Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-13T13:00:51.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Growth Stage and Herbicide Rate on Postemergence Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Enrique Rosales-Robles ,
James M. Chandler ,
Scott A. Senseman  and
Eric P. Prostko
Enrique Rosales-Robles
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840
James M. Chandler*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840
Scott A. Senseman
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840
Eric P. Prostko
Affiliation:
Extension Agronomist Texas A&M University Research and Extension Center, Stephenville, TX 76401
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jm-chandler@tamu.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies were conducted to observe the effect of full and reduced rates of postemergence (POST) herbicides on seedling and rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) at different growth stages. Herbicides and labeled rates included primisulfuron at 40 g/ha, nicosulfuron at 35 g/ha, fluazifop-P at 210 g/ha, and clethodim at 140 g/ha. Contour graphs to predict johnsongrass control at different growth stages and herbicide rates were developed. Excellent seedling and rhizome johnsongrass control was obtained with reduced rates of herbicides applied at the three- to five-leaf stages. Primisulfuron at 20 g/ha resulted in 90% or greater control of seedling johnsongrass in the three- to four-leaf stage. Rhizome johnsongrass at this growth stage required 30 g/ha of primisulfuron for the same level of control. Nicosulfuron at 17.5 and 26.3 g/ha provided 90% or greater control up to the four-leaf stage of seedling and rhizome johnsongrass, respectively. Fluazifop-P and clethodim were more effective than primisulfuron and nicosulfuron. Fluazifop-P at 105 g/ha resulted in 90% or greater control of seedling and rhizome johnsongrass up to the seven- and five-leaf stages, respectively. Clethodim at 35 g/ha controlled seedling johnsongrass at least 90% up to the eight-leaf stage. Clethodim at 70 g/ha provided 90% or greater control of rhizome johnsongrass if applied at the three- to four-leaf stages.

Keywords

Clethodim, (E,E)-(±)-2-[1-[[(3-chloro-2-propenyl)oxy] imino] propyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio) propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-onefluazifop-P, (R)-2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl] oxy] phenoxy] propanoic acidnicosulfuron, 2-[[[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl] amino] sulfonyl]-N-N-dimethyl-3-pyridinecarboxamideprimisulfuron, 2-[[[[[4,6-bis(difluoromethoxy)-2-pyrimidinyl] amino]carbonyl] amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidjohnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. # SORHAWeed controlreduced ratesSORHADAE, days after emergencePOST, postemergenceWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 1999 , pp. 525 - 529
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 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

Anonymous. 1995. Recommended Chemicals for Weed and Brush Control. Little Rock, AR: Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Miscellaneous Publ. 44. 138 p.Google Scholar
Bridges, D. C. 1989. Adjuvant and pH effects on sethoxydim and clethodim activity on rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Technol. 3:615–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridges, D. C. and Chandler, J. M. 1987. Influence of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) density and period of competition on cotton yield. Weed Sci. 35:63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Gunsolus, J. L., and Ralston, D. F. 1993. Common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) control in soybean (Glycine max) with reduced bentazon rates and cultivation. Weed Sci. 41:447–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. 5:789–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeFelice, M. S., Brown, W. B., Aldrich, R. J., Sims, B. D., Judy, D. T., and Guethle, D. R. 1989. Weed control in soybeans (Glycine max) with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 37:365–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devlin, D. L., Long, J. H., and Maddux, L. D. 1991. Using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5:834–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dieleman, J. A. and Mortensen, D. A. 1997. Influence of weed biology and ecology on development of reduced dose strategies for integrated weed management systems. In Hayfield, J. L., Bugler, D. D., and Stewart, B. A., eds. Integrated Weed and Soil Management. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press. pp. 333–362.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1997. Weed Survey—Southern States. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:227–232.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1998. Weed Survey—Southern States. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:299–303.Google Scholar
Eleftherohorinos, I. G. and Kotoula-Syka, E. 1995. Influence of herbicide application rate and timings for post-emergence control of Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. in maize. Weed Res. 35:99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foy, C. L. and Witt, H. L. 1990. Johnsongrass control with DPX-V9360 and CGA-136872 in corn (Zea mays) in Virginia. Weed Technol. 4:615–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosheh, H. Z., Holshouser, D. L., and Chandler, J. M. 1996a. Influence of density on johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) interference in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 44:879–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosheh, H. Z., Holshouser, D. L., and Chandler, J. M. 1996b. The critical period of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 44:944–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1972. Early development of johnsongrass. Weed Sci. 20:271–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P. K. and Kudsk, P. 1988. Prediction of herbicide activity. Weed Res. 28:473–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Vidrine, P. R., Griffin, J. L., and Reynolds, D. B. 1996. Influence of adjuvants on efficacy of clethodim. Weed Technol. 10:738–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, C. A. and Oliver, L. R. 1992. Application rate and timing of acifluorfen, bentazon, chlorimuron, and imazaquin. Weed Technol. 6:526–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klingaman, T. E., King, C. A., and Oliver, L. R. 1992. Effect of application rate, weed species, and weed stage of growth on imazethapyr activity. Weed Sci. 40:227–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. 1989. History, biology, and control of johnsongrass. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:85–121.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. 38:45–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prostko, E. P. and Meade, J. A. 1993. Reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in conventional soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 7:365–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosales-Robles, E. 1993. Postemergence shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) control in corn (Zea mays) in northern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Weed Technol. 7:830–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosales-Robles, E. 1998. Integrated Johnsongrass [Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.] in Field Corn (Zea mays L.) and Cotton (Gossyppium hirsutum L.). Ph.D. dissertation. Texas A&M University, College Station. TX. 124 p.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R., Ratnayake, S., and Smith, C. A. 1990. Effects of herbicide application timing on johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) control. Weed Technol. 4:900–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidrine, P. R. 1989. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in soybeans (Glycine max) with postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 3:455–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar