Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T15:48:41.317Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Row Pattern Configurations and Reduced (1/2×) and Full Rates (1×) of Imazapic and Diclosulam for Control of Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus Esculentus) in Peanut

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Brent A. Besler ,
W James Grichar ,
Scott A. Senseman ,
Robert G. Lemon  and
Todd A. Baughman
Brent A. Besler
Affiliation:
Syngenta Crop Protection, 1302 E. Broadway, Brownfield, TX 79316
W James Grichar*
Affiliation:
Texas AgriLife Research, Beeville, TX 78102
Scott A. Senseman
Affiliation:
Texas AgriLife Research, College Station, TX 77843
Robert G. Lemon
Affiliation:
College Station and Vernon, TX 76384
Todd A. Baughman
Affiliation:
College Station and Vernon, TX 76384
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: w-grichar@tamu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted from 2000 to 2002 to evaluate yellow nutsedge control and peanut yield when diclosulam and imazapic were applied at the rate recommended by the manufacturer (1×) and reduced (1/2×) rates in single and twin-row planting patterns. In 2001, both diclosulam and imazapic applied to the twin-row pattern at the full and reduced rate provided better yellow nutsedge control than herbicide applications to the single-row spacing. Because of excessive rainfall in 2002, yellow nutsedge control was considerably reduced with all treatments. Imazapic at the full rate (71 g/ha) controlled yellow nutsedge 80 to 96% in the twin-row pattern, and 79 to 86% in single-row spacings. Yellow nutsedge control was less than 65% when diclosulam and imazapic were applied at the reduced rate. The twin-row configuration yielded higher than the single-row pattern when averaged across herbicides in 1 yr. All herbicide treatments enhanced yield relative to the nontreated control, except the reduced rate of imazapic in 2002. This study revealed that to fully maximize yellow nutsedge control, the full rate of either imazapic or diclosulam should be applied to peanuts planted in a single or twin-row spacing. However, these treatments may not necessarily increase peanut yields.

