Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:59:18.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Annual Grass Control in Corn (Zea mays) with Primisulfuron Combined with Nicosulfuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Thomas L. Rabaey
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706-1597
R. Gordon Harvey
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706-1597

Abstract

Efficacy of primisulfuron and reduced rates of nicosulfuron on woolly cupgrass, wild-proso millet, and giant foxtail in field corn was evaluated in 1994 and 1995. Nicosulfuron was applied at 18, 27, and 36 g ai/ha alone and with 20 g ai/ha primisulfuron. Woolly cupgrass control from nicosulfuron at 18 and 27 g/ha was less than control from 36 g/ha (79% and 84% vs. 90%, respectively). Woolly cupgrass control was 5% greater when primisulfuron was combined with nicosulfuron at 27 and 36 g/ha than when nicosulfuron was applied alone. Corn grain yields were similar among all nicosulfuron plus primisulfuron treatments applied to control woolly cupgrass in 1994. In 1995, corn grain yield was increased 900 kg/ha when primisulfuron was combined with nicosulfuron at 18 g/ha compared to nicosulfuron applied at the same rate alone. Wild-proso millet control 3 WAT with nicosulfuron at 18 g/ha was less than control with nicosulfuron at 36 g/ha. Wild-proso millet control 8 WAT with nicosulfuron alone was greater than when nicosulfuron at any rate was applied with primisulfuron. No differences in corn grain yields were observed across nicosulfuron rates or combinations with primisulfuron to control wild-proso millet either year. Giant foxtail control and corn grain yield were not affected by nicosulfuron rate or combined applications of nicosulfuron and primisulfuron either year.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Camacho, R. F., Moshier, L. J., Morishita, D. W., and Devlin, D. L. 1991. Rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in corn (Zea mays) with primisulfuron and nicosulfuron. Weed Technol. 5:789794.Google Scholar
Dobbels, A. F., and Kapusta, G. 1993. Postemergence weed control in corn (Zea mays) with nicosulfuron combinations. Weed Technol. 7:844850.Google Scholar
Doll, J., Doersch, R., Proost, R., and Kivlin, P. 1992. Reduced Herbicide Rates: Aspects to Consider. University of Wisconsin Extension Publication A3563. 8 p.Google Scholar
Doll, J., Kraak, S., and Ateh, C. 1993. Quackgrass and annual weed management the first year after alfalfa. Wisconsin Weed Control Results 22:C11C21.Google Scholar
Doll, J., and Ateh, C. 1993. Comparison of reduced rates of preemergence and postemergence corn herbicides. Wisconsin Weed Control Results 23: C22C30.Google Scholar
Foy, C. L., and Witt, H. L. 1990. Johnsongrass control with DPX-V9360 and CGA-138672 in corn (Zea mays) in Virginia. Weed Technol. 4:615619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, S. E., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 1992. Influence of adjuvants on the efficacy, absorption, and spray retention of primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 6:592598.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., 1974. Susceptibility of seven annual grasses to herbicides. Weed Res. 14:5155.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., 1979. Serious new weed threat: wild-proso millet. Crops Soils Mag. 31(6):1013.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., Albright, J. W., Anthon, T. M., and Kutil, J. L. 1992. Field corn weed control in conservation tillage studies. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:170173.Google Scholar
Hess, F. D., 1985. Herbicide absorption and translocation and their relationship to plant tolerances and susceptibility. In Duke, S. O., ed. Weed Physiology: Volume II, Herbicide Physiology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 191214.Google Scholar
Kidder, D. W., and Behrens, R. 1988. Plant responses to haloxyfop as influenced by water stress. Weed Sci. 36:305312.Google Scholar
Mekki, M., and Leroux, G. D. 1994. Activity of nicosulfuron, rimsulfuron, and their mixture on field corn (Zea mays), soybean (Glycine max), and seven weed species. Weed Technol. 8:436440.Google Scholar
Morton, C. A., and Harvey, R. G. 1994. Simulated environments influence primisulfuron efficacy. Weed Sci. 42:424429.Google Scholar
Mulder, T. A., and Doll, J. D. 1993. Integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 7:382389.Google Scholar
Obrigawitch, T. T., Kenyon, W. H., and Kuratle, H. 1990. Effect of application timing on rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control with DPX-V9360. Weed Sci. 38:4549.Google Scholar
Rabaey, T. L., and Harvey, R. G. 1994. Efficacy of corn (Zea mays) herbicides applied at reduced rates impregnated in dry fertilizer. Weed Technol. 8: 830835.Google Scholar
Riley, D. G., and Shaw, D. R. 1988. Influence of imazapyr on the control of pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) with chlorimuron, imazaquin, and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 36:663666.Google Scholar
Rosales-Robles, E., 1993. Postemergence shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) control in corn (Zea mays) in Northern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Weed Technol. 7:830834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuh, J. F., and Harvey, R. G. 1989. Woolly cupgrass (Eriochloa villosa) control in corn (Zea mays) with pendimethalin/triazine combinations and cultivation. Weed Sci. 37:405411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar