Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T14:08:25.333Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fluazifop Toxicity to Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) as Influenced by Some Application Factors and Site of Application

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Nimal R. Chandrasena  and
Geoff R. Sagar
Nimal R. Chandrasena
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Univ. Coll. of North Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2UW, U.K.
Geoff R. Sagar
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Univ. Coll. of North Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2UW, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The phytotoxicity of the butyl ester of fluazifop to quackgrass was enhanced by the addition of a nonionic surfactant and an oil additive either alone or in mixture to the spray solution. The enhancement caused by the surfactant was consistently greater than that caused by the oil additive. A higher level of quackgrass control was achieved at the carrier volumes of 100, 200, or 400 L/ha, than at 800 L/ha. Quackgrass growth inhibition was greater following application of small herbicide droplets which averaged 0.25 μl compared to larger herbicide droplets at each herbicide application rate. When droplet concentration was varied and different doses of the herbicides applied to plants, no significant differences were noted at the highest dose. However, at intermediate dose treatments, the least concentrated droplets (2.5 μg/μl) were most phytotoxic. Herbicide droplets placed at basal areas of leaves were more phytotoxic than when placed at lamina apices and middle areas. This effect was most pronounced on adaxial rather than abaxial surfaces. In general, application of droplets to younger leaves resulted in greater phytotoxicity than treatment of older leaves.

Keywords

Fluazifop, (±)-2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]oxy]phenoxy]propionic acidquackgrass, Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. ♯3 AGRREAdditivesagralactiprondroplet studiescarrier volumeAgropyron repensAGRRE
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 6 , November 1989 , pp. 790 - 796
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. Anon. 1978. Actipron. Br. Petroleum, Tech. Inf. Leafl. MP 526/4/78.Google Scholar
2. Anderson, R. N. 1982. Comparisons of four herbicides applied postemergence for grass control. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:80–82.Google Scholar
3. Blackman, C. E., Bruce, R. S., and Holly, K. 1958. Studies in the principles of phytotoxicity. V. Interrelationships between specific differences in spray retention and selective toxicity. J. Exp. Bot 9:175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Buhler, D. B. and Burnside, O. C. 1984. Effect of application factors on postemergence phytotoxicity of fluazifop-butyl, haloxyfop-methyl, and sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 32:574–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bukovac, M. J. 1976. Herbicide entry into plants. Pages 335–364 in Audus, L. J., ed. Herbicides—Physiology, Biochemistry, Ecology. Vol. I. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
6. Caseley, J. C., Coupland, D., and Simmons, R. C. 1976. Effects of formulation, volume rate and application method on performance and rainfastness of glyphosate on Agropyron repens . Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds. 407–412.Google Scholar
7. Chandrasena, J.P.N.R. and Sagar, G. R. 1984. Effects of fluazifop-butyl on shoot growth and rhizome buds of Elymus repens (L.) Gould. Weed Res. 24:297–303.Google Scholar
8. Coupland, D., Taylor, W. A., and Caseley, J. C. 1978. The effect of site of application on the performance of glyphosate on Agropyron repens and barban, benzoylprop-ethyl and difenzoquat on Avena fatua . Weed Res. 18:123–128.Google Scholar
9. Crammer, J. R. and Duke, W. B. 1983. Controlled droplet application of fluazifop-butyl and sethoxydim for annual and perennial weed control. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Vol. 23. Pages 23–24.Google Scholar
10. Ennis, W. B. Jr., and Williamson, R. E. 1963. The influence of droplet size on effectiveness of low volume herbicidal sprays. Weeds 11:67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Foden, P. C. 1972. Factors affecting efficacy of foliage-applied herbicides. Application factors. Proc. Br. Weed Control Conf. 1129–1145.Google Scholar
12. Furmidge, C.G.L. 1959. Physicochemical studies on agricultural sprays. I. General principles of incorporating surface-active agents as spray supplements. J. Sci. Food Agric. 10:267–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Holly, K. 1976. Selectivity in relation to formulation and application methods. Pages 423–464 in Audus, L. J., ed. Herbicides—Physiology, Biochemistry, Ecology. Vol. II. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
14. Hull, H. M. 1970. Leaf structures as related to absorption of pesticides and other compounds. Res. Rev. 31:1–155.Google Scholar
15. Hull, H. M., Davis, D. G., and Stolzenberg, G. E. 1982. Action of adjuvants on plant surfaces. Pages 26–67 in Adjuvants for Herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
16. Kells, J. J., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1984. Absorption, translocation, and activity of fluazifop-butyl as influenced by plant growth stage and environment. Weed Sci. 32:143–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. McKinlay, K. S., Ashford, R., and Ford, R. J. 1974. Effects of droplet size spray volume, and dosage on paraquat toxicity. Weed Sci. 22:31–34.Google Scholar
18. McKinlay, K. S., Brandt, S. A., Morse, P., and Ashford, R. 1972. Droplet size and phytotoxicity of herbicides. Weed Sci. 20:450–452.Google Scholar
19. Merritt, C. R. 1982. The influence of form of deposit on the phytotoxicity of difenzoquat applied as individual drops to Avena fatua L. Ann. Appl. Biol. 101:517–525.Google Scholar
20. Merritt, C. R. 1982. The influence of the form of deposit on the phytotoxicity of MCPA, paraquat and glyphosate applied as individual drops. Ann. Appl. Biol. 101:527–532.Google Scholar
21. Mitchell, J. W. and Linder, P. J. 1963. Absorption, translocation, exudation and metabolism of plant growth regulating substances in relation to residues. Res. Rev. 2:51–76.Google Scholar
22. Nalewaja, J. D. and Adamczewski, K. A. 1976. Vaporization and uptake of atrazine with additives. Weed Sci. 24:217–223.Google Scholar
23. Nalewaja, J. D. and Adamczewski, K. A. 1977. Uptake and translocation of bentazon with additives. Weed Sci. 25:309–315.Google Scholar
24. Nalewaja, J. D. and Skrzypczak, G. A. 1986. Absorption and translocation of fluazifop with additives. Weed Sci. 34:572–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Plowman, R. E., Stonebridge, W. C., and Hawtree, J. N. 1980. Fluazifop-butyl, a new selective herbicide for the control of annual and perennial grass weeds. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds. 29–37.Google Scholar
26. Porter, D. J. and Harvey, R. G. 1982. Postemergence herbicides for wild proso millet control in soybeans. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:87.Google Scholar
27. Sandberg, C. L., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1978. Effect of diluent volume and calcium on glyphosate phytotoxicity. Weed Sci. 26:476–479.Google Scholar
28. Slack, C. H. and Witt, W. W. 1983. Herbicide applications with CDA. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Vol. 23. Page 54.Google Scholar