Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:28:16.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Affecting the Translocation of 14C-Mefluidide in Soybeans (Glycine max), Common Cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum), and Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

C. G. McWhorter  and
G. D. Wills
C. G. McWhorter
Affiliation:
South. Weed Sci. Lab., Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Stoneville, MS 38776
G. D. Wills
Affiliation:
Delta Branch, Mississippi Agric. and For. Exp. Stn. Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Absorption and translocation of 14C-mefluidide {N-[2,4-dimethyl-5-[[(trifluoromethyl)sulfonyl] amino] phenyl] acetamide} in soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Lee 68’], common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.), and johnsongrass [Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.] were evaluated under different environmental conditions with and without adjuvants. At a constant level of 40 or 100% relative humidity (RH), an increase in air temperature from 22 to 32 C resulted in a two- to three-fold increase in absorption and a four- to eight-fold increase in translocation of the 14C in soybeans following application to the second trifoliolate. At constant 22 or 32 C an increase from 40 to 100% RH resulted in less than a two-fold increase in absorption or translocation of 14C in soybeans. Autoradiograms indicated that movement of the 14C was primarily into leaves above the treated area. Translocation of 14C was significantly greater following application to the lower stem than to leaves. In common cocklebur, 14C absorption increased about three-fold at both 22 and 32 C with an increase from 40 to 100% RH following application to the second alternate leaf. At both levels of RH, absorption and translocation increased as the temperature was increased from 22 to 32 C. The addition of an adjuvant increased absorption and translocation in common cocklebur under all environmental conditions. When 14C-mefluidide was applied without an adjuvant to johnsongrass, absorption increased five- to six-fold at both 22 and 32 C as RH was increased from 40 to 100%. Translocation in johnsongrass was often affected less by variations in temperature than it was in soybeans or common cocklebur. The adjuvant increased absorption and translocation of the 14C-label of mefluidide in johnsongrass. The 14C-label accumulated primarily in the distal leaf of johnsongrass or in leaves above the treated area.

Keywords

Herbicideenvironmentweed-controladjuvant
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , July 1978 , pp. 382 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 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. Bloomberg, J. R. and Wax, L. M. 1977. Absorption and translocation of mefluidide in soybeans and cockle burs (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.). Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., p. 16–17.Google Scholar
2. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. California Agric. Exp. Stn. and Ext. Serv. Manual 35, 143 pages.Google Scholar
3. Crawford, S. H. and Blackmon, W. J. 1976. Evaluation of selected postemergence overtop and directed treatments in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 29:144.Google Scholar
4. Gates, D. W. 1975. Response of several plant species to MBR-12325. Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Pestic. Chem, 170 ACS National Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Abstr. 70.Google Scholar
5. Gates, D. W. 1976. Sesbania control in soybeans with MBR-12325 and in combination with other herbicides. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 29:108.Google Scholar
6. Gates, D. W., Prochaska, D. J., Hargroder, T., and Selman, F. L. 1976. Johnsongrass control in soybeans with MBR-12325. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 29:60.Google Scholar
7. Gruenhagen, R. D., Hargroder, T. G., Matteson, J. W., O'Malley, J. W., Pauly, D. R., and Selman, F. W. 1975. Turf and agronomic crop responses to MBR-12325. Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Pestic. Chem., 170 ACS National Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Abstr. 44.Google Scholar
8. Harrison, H. F., Gossett, B. J., and Musen, H. L. 1976. Response of soybeans and weeds to MBR-12325 alone and with bentazon and chloroxuron. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 29:103.Google Scholar
9. Mahoney, M. D. and Penner, D. 1975. Bentazon translocation and metabolism in soybean and navy bean. Weed Sci. 23:265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Mahoney, M. D. and Penner, D. 1975. The basis for bentazon selectivity in navy bean, cocklebur, and black nightshade. Weed Sci. 23:272–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Wills, G. D. 1976. Translocation of bentazon in soybeans and common cocklebur. Weed Sci. 24:536–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1977. Effect of environment on the translocation of mefluidide in plants. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., p. 24.Google Scholar