Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:48:50.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of Adjuvant and Urea Ammonium Nitrate on Bispyribac Efficacy, Absorption, and Translocation in Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli). II. Absorption and Translocation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Darrin M. Dodds
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, 117 Dorman Hall, Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762
Daniel B. Reynolds*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, 117 Dorman Hall, Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762
Joseph H. Massey
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, 117 Dorman Hall, Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762
M. Cade Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, 117 Dorman Hall, Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762
C. H. Koger
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, 82 Stoneville Road, P.O. Box 197, Stoneville, MS 38776
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Inconsistent control of barnyardgrass with bispyribac may be alleviated through adjuvant technology. Experiments were conducted to determine the effect of adjuvant and urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) on absorption and translocation of bispyribac in barnyardgrass. Additional experiments were conducted to determine when maximum absorption and translocation occurred with the use of a methylated seed oil/organosilicone adjuvant (MSO/OSL) plus UAN (0.37 L ha−1 and 2% v/v). In the initial experiment, 14C-bispyribac–treated leaves, nontreated leaves, and roots were collected 6 and 24 h after application. Absorption was greatest with tank-mixed MSO/OSL (0.37 L ha−1) plus UAN (2% v/v) and the proprietary blend of MSO/OSL/UAN (2% v/v) at 80 and 74% of applied 14C-bispyribac, respectively. Translocation to nontreated leaves and roots was also highest with these treatments. Increased translocation appeared to be due to greater herbicide absorption, not an increase in translocation rate. The addition of 32% UAN to MSO/OSL and nonionic organosilicone (OSL/NIS) adjuvant systems resulted in a four to fivefold increase in absorption compared with treatments without UAN. Recovery of 14C-bispyribac in additional experiments generally decreased as time after application increased; however, recovery was 86% or greater for all time intervals. By 12 h after application, 68% of applied 14C-bispyribac was absorbed. At this time, 14C-bispyribac was partitioned within the plant in the following manner: 48% in the treated area, 10% in leaf tissue from treated area to tip of the treated leaf, 1.9% in leaf tissue from treated area to collar region of the treated leaf, 1.6% in remaining leaves from collar of treated leaf upward, 5.3% in remaining leaves from collar of treated leaf downward to soil line, and 0.7% in the roots. These data indicate that maximum absorption was achieved within 12 h with a tank mix of MSO/OSL and UAN or the MSO/OSL/UAN blend.

Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Anonymous, , 2006. Regiment Label. http://www.cdms.net/ldat/ld5HT004.pdf. Accessed: December 12, 2006.Google Scholar
Beckett, T. H. and Stoller, E. W. 1991. Effects of methylammonium and urea ammonium nitrate on foliar uptake of thifensulfuron in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 39:333338.Google Scholar
Bridges, D. C. 1989. Adjuvant and pH effects on sethoxydim and clethodim activity on rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Technol. 3:615620.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. A., Penner, D., and Kells, J. J. 1993. Absorption and activity of nicosulfuron and primisulfuron in quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) as affected by adjuvants. Weed Sci. 41:218224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., Jordan, D. L., York, A. C., Corbin, F. T., and Sheldon, Y. 1999. Influence of adjuvants and bromoxynil on absorption of clethodim. Weed Technol. 13:536541.Google Scholar
DeWitt, T. C., Vickery, C., and Heier, J. 1999. Control of herbicide resistant watergrass in northern California rice with Regiment™ herbicide. Proc. Calif. Weed Sci. Soc. 51:182183.Google Scholar
Hammes, G. G. 1993. Weed management in peanuts with chlorimuron and foliar nitrogen sources. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46:319.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Burns, A. B., Barnes, C. J., Barnett, W., and Herrick, J. K. 1997. Influence of adjuvants and formulation on barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control with propanil in rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 11:762766.Google Scholar
Koger, C. H., Dodds, D. M., and Reynolds, D. B. 2007. Effect of adjuvants and urea ammonium nitrate on bispyribac efficacy, absorption, and translocation in barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli). I. Efficacy, rainfastness, and soil moisture. Weed Sci. 55:399405.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L. and Kropff, M. J. 1996. Applications of an ecophysiological model for irrigated rice (Oryza sativa)–(Echinochloa crus-galli) competition. Weed Sci. 44:5256.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D., Woznica, Z., and Manthey, F. A. 1991. DPX-V9360 efficacy with adjuvants and environment. Weed Technol. 5:9296.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1968. Weed competition in rice. Weed Sci. 16:252255.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1974. Competition of barnyardgrass with rice cultivars. Weed Sci. 22:423426.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J. Jr. 1988. Weed thresholds in southern U.S. rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Technol. 2:232241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
W.K. Vencill. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th ed. Champaign, IL Weed Science Society of America. 51.Google Scholar
Wanamarta, G., Penner, D., and Kells, J. J. 1989. Identification of efficacious adjuvants for sethoxydim and bentazon. Weed Technol. 3:6066.Google Scholar