Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T04:43:11.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sulfonylurea Herbicides Suppress Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum) in Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Phillip W. Stahlman  and
Mosad Abd El-Hamid
Phillip W. Stahlman
Affiliation:
KSU Agric. Res. Ctr.-Hays, Hays, KS 67601
Mosad Abd El-Hamid
Affiliation:
KSU Agric. Res. Ctr.-Hays, Hays, KS 67601
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In separate studies in west-central Kansas, a prepackaged mixture of chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron (5:1 w/w) and triasulfuron alone or in combination with metribuzin as a sequential or tank mix treatment were evaluated two years for downy brome control in winter wheat. Downy brome and wheat responses to each herbicide alone PRE or plus metribuzin POST varied between years. Visually, downy brome biomass was reduced 32 to 79% by chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron at 16 to 26 g ai/ha and 58 to 76% by triasulfuron at 30 g ai/ha applied PRE. Metribuzin POST at 158 g ai/ha following chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron PRE at 26 g/ha and metribuzin POST at 140 g/ha or more following triasulfuron PRE at 30 g/ha reduced downy brome biomass in both years more than PRE treatments alone. Chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron at 11 or 16 g/ha plus metribuzin at 105 or 158 g/ha applied POST affected downy brome less in 1992 than chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron applied PRE at 21 or 26 g/ha. Conversely in 1993, POST treatments except for chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron at 11 or 16 g/ha plus metribuzin at 105 g/ha affected downy brome more than PRE treatments. Triasulfuron plus metribuzin POST in late fall controlled downy brome better than a sequential application in one of two years; late-fall POST was better than early-spring POST applications in both years. Despite some treatments retarding growth, no treatment in either study reduced wheat yield in 1992. However in 1993, chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron PRE at 26 g/ha, chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron at 16 g/ha plus metribuzin at 105 or 158 g/ha applied POST, and metribuzin POST at 315 g/ha reduced wheat yields. Triasulfuron at 30 g/ha plus metribuzin at 140 g/ha or higher applied PRE, sequentially, or POST in late fall and metribuzin applied POST in early spring at 280 g/ha also reduced wheat yields.

Keywords

Chlorsulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzesulfonamidemetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onemetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidtriasulfuron, 2-(2-chloroethoxy)-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidedowny brome, Bromus tectorum L., ♯ BROTEwheat, Triticum aestivum L. TAM 107,’ ‘2163.’ChlorsulfuronmetribuzinmetsulfurontriasulfuronDescurainia pinnataDescurainia sophiaBROTEDESPIDESSO
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 812 - 818
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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

1. Ahrens, W. H., Cox, D. J., and Budhwar, G. 1990. Use of arcsine and square root transformations for subjectively determined data. Weed Sci. 38:452–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Blackshaw, R. E. 1993. Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) density and relative time of emergence affects interference in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 41:551–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Buman, R. A. and Abernethy, R. H. 1988. Temperature requirements for mountain rye, Hycrest crested wheatgrass, and downy brome germination. J. Range Manage. 41:35–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Driver, J. E., Peeper, T. F., and Koscelny, J. A. 1993. Cheat (Bromus secalinus) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:851–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Fredrickson, D. R. and Shea, P. J. 1986. Effect of soil pH on degradation, movement, and plant uptake of chlorsulfuron. Weed Sci. 34:328–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Greer, H.A.L. and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Cheat control in wheat. OSU Ext. Fact Sheet No. 2774. Oklahoma State Univ., Ext. Serv. 2 p.Google Scholar
7. Harris, G. A. 1967. Some competitive relationships between Agropyron spicatum and Bromus tectorum . Ecol. Monog. 37:89–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Klemmondson, J. O. and Smith, J. G. 1964. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Bot. Rev. 30:226–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of pH on metribuzin activity in the soil. Weed Sci. 24:505–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of pH on microbial degradation, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:477–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Mack, R. N. 1981. Invasion of Bromus tectorum L. into western North America: an ecological chronicle. Agro-ecosystems 7:145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Massee, T. W. 1976. Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) control in dryland wheat with stubble—mulch fallowing and seeding management. Agron. J. 68:952–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. McGregor, R. L. 1987. The annual species of Bromus (Poaceae) in Kansas. Contr. Univ. Kansas Herb. No. 26.11 p.Google Scholar
14. Mersie, W. and Foy, C. L. 1985. Phytotoxicity and adsorption of chlorsulfuron as affected by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:564–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Morrow, L. A. and Stahlman, P. W. 1984. The history and distribution of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) in North America. Weed Sci. 32, Suppl. 1:2–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Parrish, S. K., Morrow, L. A., and Gealy, D. R. 1982. Metribuzin activity as related to soil moisture and crop residue. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 35:86–87.Google Scholar
17. Peek, D. C. and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Phytotoxicity, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin and its ethylthio analog as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 37:419–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Peter, C. J. and Weber, J. B. 1985. Adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of metribuzin as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:868–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Peterson, D. E. and Regehr, D. L. 1992. Cheat control in winter wheat. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:68.Google Scholar
20. Peterson, D. E. and Regehr, D. L. 1993. Cheat control in winter wheat. Res. Rep. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:76.Google Scholar
21. Peterson, D. E., Moshier, L. J., and Ebert, C. T. 1992. Factors influencing sulfonylurea herbicide activity on three winter annual brome grasses. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:16–17.Google Scholar
22. Runyan, T. J., McKneil, W. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Differential tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:94–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Rydrych, D. J. and Muzik, T. J. 1968. Downy brome competition and control in dryland wheat. Agron. J. 20:279–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Stahlman, P. W. 1986. Competition and control of annual bromes in winter wheat. Keeping Up With Research #89, Kansas Agric. Exp. Sta., Manhattan. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Stahlman, P. W. and Miller, S. D. 1990. Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) interference and economic thresholds in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 38:224–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Walker, A., Cotterill, E. G., and Welch, S. J. 1989. Adsorption and degradation of chlorsulfuron and metsulfuron-methyl in soils from different depths. Weed Res. 29:281–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Walker, A. and Welch, S. J. 1989. The relative movement and persistence in soil of chlorsulfuron, metsulfuron-methyl and triasulfuron. Weed Res. 29:375–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Wicks, G. A., Burnside, O. C., and Fenster, C. R. 1971. Influence of soil type and depth of planting on downy brome seed. Weed Sci. 19:82–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar