Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:14:01.159Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Glyphosate Combinations by 2,4-D or Dicamba on Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jerry L. Flint  and
Michael Barrett
Jerry L. Flint
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron. Univ. Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546-0091
Michael Barrett
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron. Univ. Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546-0091
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Applications of isopropylamine glyphosate at 0.28, 0.56, 0.84, and 1.12 kg ae/ha in combination with the dimethylamine salts of 2,4-D or dicamba at 0.14, 0.28, 0.42, and 0.56 kg ae/ha produced additive or synergistic field bindweed control compared to the herbicides applied alone. Leaf and root growth was inhibited more from herbicide combinations than would be predicted from the effects of the chemicals applied alone at the same rate. The uptake of 14C from glyphosate into the treated leaf and its accumulation in roots increased when 2,4-D or dicamba was combined with the 0.28 kg/ha rate of 14C-glyphosate. The combination of 2,4-D or dicamba with a higher (0.84 kg/ha) 14C-glyphosate rate did not change total absorption of 14C from glyphosate. However, compared to 0.84 kg/ha of 14C-glyphosate applied alone, less 14C accumulated above the treated leaf and more accumulated in the roots when 2,4-D was added to the glyphosate. The combination of glyphosate with 2,4-D or dicamba generally resulted in both increased uptake of 14C from 2,4-D or dicamba and greater accumulation in the roots. The additive or synergistic field bindweed control observed from mixtures of glyphosate with 2,4-D or dicamba appeared to be due to greater accumulation of the herbicides in the roots.

Keywords

Dicamba, 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acidfield bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis L. # CONARglyphosate, N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine2,4-D, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy) acetic acidUptaketranslocationsynergismCONAR
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , January 1989 , pp. 12 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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

1. Agbakoba, C.S.O. and Goodin, J. R. 1970. Absorption and translocation of 14C-labeled 2,4-D and picloram in field bindweed. Weed Sci. 18:168–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Belles, W. S., Wattenbarger, D. W., and Lee, G. A. 1980. Herbicidal control of Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense L. Scop.). Proc. West. Weed Sci. Soc. 33:134.Google Scholar
3. Chang, F. Y. and Vanden Born, W. H. 1971. Dicamba uptake, translocation, metabolism, and selectivity. Weed Sci. 19:113–117.Google Scholar
4. Coble, H. D., Slife, F. W., and Butler, H. S. 1970. Absorption, metabolism, and translocation of 2,4-D by honeyvine milkweed. Weed Sci. 18:653–656.Google Scholar
5. Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:20–22.Google Scholar
6. DeGennaro, F. P. and Weller, S. C. 1984. Differential susceptibility of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) biotypes to glyphosate. Weed Sci. 32:472–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. DeGennaro, F. P. and Weller, S. C. 1984. Growth and reproductive characteristics of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) biotypes. Weed Sci. 32:525–528.Google Scholar
8. Devine, M. D., Bestman, H. D., Hall, C., and Vanden Born, W. H. 1984. Leaf wash techniques for estimation of foliar absorption of herbicides. Weed Sci. 32:418–425.Google Scholar
9. Flint, J. L., Cornelius, P. L., and Barrett, M. 1988. Analyzing herbicide interactions: a statistical treatment of Colby's method. Weed Tech. 2:304–309.Google Scholar
10. Gougler, J. A. and Geiger, D. R. 1981. Uptake and distribution of N-phosphonomethylglycine in sugarbeet plants. Plant Physiol. 68:668–672.Google Scholar
11. Gougler, J. A. and Geiger, D. R. 1984. Carbon partitioning and herbicide transport in glyphosate-treated sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 32:546–551.Google Scholar
12. Hamill, A. J. and Penner, D. 1973. Interaction of alachlor and carbofuran. Weed Sci. 21:330–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Hatzios, K. K. 1985. Interactions of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. of Weed Sci. 1:1–63.Google Scholar
14. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. No. 347. 32 pp.Google Scholar
15. Moshier, L. J. 1980. Response of honeyvine milkweed (Ampelamus albidus) to herbicide applications. Weed Sci. 28:722–724.Google Scholar
16. Rieck, W. L. and Schumacher, R. 1978. Glyphosate performance on field bindweed in the North–Central United States. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 33:150.Google Scholar
17. Sherrick, S. L., Holt, H. A., and Hess, F. D. 1986. Effects of adjuvants and environment during plant development on glyphosate absorption and translocation in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Weed Sci. 34:811–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Swan, D. G. 1980. Field bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis L. Washington State Univ. Bull. No. 0888. 8 pp.Google Scholar
19. Waldecker, M. A. and Wyse, D. L. 1985. Chemical and physical effects of the accumulation of glyphosate in common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) root buds. Weed Sci. 33:605–611.Google Scholar
20. Weise, A. F. and Lavake, D. E. 1986. Control of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) with postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 34:77–80.Google Scholar
21. Whitesides, R. E. 1980. Field bindweed control with 2,4-D, dicamba, and glyphosate. Proc. West. Weed Sci. Soc. Page 11.Google Scholar