Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:45:24.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Butylate and Carbofuran Interaction in Barley and Corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Allan S. Hamill  and
Donald Penner
Allan S. Hamill
Affiliation:
Dep. of Crop and Soil Sci., Mich. State Univ., E. Lansing, Mich.
Donald Penner
Affiliation:
Dep. of Crop and Soil Sci., Mich. State Univ., E. Lansing, MI 48823
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Radicle length of barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Larker’) seedlings was greatly reduced by the combination of the herbicide S-ethyl diisobutylthiocarbamate (butylate) applied in combination with the insecticide 2,2-dimethyl-2,3-dihydrobenzofuranyl-7-N-methylcarbamate (carbofuran). Corn (Zea mays L. ‘Michigan 400’) seedlings were not similarly affected. Carbofuran interacted with butylate to reduce synergistically the root and shoot growth of barley but not that of corn. The combination of these two carbamate pesticides synergistically increased respiration in barley. The basis for these interaction effects in barley appeared to be decreased metabolism of butylate and increased respiration in the presence of carbofuran. Although the same metabolism trend was apparent in tolerant corn, the butylate level was much lower since the absorption of butylate was reduced by the carbofuran seed treatment. The 14C from 14C-butylate preferentially accumulated in barley shoots and corn roots.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , July 1973 , pp. 339 - 342
Copyright
Copyright © 1973 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. Chrispeels, M. J. and Hanson, J. B. 1962. The increase in ribonucleic acid content of cytoplasmic particles of soybean hypocotyl induced by 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. Weeds 10:123–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:20–21.Google Scholar
3. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Ext. Serv. Manual 35. 143 pp.Google Scholar
4. Doxey, D. 1949. The effect of isopropyl phenylcarbamate on mitosis in rye and onion. Ann. Bot. (London) 13:329–335.Google Scholar
5. Ennis, W. B. Jr. 1948. Responses of crop plants to isopropyl phenylcarbamate. Bot. Gaz. 109:473–493.Google Scholar
6. Hamill, A. S. and Penner, D. 1973. Interaction of alachlor and carbofuran. Weed Sci. 21: (this issue).Google Scholar
7. Kaufman, D. D., Kearney, P. C., Von Endt, D. W., and Miller, D. E. 1970. Methylcarbamate inhibition of phenylcarbamate metabolism in soil. J. Agr. Food Chem. 18:513–519.Google Scholar
8. Keitt, G. W. Jr. 1967. On the mode of action of carbamate herbicides. Physiol. Plant. 20:1076–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Prendeville, G. N., James, C. S., Warren, G. F., and Schreiber, M. M. 1969. Antagonistic responses with combinations of carbamate and growth regulator herbicides. Weed Sci. 17:307–309.Google Scholar