Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T03:53:48.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Propanil-Resistant Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) Biotypes Found in Greece

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Ioannis B. Vasilakoglou ,
Ilias G. Eleftherohorinos  and
Kico V. Dhima
Ioannis B. Vasilakoglou
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, Box 233, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
Ilias G. Eleftherohorinos*
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, Box 233, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
Kico V. Dhima
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, Box 233, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: eleftero@agro.auth.gr.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse experiments were conducted in Greece to evaluate the level of propanil resistance in three barnyardgrass biotypes collected from rice fields where propanil had been used for around 25 yr. Suspected resistant biotypes were not controlled by propanil at 2.6, 5.2, 10.4, and 20.8 kg ai/ha, with the highest rate five times greater than the recommended rate. Control was reduced even more when propanil application was delayed until the three- to five-leaf stage. The susceptible barnyardgrass biotype collected from a nontreated propanil area was controlled with 2.6 kg/ha propanil. All barnyardgrass biotypes were effectively controlled by quinclorac (0.75 kg ai/ha) applied either alone at the two- to three-leaf stage or in mixture with propanil (3.5 kg/ha) at the three- to five-leaf stage. Only two of the resistant barnyardgrass biotypes were effectively controlled by azimsulfuron (0.02 kg ai/ha) applied alone at the two- to three-leaf stage, but all biotypes were controlled with the addition of propanil (3.5 kg/ha) at the three- to five-leaf stage. The resistant barnyardgrass biotype, which required the highest rate of propanil to reduce biomass by 50%, also tended to exhibit the most growth potential 7 to 22 d after emergence when compared with the other resistant biotypes or the susceptible biotype. Results clearly show that varying levels of barnyardgrass resistance to propanil exist but that effective control alternatives are available.

Keywords

Azimsulfuronpropanilquincloracbarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. #3 ECHCGrice, Oryza sativa L.Herbicide resistanceresistant biotypeDAE, days after emergenceR-BYG, resistant barnyardgrassS-BYG, susceptible barnyardgrass
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , September 2000 , pp. 524 - 529
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

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.Google Scholar
Carey, V. F., Duke, S. O., Hoagland, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1995a. Resistance mechanism of propanil-resistant barnyardgrass: I. Absorption, translocation, and site of action studies. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 52: 182–189.Google Scholar
Carey, V. F., Hoagland, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1995b. Verification and distribution of propanil-resistant barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in Arkansas. Weed Technol. 9: 366–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, V. F., Hoagland, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1997. Resistance mechanism of propanil-resistant barnyardgrass: II. In vivo metabolism of propanil molecule. Pestic. Sci. 49: 333–338.Google Scholar
Crawford, S.H. and Jordan, D. L. 1995. Comparison of single and multiple applications of propanil and residual herbicides in dry-seeded rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 9: 153–157.Google Scholar
Daniell, H., Sarojini, G., Kumarachinnayan, P., and Kulandaivelu, G. 1981. Action of propanil on in vivo chlorophyll a fluorescence in Echinochloa crus-galli and rice. Weed Res. 21: 171–177.Google Scholar
Fischer, A. J., Granados, E., and Trujillo, D. 1993. Propanil resistance in populations of junglerice (Echinochloa colona) in Colombian rice fields. Weed Sci. 41: 201–206.Google Scholar
Frear, D. S. and Still, G. G. 1968. The metabolism of 3',4'-dichloropropionanilide in plants. Partial purification and properties of an aryl acylamidase from rice. Phytochemistry 7: 913–920.Google Scholar
Giannopolitis, C. N. and Vassiliou, G. 1989. The Echinochloa crus-galli complex in rice—morphological variants and tolerance to propanil in Greece. In Cavalloro, R. and Noye, G., eds. Importance and Perspectives in Herbicide Resistant Weeds. EC No. 11561. Luxemburg. pp. 23–28.Google Scholar
Hoagland, R. E., Graf, G., and Handel, E. D. 1974. Hydrolysis of 3',4'-dichloropropionanilide by plant aryl acylamidases. Weed Res. 14: 371–374.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L. 1997. Efficacy of reduced rates of quinclorac applied with propanil or propanil plus molinate in dry-seeded rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Sci. 45: 824–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jun, C. J. and Matsunaka, S. 1990. The propanil hydrolyzing enzyme aryl acylamidase in the wild rices of genus Oryza . Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 38: 28–33.Google Scholar
Leah, J. M., Caseley, J. C., Riches, C. R., and Valverde, B. 1994. Association between elevated activity of aryl acylamidase and propanil resistance in jungle-rice, Echinochloa colona . Pestic. Sci. 42: 281–289.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
Radosevich, S. R. and Holt, J. 1984. Weed Ecology, Implications for Vegetation Management. Chapter 6. New York: J. Wiley. pp. 195–241.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. 1965. Propanil and mixtures with propanil for weed control in rice. Weeds 13:236.Google Scholar
Yogo, Y. and Ishizuka, K. 1985. Tolerance of finger millet to propanil. Weed Res. (Japan) 30: 182–189.Google Scholar