed Technol 30:573586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Cock, N, Massinon, M, Salah, SO, Lebeau, F (2017) Investigation on optimal spray properties for ground based agricultural applications using deposition and retention models. Biosyst Eng 162:99111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Oliveira, RB, Precipito, LMB, Gandolfo, MA, de Oliveira, JV, Lucio, FR (2019) Effect of droplet size and leaf surface on retention of 2,4-D formulations. Crop Prot 119:97101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ennis, WB, Williamson, RE (1963) Influence of droplet size on effectiveness of low-volume herbicidal sprays. Weeds-U 11:6772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etheridge, RE, Hart, WE, Hayes, RM, Mueller, TC (2001) Effect of Venturi-type nozzles and application volume on postemergence herbicide efficacy. Weed Technol 15:7580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, HC, Sperry, BP, Reynolds, DB, Kruger, GR, Claussen, S (2018) Reducing herbicide particle drift: effect of hooded sprayer and spray quality. Weed Technol 32:714721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frans, RE, Talbert, R, Marx, D, Crowley, H (1986) Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. Pages 3738in Camper, ND, ed., Research Methods in Weed Science. 3rd edn. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Frost, KR, Ware, GW (1970) Pesticide drift from aerial and ground applications. J Agric Eng 51:460464Google Scholar
Giles, DK, Henderson, GW, Funk, K (1996) Digital control of flow rate and spray droplet size from agricultural nozzles for precision chemical application. Precis Agric 729738Google Scholar
Gizotti de Moraes, J (2018) Evaluation of Glyphosate and PPO-Inhibiting Herbicide Tank-Mixtures to Manage Glyphosate Resistance in Soybean. Master’s thesis. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska. 82 pGoogle Scholar
GopalaPillai, S, Tian, L, Zheng, J (1999) Evaluation of a flow control system for site-specific herbicide applications. T ASABE 42:863870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, WJ (2007) Horse purslane (Trianthema portulacastrum), smellmelon (Cucumis melo), and Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control in peanut with postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol 21:688691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, WJ (2008) Herbicide systems for control of horse purslane (Trianthema portulacastrum L.), smellmelon (Cucumis melo L.), and Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) in peanut. Peanut Sci 35:3842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grover, R, Kerr, LA, Maybank, J, Yoshidja, K (1978) Field measurement of droplet drift from ground sprayers, I: sampling, analytical and data integration techniques. Can J Plant Sci 58:611622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, JR, Gossett, BJ, Murphy, TR, Toler, JE (1991) Response of broadleaf weeds and soybeans to the diphenyl ether herbicides. J Prod Agric 4:407–NPCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havens, PL, Hilger, DE, Hewitt, AJ, Kruger, GR, Marchi-Werle, L, Czaczyk, Z (2018) Field measurements of drift of conventional and drift control formulations of 2,4-D plus glyphosate. Weed Technol 32:550556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, IM (2019) The International survey of herbicide-resistant weeds. www.weedscience.org. Accessed: January 18, 2019Google Scholar
Henry, RS, Fritz, BK, Hoffmann, WC, Kruger, GR (2016) The Influence of nozzle type, operating pressure, and tank-mixture components on droplet characteristics and the EPA’s drift reduction rating. Pages 149161in Poffenberger, C, Heuser, J, eds. Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems. Vol 36: Emerging Trends Building on a Solid Foundation. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM InternationalCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoche, M (1994) Effect of droplet size and carrier volume on performance of foliage-applied herbicides. Crop Prot 13:163178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korres, NE, Norsworthy, JK, Burgos, NR, Oosterhuis, DM (2017) Temperature and drought impacts on rice production: an agronomic perspective regarding short-and long-term adaptation measures. Water Resources Rural Dev 9:1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, JR (1977) The effect of drop size and velocity on the performance of agricultural sprays. Pestic Sci 8:515520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, JD, Sharda, A, Pitla, SK, Fulton, JP, Shearer, SA (2011) A case study concerning the effects of controller response and turning movements on application rate uniformity with a self-propelled sprayer. T ASABE 54:423431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinlay, KS, Ashford, R, Ford, RJ (1974) Effects of drop size, spray volume, and dosage on paraquat toxicity. Weed Sci 22:3134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinlay, KS, Brandt, SA, Morse, P, Ashford, R (1972) Droplet size and phytotoxicity of herbicides. Weed Sci 20:450452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, CJ, Norsworthy, JK, Kruger, GR, Barber, T (2015) Influence of droplet size on efficacy of the formulated products Engenia™, Roundup PowerMax®, and Liberty®. Weed Technol 29:641652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, PCH, Ellis, MB (2000) Effects of formulation on spray nozzle performance for applications from ground-based boom sprayers. Crop Prot 19:609615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Burgos, NR, Oliver, LR (2001) Differences in weed tolerance to glyphosate involve different mechanisms. Weed Technol 15:725731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nuyttens, D, Baetens, K, De Schampheleire, M, Sonck, B (2007) Effect of nozzle type, size and pressure on spray droplet characteristics. Biosyst Eng 97:333345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D (2005) Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides primarily in the United States. Environ Dev Sustain 7:229252Google Scholar
Prasad, R (1987) A study of droplet size and density in relation to efficacy of herbicides. Weed Sci Soc Am Abstr 27:98Google Scholar
Reichenberger, S, Bach, M, Skitschak, A, Frede, HG (2007) Mitigation strategies to reduce pesticide inputs into ground and surface water and their effectiveness; a review. Sci Total Environ 384:135CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salas, RA, Burgos, NR, Tranel, P, Singh, S, Glasglow, L, Scott, RC, Nichols, RI (2016) Resistance to PPO-inhibiting herbicide in Palmer amaranth from Arkansas. Pest Manag Sci 72:864869CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, DR, Morris, WH, Webster, EP, Smith, DB (2000) Effects of spray volume and droplet size on herbicide deposition and common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) control. Weed Technol 14:321326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperry, BP, Ferrell, JA, Smith, HC, Fernandez, VJ, Leon, RG, Smith, CA (2017) Effect of sequential applications of protoporphyrinogen oxidase–inhibiting herbicides on Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control and peanut response. Weed Technol 31:4652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, GW, Whitacre, DM (2004) The Pesticide Book. 6th edn. Willoughby, OH: Meister Media Worldwide. Pp 313Google Scholar
Wolf, TM (2002) Optimizing herbicide performance—biological consequences of using low-drift nozzles. Asp Appl Biol 66:7986Google Scholar
Zabkiewicz, JA (2007) Spray formulation efficacy—holistic and futuristic perspectives. Crop Prot 26:312319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Droplet size impact on lactofen and acifluorfen efficacy for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Droplet size impact on lactofen and acifluorfen efficacy for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Droplet size impact on lactofen and acifluorfen efficacy for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *