Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T21:35:09.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Cotton and Weeds to Herbicides by Phytobland Oil or Surfactant

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles W. Hogue
Charles W. Hogue*
Affiliation:
Delta Branch, Miss. Agr. and Forest. Exp. Sta., Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In field studies, surfactant and phytobland oil were compared as additives to herbicides and herbicide combinations for postemergence weed control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Stoneville 7A’). Addition of phytobland oil to MSMA (monosodium methanearsonate) and MSMA + fluometuron [1,1-dimethyl-3-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)urea], dinoseb (2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol), or norea [3-(hexadydro-4,7-methanoindan-5-yl)-1,1-dimethyl-urea] had no significant effect on weed control when applied as directed treatments to weeds in cotton 7 to 15 cm tall. In cotton 15 to 23 cm tall, addition of phytobland oil to MSMA + linuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea] and MSMA + linuron + prometryne [2,4-bis(isopropylamino)-6-(methylthio)-s-triazine] increased weed control when compared to the same treatments with surfactant. MSMA + linuron + phytobland oil decreased cotton yields. Addition of phytobland oil to DSMA (disodium methanearsonate) and DSMA combinations had no effect on weed control when compared to the same treatments with surfactant. There were no differences in several paraffinic phytobland oils or surfactant when used as additives to MSMA + fluometuron for weed control in cotton 7 to 15 cm tall.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , March 1974 , pp. 97 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 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. Aya, F.C. and Ries, S.K. 1968. Influence of oils on the toxicity of amitrole to quackgrass. Weed Sci. 16:288–290.Google Scholar
2. Bandeen, J.D. 1969. Wetting agents, oils, are they a plus for atrazine. Crops Soils Mag. 21:15.Google Scholar
3. Barrentine, J.L. and Warren, G.F. 1970. Isoparaffinic oil as a carrier for chloropropham and terbacil. Weed Sci. 18:365–372.Google Scholar
4. Burt, E.O. 1966. Tolerance of warm season tuff grasses to herbicides. Florida Plantation Field Lab. Mineo Report PFL 66–1.Google Scholar
5. Chenault, E.W. and Wiese, A.F. 1969. The effect of oil emulsion carriers on herbicide toxicity. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 22:165 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
6. Colby, S.R. 1967. Preemergence and postemergence control of yellow nutsedge with herbicide combinations and oils. Proc. Northeast. Weed Contr. Conf. 21:307–314.Google Scholar
7. Dickerson, C.H. and Sweet, R.D. 1967. Atrazine and oil for postemergence weed control in sweet corn (Zea mays var. rugosa). Proc. Northeast. Weed Contr. Conf. 21:106–113.Google Scholar
8. Frans, R.E. and Smith, H.R. 1966. Herbicide field evaluation trials on field crops. Ark. Agr. Exp. Sta. Mimeo Series 156:4, 17.Google Scholar
9. Frans, R.E. and Smith, H.R. 1967. Herbicide field evaluation trials on field crops. Ark. Agr. Exp. Sta. Mimeo Series 165:18.Google Scholar
10. Hardcastle, W.S. 1969. Enhancement of postemergence herbicide applications in soybeans with phytobland oils–a progress report. Ga. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Rep. 60.Google Scholar
11. Hardcastle, W.S. and Wilkinson, R.E. 1968. Enhancement of postemergence herbicide applications in cotton with phytobland oil. Georgia Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Rep. 25.Google Scholar
12. Holstun, J.T. Jr. 1952. Postemergence screening of chemicals and methods for weed control in cotton. Proc. S. Weed Conf. 5:79–89.Google Scholar
13. Holstun, J.T. Jr. and Bingham, S.W. 1960. Several triazines as selective postemergence herbicides in cotton. Weeds 8:187–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Horn, G.C. 1966. Increasing the effectiveness of turf herbicides by use of oil. Florida Turf Grass Assoc. Bull. 13:1–6.Google Scholar
15. Jones, G.E. and Anderson, G.W. 1964. Atrazine as a foliar application in an oil water emulsion. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Contr. Conf. 20:27–29.Google Scholar
16. Liu, L.C., Ilnicki, R.D., Regan, J.B., and Visinski, E.J. 1966. Naphthenic and paraffinic oils as adjuvants in atrazine and linuron sprays for weed control in corn. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Contr. Conf. 20:309–316.Google Scholar
17. Schrader, J.W. and Meggitt, W.F. 1968. Factors affecting the performance of atrazine-oil combinations for weed control in corn. Abstr., Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. p. 105.Google Scholar
18. Stritzke, J.F. and Parker, B. 1967. Summary of atrazine and oil work in South Dakota. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Contr. Conf. 21:59–60.Google Scholar
19. Wiese, A.F. 1966. Increasing toxicity of propazine, atrazine and diuron with oils and paraquat. Proc. S. Weed Conf. 19:47–48.Google Scholar
20. Wiese, A.F., Weir, L., and Chenault, W. 1968. Oil-water emulsions and atrazine for weed control in sorghum. Abstr., Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. p. 106.Google Scholar