Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T17:31:12.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Basis for Differential Susceptibility of Rice (Oryza sativa), Wild Rice (Zizania palustris), and Giant Burreed (Sparganium eurycarpum) to Bentazon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Sharon A. Clay  and
Ervin A. Oelke
Sharon A. Clay
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., and Plant Genetics, Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Ervin A. Oelke
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., and Plant Genetics, Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The basis for differential susceptibility of tolerant rice (Oryza sativa L.), susceptible wild rice (Zizania palustris L.), and susceptible giant burreed (Sparganium eurycarpum Engelm. # SPGEU) to foliar application of 1.1 kg ai/ha of bentazon [3-(1-methylethyl)-(1H)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-4(3H)-one 2,2-dioxide] was investigated by evaluating herbicide absorption, translocation, and metabolism. Giant burreed and wild rice absorbed more bentazon than rice at similar growth stages. Less than 10% of the absorbed bentazon was translocated out of the treated leaf of any of the species. Differential tolerance of bentazon among the three species was due to differences in the rate of bentazon metabolism. Rice metabolized 98% of the bentazon retained in the treated leaf 1 day after treatment (DAT), while giant burreed and wild rice metabolized less than 2% of the bentazon retained in the treated leaf 5 DAT.

Keywords

AbsorptiontranslocationmetabolismSPGEU
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , May 1988 , pp. 301 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Baltazar, A. M. and Monaco, T. J. 1984. Uptake, translocation, and metabolism of bentazon by two pepper species (Capsicum annuum and Capsicum chinense). Weed Sci. 32:258–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bernard, R. L. and Wax, L. M. 1975. Inheritance of a sensitive reaction to bentazon herbicide. Soybean Genetics Newsl. 2:46–47.Google Scholar
3. Clay, S. A. and Oelke, E. A. 1987. The effects of giant burreed (Sparganium eurycarpum) and shade on wild rice (Zizania palustris). Weed Sci. 35:640–646.Google Scholar
4. Ennis, W. B., Williamson, R. E., and Dorschner, K. D. 1952. Studies on spray retention by leaves of different plants. Weeds. 1:274–276.Google Scholar
5. Holly, K. 1976. Selectivity in relation to formulation and application methods. Pages 249–275 in Audus, L. H., ed. Herbicides-Physiology, Biochemistry, Ecology. Vol. 2. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
6. Mahoney, M. D. and Penner, D. 1975. The basis for bentazon selectivity in navy bean, cocklebur, and black nightshade. Weed Sci. 23:272–276.Google Scholar
7. Mine, M. and Matsunaka, S. 1975. Mode of action of bentazon: effect on photosynthesis. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 5:440–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Mine, M., Miyakado, M., and Matsunaka, S. 1975. The mechanism of bentazon selectivity. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 5:566–574.Google Scholar
9. Penner, D. 1975. Bentazon selectivity between soybean and Canada thistle. Weed Res. 15:259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Ransom, J. K., Oelke, E. A., and Wyse, D. L. 1983. Behavior of 2,4-D in common waterplantain (Alisma triviale). Weed Sci. 31:766–770.Google Scholar
11. Sargent, J. A. 1976. Relationship of selectivity to uptake and movement. Pages 303–331 in Audus, L. J., ed. Herbicides-Physiology, Biochemistry, Ecology. Vol. 2. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar