Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T03:10:49.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flood Depth, Application Timing, and Imazethapyr Activity in Imidazolinone-Tolerant Rice (Oryza sativa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jeff A. Masson ,
Eric P. Webster  and
Bill J. Williams
Jeff A. Masson
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, 302 Life Sciences Building, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Eric P. Webster*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, 302 Life Sciences Building, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Bill J. Williams
Affiliation:
Northeast Research Station, St. Joseph, LA 71366
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: ewebster@agctr.lsu.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A study was conducted in 1999 to evaluate weed control and imidazolinone-tolerant (IMI-tolerant) rice response to 140 g ai/ha imazethapyr at different application timings and to flood depths of 5, 10, and 20 cm at the Rice Research Station near Crowley, LA, and at the Northeast Research Station near St. Joseph, LA. Barnyardgrass control, rice injury, and rice yield were not influenced by flood depth; therefore, data were averaged over flood depths. Season-long barnyardgrass control was greater than 80% at both locations with imazethapyr applied preplant incorporated (PPI), early postemergence (EPOST), and mid-postemergence (MPOST). IMI-tolerant rice injury at 7 d after late postemergence (LPOST) treatment (DAT) was less than 5% for all imazethapyr treatments at Crowley and 1 to 8% for PPI, preemergence (PRE), delayed preemergence (DPRE), and EPOST timings at St. Joseph. However, IMI-tolerant rice injury was 5% or less at 42 DAT for all treatments at Crowley and St. Joseph. IMI-tolerant rice yield at Crowley was 2,780 to 3,000 kg/ha following applications of imazethapyr at PPI, PRE, DPRE, and EPOST, and these yields were higher than the yields of the MPOST and LPOST treatments. At St. Joseph, IMI-tolerant rice yields were equal for imazethapyr applied PPI, DPRE, and EPOST treatments compared with Crowley.

Keywords

Imazethapyrbarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. #3 ECHCGrice, Oryza sativa L. imidazolinone-tolerant ‘93 AS 3510’ALSacetolactate synthaseClearfield ricesoil-applied herbicidewater depthDAT, days after LPOST treatmentDPRE, delayed preemergenceEPOST, early postemergenceIMI-tolerant, imidazolinone-tolerantLPOST, late postemergenceMPOST, mid-postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, preemergencepower take-off (PTO)
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , June 2001 , pp. 315 - 319
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

Ahrens, W. H., ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. Seventh ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. pp. 166–168.Google Scholar
Baltazar, A. M. and Smith, R. J. Jr. 1994. Propanil-resistant barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control in rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 8: 576–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baughman, T. A. and Shaw, D. R. 1996. Effect of wetting/drying cycles on dissipation patterns of bioavailable imazaquin. Weed Sci. 44: 380–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouhache, M. and Bayer, D. E. 1993. Photosynthetic response of flooded rice (Oryza sativa) and three Echinochloa species to changes in environmental factors. Weed Sci. 41: 611–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croughan, T. P., Utomo, H. S., Sanders, D., and Braverman, M. 1995. Assessment of imidazolinone-resistant rice. Baton Rouge, Louisiana State University Rice Experiment Station Annual Progress Report 87. pp. 491–525.Google Scholar
Dillon, T. L., Baldwin, F. L., and Webster, E. P. 1998. Weed control in IMItolerant rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:268.Google Scholar
Dillon, T. L., Baldwin, F. L., and Talbert, R. E. 1999. Control of red rice and other difficult weeds in imidazolinone tolerant rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52: 15–16.Google Scholar
Gealy, D. 1998. Differential response of palmleaf morningglory (Ipomoea wrightii) and pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) to flooding. Weed Sci. 46: 217–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetz, A. and Lavy, T. L. 1988. Mobility and sorptive properties of imazethapyr in Arkansas soils. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:337.Google Scholar
Helms, R. S. 1994. Rice Production Handbook. Little Rock, AR: Arkansas Cooperative Extension Series MP 192. pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Kurtz, M. E. and Street, J. E. 1999. Efficacy of Pursuit in IMI rice for broad spectrum weed control. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:13.Google Scholar
Liscano, J. F., Williams, B. J., and Croughan, T. P. 1999. Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control in dry-seeded imidazolinone tolerant rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:13.Google Scholar
Malefyt, T. and Quakenbush, L. S. 1991. Influences of environmental factors on the biological activity of the imidazolinone herbicides. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Conner, S. L., eds. The IMIDAZOLINONE HERBICIDES. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 103–128.Google Scholar
Masson, J. A., Webster, E. P., and Morris, S. N. 1999. Evaluation of imazethapyr on imidazolinone-resistant rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:18.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Talbert, R. E., and Hoagland, R. E. 1998. Chlorophyll fluorescence for rapid detection of propanil-resistant barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli). Weed Sci. 46: 163–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pillmoor, J. B. and Caseley, J. C. 1987. The biochemical and physiological effects and mode of action of AC 222,293 against Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. and Avena fatua L. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 27:340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1974. Responses of rice to postemergence treatments of propanil. Weed Sci. 22: 563–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. and Hill, J. E. 1990. Weed control technology in U.S. rice. In Grayson, B. T., Green, M. B., and Copping, L. D., eds. Pest Management in Rice. Oxford, UK: Elsevier. pp. 314–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, E. P., Masson, J. A., and Zhang, W. 2000. Imazethapyr rates and timings in water-seeded rice. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 40: 112–113.Google Scholar
Zhang, W. and Webster, E. P. 2000. Effect of imazethapyr applied preplant incorporated or postemergence for rice weed control as affected by soil moisture. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 40:141.Google Scholar