Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T16:13:10.359Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Tillage and Application Method on Corn (Zea mays) Response to Imidazolinone Residues in Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Karen A. Renner ,
Oliver Schabenberger  and
James J. Kells
Karen A. Renner
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1325
Oliver Schabenberger
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1325
James J. Kells
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1325
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies on a sandy loam soil determined the influence of application method and rate and subsequent tillage on corn response to imazaquin and imazethapyr residues remaining in the soil. Imazaquin was applied preplant incorporated (PPI) and preemergence (PRE) at 70, 140, and 280 g ai/ha and postemergence (POST) at 70 and 140 g/ha. Imazethapyr was applied PPI and PRE at 70, 105, and 140 g ai/ha and POST at 70 and 105 g/ha. Subsequent tillage included fall moldboard plowing followed by spring field cultivation, fall chisel plowing followed by spring field cultivation, and no tillage. Herbicide dissipation was determined by analyzing soil cores taken in the spring at the time of corn planting and by measuring corn height and grain yield. Imidazolinone residues were detected in only 1 of 2 yr. Imazaquin was detected more frequently than imazethapyr. Imazaquin concentrations in the upper 10 cm of soil 11 mo after a PPI application of 280 g/ha were 5, 6, and 7 ng/g of soil in moldboard plow, chisel, and no-tillage systems, respectively. Imazaquin (5 ng/g) was also detected in the 10–18-cm soil depth in the moldboard plow system. Corn height and grain yield were not reduced from imazaquin or imazethapyr, regardless of application method or rate in any tillage system.

Keywords

Imazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acidimazethapyr, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidcorn, Zea mays L. var. ‘Pioneer 3744.'Bioactivitybioavailabilitycarryovercrop rotationpersistenceresiduesPOST, applied postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, applied preemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 281 - 285
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Basham, G. W., Lavy, T. L., Oliver, L. R., and Scott, H. D. 1987. Imazaquin persistence and mobility in three Arkansas soils. Weed Sci. 35:576–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baughman, T. A. and Shaw, D. R. 1996. Effect of welting/drying cycles on dissipation patterns of bioavailable imazaquin. Weed Sci. 44:380–382.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. R., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Biodegradation characteristics of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 37:815–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, W. S., Liebl, R. A., and Simmons, F. W. 1992. Effects of tillage and application method on clomazone, imazaquin, and imazethapyr persistence. Weed Sci. 40:482–489.Google Scholar
Devine, J. M. 1991. Residue analysis. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 173–178.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gebur, E. E. Jr. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:421–428.Google Scholar
Gunsolus, J. L., Behrens, R., Lueschen, W. E., Warnes, D. D., and Wiersma, J. V. 1986. Carryover potential of AC-263-499, DPX-F6025, FMC-57020, and imazaquin in Minnesota. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:52.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. H., Jordan, D. L., Johnson, W. G., Talbert, R. E., and Frans, R. E. 1993. Nicosulfuron, primisulfuron, imazethapyr, and DPX-PE350 injury to succeeding crops. Weed Technol. 7:641–644.Google Scholar
Jungman, S. H. and Owen, M.D.K. 1989. Influence of tillage, application liming, and herbicide rate on imazaquin and imazethapyr carryover to rotational corn. Weed Sci. Soc. of Am. Abstr. 29:1.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Knake, E. L. 1992. Soybean (Glycine max) and rotational crop tolerance to chlorimuron, clomazone, imazaquin, and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 6:77–80.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1994. Soybean (Glycine max) and rotational crop response to PPI chlorimuron, clomazone, imazaquin, and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 8:224–230.Google Scholar
Lief, J. W. 1996. Rotational crop response to imidazolinone herbicides as affected by soil pH. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:27.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone in soil. Weed Sci. 37:259–267.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M. and Reese, K. D. 1992. Effect of soil pH on adsorption and persistence of imazaquin. Weed Sci. 40:490–496.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M. and Reese, K. D. 1993. Effect of soil type and pH on persistence and carryover of imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:452–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mangels, G. 1991. Behavior of the imidazolinone herbicides in soil—a review of the literature. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 191–209.Google Scholar
Marsh, B. H. and Lloyd, R. W. 1996. Soil pH effect on imazaquin persistence in soil. Weed Technol. 10:337–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, J. A. and Witt, W. W. 1991. Dissipation of imazaquin and imazethapyr under conventional and no-tillage soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5:586–591.Google Scholar
Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Leavitt, R. A. 1988a. Influence of rate, method of application, and tillage on imazaquin persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 36:90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. R., and Penner, D. 1988b. Effect of soil pH on imazaquin and imazethapyr adsorption to soil and phytotoxicity to corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 36:78–83.Google Scholar
Sander, K. W. and Barrett, M. 1989. Differential tolerance and behavior of selected corn (Zea mays) hybrids. Weed Sci. 37:290–295.Google Scholar