Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:25:18.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Influencing the Phytotoxicity of Chloroxuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Wayne C. Carlson  and
L. M. Wax
Wayne C. Carlson
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois
L. M. Wax
Affiliation:
Crops Research Division, Agr. Res. Serv., U. S. Dep. of Agr., Urbana, Illinois
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The phytotoxicity of 3-[p-(p-chlorophenoxy)phenyl]-1,1-dimethylurea (chloroxuron) usually decreased as the stage of growth of five weed species at treatment increased. Giant foxtail (Setaria faberii Herrm.), velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic.), and the cotyledonary stage of cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.) were most resistant to the herbicide. Ivyleaf morningglory (Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq.) and jimsonweed (Datura stramonium L.) were more susceptible to chloroxuron. Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) seemed less susceptible at the cotyledonary stage than at later stages. Phytotoxicity on both weeds and soybeans was increased by increased temperature and relative humidity following chloroxuron application. The phytotoxicity of chloroxuron also was increased by simulated rainfall in greenhouse studies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 1970 , pp. 98 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 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. Andersen, R. N. 1968. Effects of postemergence chloroxuron treatments on weed-free soybeans. Proc. North Centr. Weed Contr. Conf. 23:27.Google Scholar
2. Barrier, G. E. and Loomis, W. E. 1957. Absorption and translocation of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and P32 by leaves. Plant Physiol. 32:225–231.Google Scholar
3. Currier, H. B. and Dybing, C. D. 1959. Foliar penetration of herbicides-review and present status. Weeds 7:195–213.Google Scholar
4. Hammerton, J. L. 1967. Environmental factors and susceptibility to herbicides. Weeds 15:330–336.Google Scholar
5. Pallas, J. E. Jr. 1960. Effects of temperature and humidity on foliar absorption and translocation of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and benzoic acid. Plant Physiol. 35:575–580.Google Scholar
6. Rice, E. L. 1948. Absorption and translocation of ammonium 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetate by bean plants. Bot. Gaz. 109: 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Smith, A. E., Zukel, J. W., Stone, G. M., and Riddel, J. A. 1959. Factors affecting the performance of maleic hydrazide. J. Agr. Food Chem. 7:341–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Thompson, L. Jr. and Slife, F. W. 1969. Foliar and root absorption of atrazine applied postemergence to giant foxtail. Weed Sci. 17:251–256.Google Scholar
9. Weaver, R. J., Minarik, C. E., and Boyd, F. T. 1946. Influence of rainfall on the effectiveness of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid sprayed for herbicidal purposes. Bot. Gaz. 107:540–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar