Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:17:42.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Magnesium and Photoperiod on Atrazine Toxicity to Tomatoes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ronald G. Brenchley  and
Arnold P. Appleby
Ronald G. Brenchley
Affiliation:
Farm Crops Dep., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis 97331 Monsanto Company, Fremont, Nebraska
Arnold P. Appleby
Affiliation:
Farm Crops Dep., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis 97331
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In greenhouse studies, magnesium-deficient tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) plants were more susceptible to 2-chloro-4-(ethylamino)-6-(isopropylamino)-s-triazine (atrazine) than normal plants when grown under continuous light. Under a 12-hr photoperiod, magnesium-atrazine interactions were not significant. Magnesium deficiency and continuous light each caused reductions in chlorophyll content in tomatoes. A combination of these two conditions caused an additive reduction in chlorophyll content and also caused the greatest susceptibility to atrazine. The influence of magnesium on atrazine toxicity may be due to its effect on chlorophyll content rather than a direct effect on atrazine action.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 19 , Issue 5 , September 1971 , pp. 524 - 525
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

1. Arthur, J. M., Guthrie, J. D., and Newell, J. M. 1930. Some effects of artificial climates on the growth and chemical composition of plants. Amer. J. Bot. 17:416–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Ashton, F. M. 1965. Relationship between light and toxicity symptoms caused by atrazine and monuron. Weeds 13:164–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Guthrie, John D. 1929. Effect of environmental conditions on the chloroplast pigments. Amer. J. Bot. 16:716–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Izawa, S. and Good, N. E. 1965. The number of sites sensitive to 3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethyl urea, 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethyl urea and 2-chloro-4-(2-propylamino)-6-ethylamino-s-triazine in isolated chloroplasts. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 102:20–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Moreland, D. E. and Hill, K. L. 1962. Interference of herbicides with the Hill reaction of isolated chloroplasts. Weeds 10:229–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Withrow, A. P. and Withrow, R. B. 1949. Photoperiodic chlorosis in tomato. Plant Physiol. 24:657–668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed