Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T05:44:03.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quinclorac: Soil Behavior and Foliar vs. Root Absorption by Torpedograss (Panicum repens)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Walker Williams ,
Glenn Wehtje  and
Robert H. Walker
Walker Williams
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn University, AL 36849-5412
Glenn Wehtje
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn University, AL 36849-5412
Robert H. Walker*
Affiliation:
Agronomy and Soils Department, Auburn University, Auburn University, AL 36849-5412
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: rwalker@acesag.auburn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Selective placement studies were conducted under greenhouse conditions to determine the relative importance of root vs. foliar absorption of postemergence-applied quinclorac by torpedograss. Foliar + soil and soil-only applications were more effective than foliar-only in reducing torpedograss foliage at 4 wk after treatment (WAT). However, foliar-only and foliar + soil were more effective than soil-only in suppressing regrowth at 10 WAT. Quinclorac foliar absorption by torpedograss and subsequent translocation, as determined with radiotracer techniques, was minimal. After 72 h, only 26% of the applied quinclorac had been absorbed, and 13.7% of the amount applied remained within the treated leaf. Only 0.3% of applied was recovered in the roots, and none was detected in the developing rhizomes. Quinclorac was readily root absorbed and translocated. After 6 h, a 26.7 μg/plant dose of quinclorac had been absorbed, and 54% of this quantity remained in the roots; the remaining 46% having been translocated throughout the plant. The youngest leaf and the immature rhizomes accumulated 5 and 9% of the amount absorbed, respectively. Quinclorac was not readily soil sorbed as determined by soil solution experiments. Quinclorac was displaced nearly concomitant with the wetting front in soil chromatography. Soil solution concentration and soil mobility were greater at pH 6.7 than at 5.7. Results establish that consistent control of torpedograss with quinclorac is dependent on soil entry and root absorption. Unfortunately, the propensity of quinclorac to be water displaced could negatively affect this control.

Keywords

Quincloractorpedograss, Panicum repens L. # PANREHerbicide translocationsoil sorptionsoil mobilitysoil pHWAT, weeks after treatmentLSS, liquid scintillation spectrometry
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , September 2004 , pp. 626 - 633
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

Adams, F., Burmester, C., Hue, N. V., and Long, L. F. 1982. A comparison of column displacement and centrifugation methods of obtaining soil solution. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc 44:733–735.Google Scholar
Ahrens, W. H. ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. Pp. 258–259.Google Scholar
Brecke, B. J. and Unruh, J. B. 2001. Torpedograss management with quinclorac. Golf Course Manag 69:61–64.Google Scholar
Brecke, B. J., Unruh, J. B., and Dusky, J. 2001. Torpedograss (Panicum repens) control with quinclorac in bermudagrass (Cyodon dactylon X C. transvaalensis) turf. Weed Technol. 15:732–756.Google Scholar
Chism, W. J., Bingham, S. W., and Shaver, R. L. 1991. Uptake, translocation and metabolism of quinclorac in two grass species. Weed Technol. 5:771–775.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Walker, R. H., Wehtje, G., and Hajek, B. F. 1989. Sorption and mobility of chlorimuron in Alabama soils. Weed Sci. 37:428–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Wehtje, G., Walker, R. H., and Hajek, B. F. 1986. Soil solution and mobility characterization of imazaquin. Weed Sci. 34:788–793.Google Scholar
Grossman, K. 1998. Quinclorac belongs to a new class of highly selective auxin herbicides. Weed Sci. 63:707–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, K. and Kwiatkowski, J. 2000. The mechanism of quinclorac activity in grasses. Pest. Biochem. Physiol 66:83–91.Google Scholar
Grossman, K. and Scheltrup, F. 1998. Studies on the mechanism of selectivity of the auxin herbicide quinmerac. Pestic. Sci 52:111–118.Google Scholar
Helling, C. S. 1971. Pesticide mobility in soils. I. Parameters of thin-layer chromatography. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc 35:732–737.Google Scholar
Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agri. Exp. Stn Cir. No. 347.Google Scholar
Holm, L. D., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. B., and Herberger, J. B. 1977. Panicum repens L. in The World's Worst Weeds. Honolulu, HI: University Press of Hawaii. Pp. 353–357.Google Scholar
Koo, S. J., Neal, J. C., and Di Tomaso, J. M. 1994. Quinclorac-induced electrolyte leakage in seedling grasses. Weed Sci. 42:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarty, L. B., Higgins, J. M., and Colvin, D. L. 1993. Selective torpedograss (Panicum repens) control in bermudagrass (Cynodon spp.) turf. Weed Technol. 7:911–915.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1992. SAS User's Guide: Statistics. Version 6.03. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1082 p.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. R. and Pestemer, W. 1980. Plant availability and uptake of herbicides from soil. in Hance, R. J., ed. Interactions between Herbicides and the Soil. New York: Academic. Pp. 179–202.Google Scholar
Tenpenny, R. M., Sutton, D. L., and MacDonald, G. E. 2001. Vegetative reproduction of torpedograss. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 54:132.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Dute, R. R., Truelove, B., and Davis, D. E. 1988. Factors limiting the distribution of cogongrass, Imperata cylindrica, and torpedograss, Panicum repens . Weed Sci. 36:577–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zawierucha, J. E. and Penner, D. 2000. Absorption, translocation, metabolism, and spray retention of quinclorac in Digitaria sanguinalis and Eleusine indica . Weed Sci. 48:296–301.Google Scholar