Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T21:22:03.138Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of CGA-154281 and Temperature on Metolachlor Absorption and Metabolism, Glutathione Content, and Glutathione-S-Transferase Activity in Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Paul R. Viger ,
Charlotte V. Eberlein ,
E. Patrick Fuerst  and
John W. Gronwald
Paul R. Viger
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genet., Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Charlotte V. Eberlein
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, Univ. Idaho, Aberdeen, ID 83210
E. Patrick Fuerst
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA 99164
John W. Gronwald
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric, Agric. Res. Serv., Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 Dep. Agron. and Plant Genet., Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

CGA-154281 and temperature effects on metolachlor absorption and metabolism were studied in corn seedlings grown in untreated soil or soil treated with metolachlor, CGA-154281, or both. Seedlings were grown under a cool (21/13 C, 16-h day) or warm (30/21 C, 16-h day) temperature regime and exposed to 14C-metolachlor for 10 min at either 21 or 30 C. Corn grown under the cool temperature regime absorbed slightly more 14C-metolachlor than corn grown under the warm temperature regime. Corn held at 21 C during a 10-min 14C-metolachlor exposure period metabolized metolachlor more slowly than corn held at 30 C. Decreased corn tolerance to metolachlor observed at lower temperatures may be due in part to slower metolachlor metabolism. Corn grown in the presence of metolachlor plus CGA-154281 metabolized 14C-metolachlor to the glutathione conjugate twice as fast as corn grown in the presence of metolachlor alone. The increase in metabolism rate was due to a fivefold increase in glutathione-S-transferase (GST, EC 2.5.1.18) activity and not to an increase in glutathione (GSH) content. Results are consistent with the hypothesis that CGA-154281 protects corn from metolachlor injury by enhancing GST activity, which accelerates metolachlor detoxification via GSH conjugation.

Keywords

CGA-154281, 4-(dichloroacetyl)-3,4-dihydro-3-methyl-2H-1,4-benzoxazinemetolachlor, 2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamidecorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3906’Antidotesafenerprotectant
Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Information
Weed Science , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 324 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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. Boldt, L. D. and Barrett, M. 1989. Factors in alachlor and metolachlor injury to corn (Zea mays) seedlings. Weed Technol. 3:303–306.Google Scholar
2. Bradford, M. M. 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 72:248.Google Scholar
3. Breaux, E. J., Patanella, J. E., and Sanders, E. F. 1987. Chloroacetanilide herbicide selectivity: Analysis of glutathione and homoglutathione in tolerant, susceptible, and safened seedlings. J. Agric. Food Chem. 35:474–478.Google Scholar
4. Christ, R. A. 1981. The effect of CGA 43089 as a safener of metolachlor in sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) (Recordings of elongation rates on single sorghum seedlings). Weed Res. 21:1–8.Google Scholar
5. Davies, M. H., Birt, D. F., and Schnell, R. G. 1984. Direct enzymatic assay for reduced and oxidized glutathione. J. Pharmacol. Methods 12:191–194.Google Scholar
6. Dean, J. V., Gronwald, J. W., and Eberlein, C. V. 1990. Induction of glutathione-S-transferase isozymes in sorghum by herbicide antidotes. Plant Physiol. 92:467–473.Google Scholar
7. Dutka, F. and Komives, T. 1987. MG-191: A new selective herbicide antidote. Pages 201–204 in Greenhalgh, R. and Roberts, T. R., eds. Pesticide Science and Biotechnology. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
8. Ebert, E. 1982. The role of waxes in the uptake of metolachlor into sorghum in relation to the protectant CGA-43089. Weed Res. 22:305–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Fuerst, E. P. and Gronwald, J. W. 1986. Induction of rapid metabolism of metolachlor in sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) shoots by CGA-92194 and other antidotes. Weed Sci. 34:354–361.Google Scholar
10. Gronwald, J. W., Fuerst, E. P., Eberlein, C. V., and Egli, M. A. 1987. Effect of herbicide antidotes on glutathione content and glutathione-S-transferase activity of sorghum shoots. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 29:66–76.Google Scholar
11. Guy, C. L. and Carter, J. V. 1982. Effect of low temperature on the glutathione status of plant cells. Pages 169–179 in Li, P. H. and Sakai, A., eds. Plant Cold Hardiness and Freezing Stress. Vol. II. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
12. Hatzios, K. K. 1983. Herbicide antidotes: Development, chemistry and mode of action. Adv. Agron. 36:264–316.Google Scholar
13. Jackson, L. A., Yopp, J. H., and Kapusta, G. 1986. Absorption and distribution of flurazole and acetochlor in grain sorghum. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 25:373–380.Google Scholar
14. Ketchersid, M. L., Norton, K., and Merkle, M. G. 1981. Influence of soil moisture on the safening effect of CGA-43089 in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Sci. 29:281–287.Google Scholar
15. Ketchersid, M. L., Vietor, D. M., and Merkle, M. G. 1982. CGA-43089 effects on metolachlor uptake and membrane permeability in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). J. Plant Growth Regul. 1:285–294.Google Scholar
16. Komives, T., Komives, V. A., Balazs, M., and Dutka, F. 1985. Role of glutathione-related enzymes in the mode of action of herbicide antidotes. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds. 3:1155–1162.Google Scholar
17. Komives, T., Balazs, M., Komives, V., and Dutka, F. 1985. Effects of herbicide antidotes on reduced glutathione content and levels of cytochrome P-450 and glutathione S-transferase in Zea mays L. Pages 451–454 in Vereczkey, L. and Magyar, K., eds. Cytochrome P-450: Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Induction. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.Google Scholar
18. Leavitt, J.R.C. and Penner, D. 1978. Protection of corn (Zea mays) from acetanilide herbicidal injury with the antidote R-25788. Weed Sci. 26:653–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Leavitt, J.R.C. and Penner, D. 1979. In vitro conjugation of glutathione and other thiols with acetanilide herbicides and EPTC sulfoxide and action of the herbicide antidote R-25788. J. Agric. Food Chem. 27:533–536.Google Scholar
20. Marsh, H. V. Jr., Bates, J., and Downs, S. 1976. Effects of alachlor on corn seedlings. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:158–165.Google Scholar
21. Mozer, T. J., Tiemeier, D. C., and Jaworski, E. G. 1983. Purification and characterization of corn glutathione S-transferase. Biochemistry 22:1068–1072.Google Scholar
22. O'Connell, K. M., Breaux, E. J., and Fraley, R. T. 1988. Different rates of metabolism of two chloroacetanilide herbicides in Pioneer 3320 corn. Plant Physiol. 86:359–363.Google Scholar
23. Rowe, L., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 1991. Efficacy and mode of action of CGA-154281, a protectant for corn (Zea mays) from metolachlor injury. Weed Sci. 39:78–82.Google Scholar
24. Stephenson, G. R., Ali, A., and Ashton, F. M. 1983. Influence of herbicides and antidotes on the glutathione levels of maize seedlings. Pages 219–224 in Miyamoto, J. and Kearney, P. C., eds. Pesticide Chemistry: Human Welfare and the Environment. Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
25. Viger, P. R., Eberlein, C. V., and Fuerst, E. P. 1991. Influence of available soil water, temperature, and CGA-154281 on metolachlor injury to corn. Weed Sci. 39:227–231.Google Scholar
26. Zama, P. and Hatzios, K. K. 1986. Effects of CGA-92194 on the chemical reactivity of metolachlor with glutathione and metabolism of metolachlor in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Weed Sci. 34:834–841.Google Scholar