Keywords

Diclosulamimazapicyellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L. CYPESpeanut, Arachis hypogaea L. ‘Georgia Green’Herbicidesintegrated weed managementsingle rowtwin rowyield
Type
Notes
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 558 - 562
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Baldwin, J. and Williams, J. 2002. Effects of twin rows on yield and grade. Peanut Grower. 14:28–29.Google Scholar
Beste, C. E., Frank, J. R., Bruckart, W. L., Johnson, D. R., and Potts, W. E. 1992. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) control in tomato with Puccinia canaliculata and pebulate. Weed Technol. 6:980–984.Google Scholar
Braxton, L. B., Barrentine, J. L., Geselius, T. C., Grant, D. L., Langston, V. B., Nolting, S. P., Redding, K. D., Richburg, J. S. III, and Sheppard, B. R. 1997. Efficacy and crop tolerance of diclosulam soil-applied in peanuts. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 50:162.Google Scholar
Brecke, B. J. and Colvin, D. L. 1991. Weed management in peanuts. Pages 239–251. in Pimentel, D., editor. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture, Vol. 3, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL CRC.Google Scholar
Brecke, B. J. and Stephenson, D. O. IV. 2006. Weed management in single- vs. twin-row peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 20:368–376.Google Scholar
Buchanan, G. A. and Hauser, E. W. 1980. Influence of row spacing on competitiveness and yield of peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 28:401–409.Google Scholar
Cardina, J., Mixon, A. C., and Wehtje, G. R. 1987. Low-cost weed control systems for close-row peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 35:700–703.Google Scholar
Colvin, D. L., Walker, R. H., Patterson, M. G., Wehtje, G., and McGuire, J. A. 1985. Row pattern and weed management effects on peanut production. Peanut Sci. 12:22–27.Google Scholar
Davidson, J. I. Jr, Whitaker, T. B., and Dickens, J. W. 1982. Grading, cleaning, storage, shelling, and marketing of peanuts in the United States. Pages 571–623. in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., editors. Peanut Science and Technology. Yoakum, TX American Peanut Research Education Society, Inc.Google Scholar
Dotray, P. A. and Keeling, J. W. 1997. Purple nutsedge control in peanuts as affected by imazameth and imazethapyr application timing. Peanut Sci. 24:113–116.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1998. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:299–313.Google Scholar
Glaze, N. C. 1987. Cultural and mechanical manipulation of Cyperus spp. Weed Technol. 1:82–83.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Colburn, A. E., and Kearney, N. S. 1994. Herbicides for reduced tillage in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) in the southwest. Weed Technol. 8:212–216.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Dotray, P. A., and Sestak, D. C. 1999. Diclosulam for weed control in Texas peanut. Peanut Sci. 26:23–28.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. and Nester, P. R. 1997. Nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with AC 263,222 and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 11:714–719.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Nester, P. R., and Colburn, A. E. 1992. Nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) with imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 6:396–400.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. and Sestak, D. C. 2000. Effect of adjuvants on control of nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus and C. rotundus) by imazapic and imazethapyr. Crop Prot. 19:461–465.Google Scholar
Harder, D. B., Sprague, C. L., and Renner, K. A. 2007. Effect of soybean row width and population on weeds, crop yield, and economic return. Weed Technol. 21:744–752.Google Scholar
Hauser, E. W. and Buchanan, G. A. 1981. Influence of row spacing, seeding rates and herbicide systems on the competitiveness and yield of peanuts. Peanut Sci. 8:74–81.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. U., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The world's worst weeds, distribution and biology. Honolulu Univ. Press of Hawaii. 258–261.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 1997. Populations dynamics of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) in cropping systems in the southeastern coastal plains. Weed Sci. 45:166–171.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III, Prostko, E. P., and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 2005. Improving the management of dicot weeds in peanut with narrow row spacings and residual herbicides. Agron. J. 97:85–88.Google Scholar
Keeley, P. E. 1987. Interference and interaction of purple and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus and Cyperus esculentus) with crops. Weed Technol. 1:74–81.Google Scholar
Langston, V. B., Braxton, L. B., Barrentine, J. L., Sheppard, B. R., Nolting, S. P., Richburg, J. S. III, Grant, D. L., Redding, K. D., and Geselius, T. C. 1997. Efficacy and crop tolerance of diclosulam post applied in peanuts. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 50:162.Google Scholar
Lanier, J. E., Jordan, D. L., Spears, J. F., Wells, R., Johnson, P. D., Barnes, J. S., Hurt, C. A., Branderburg, R. L., and Bailey, J. E. 2004. Peanut responses to planting pattern, row spacing, and irrigation. Agron. J. 96:1066–1072.Google Scholar
Matocha, M. A., Grichar, W. J., Senseman, S. A., Gerngross, C. A., Brecke, B. J., and Vencill, W. K. 2003. The persistence of imazapic in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) crop rotations. Weed Technol. 17:325–329.Google Scholar
McIntosh, M. S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75:153–155.Google Scholar
Richburg, J. S. III, Barrentine, J. L., Braxton, L. B., Geselius, T. C., Grant, D. L., Langston, V. B., Redding, K. D., Sheppard, B. R., and Nolting, S. P. 1997. Performance of diclosulam on key broadleaf weeds in southern soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:161.Google Scholar
SAS 2000. SAS User's Guide. Version 8.1. Cary, NC SAS Institute. 235–237.Google Scholar
Sheppard, B. R., Braxton, L. B., Barrentine, J. L., Geselius, T. C., Grant, D. L., Langston, V. B., Redding, K. D., Richburg, J. S., and Roby, D. B. 1997. Diclosulam, a new herbicide for broadleaf weed control in soybeans and peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:161.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W., Wax, L. M., and Slife, F. W. 1979. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) competition and control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 27:32–37.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. T. 2001. Effect of glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) population and row spacing on light interception, corn yield, and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) growth. Weed Technol. 15:413–418.Google Scholar
Tumbleson, M. and Kommedahl, R. 1961. Reproductive potential of Cyperus esculentus by tubers. Weeds. 9:646–653.Google Scholar
Volz, M. G. 1977. Infestations of yellow nutsedge in cropped soil: effects on soil nitrogen availability to the crop and on associated transforming bacterial populations. Agro Ecosyst. 3:313–319.Google Scholar
Walker, R. H., Wells, L. W., and McGuire, J. A. 1989. Bristly starbur (Acanthospermum hispidum) interference in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 37:196–200.Google Scholar
Wehtje, G., Walker, R. H., Patterson, M. G., and McGuire, J. A. 1984. Influence of twin rows on yield and weed control in peanuts. Peanut Sci. 11:88–91.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Langston, V. B., Braxton, L. B., and Richburg, J. S. III. 1997. Evaluation of Strongarm (DE 564) for weed control in southeastern peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:5.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Eastin, E. F., Wiley, G. R., Walls, F. R. Jr, and Newell, S. 1994a. Imazethapyr and paraquat systems for weed management in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 42:601–607.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Wiley, G., Walls, F. R. Jr, Jones, S. R., and Iverson, M. J. 1994b. Imidazolinone herbicide systems for peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Sci. 21:23–28.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Walls, F. R. Jr, and Horton, D. N. 1991. Weed control, yield and net returns using imazethapyr in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 39:238–242.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., Grichar, W. J., and Wehtje, G. R. 1995. The biology and management of weeds in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Pages 207–244. in Pattee, H. E. and Stalker, H. T., editors. Advances in Peanut Science. Stillwater, OK American Peanut Research Education Society.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Wehtje, G. R. 1994c. The control and interaction of weeds in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Rev. Weed Sci. 6:177–205.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. E. 1988. Carbamathioates. Pages 245–300. in Kerney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., editors. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Volume 3. New York Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Young, J. H., Person, N. K., Donald, J. O., and Mayfield, W. H. 1982. Harvesting, curing, and energy utilization. Pages 458–487. in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T., editors. Peanut Science and Technology. Yoakum, TX American Peanut Research Education Society.Google Scholar