Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:36:27.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Suppression of Red Rice (Oryza sativa) Seed Production with Fluazifop and Quizalofop

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Frederick P. Salzman
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Roy J. Smith Jr.
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Ronald E. Talbert
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Stuttgart, AR 72160

Abstract

Field research was conducted in 1985 and 1986 to compare the efficacy of fluazifop and quizalofop on production of panicles and seeds of red rice. Single and first sequential treatments were applied to red rice in the early-tillering, midtillering, and panicle initiation stages of growth. Sequential treatments were applied 14 days after each earlier application to red rice in the midtillering, late-tillering, and early-heading growth stages, respectively. Both herbicides were applied singly or sequentially at 70, 140, and 280 g/ha. Sequential applications of fluazifop and quizalofop at 280 g/ha caused the greatest reduction of red rice panicle and seed production. Fluazifop at 280 g/ha applied sequentially reduced panicle production 75 to 80% and seed production 80%; 140 g/ha applied sequentially reduced seed production 83%. Quizalofop at 280 g/ha applied sequentially reduced panicle production 75 to 100% and seed production 91%. Sequential applications of either herbicide applied to red rice plants in the panicle initiation and early-heading growth stages were the most effective treatments.

Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Anonymous. 1987. Recommended chemicals for weed and brush control. Arkansas Coop. Ext. Serv. Misc. Publ. 44. 98 pp.Google Scholar
2. Barrentine, W. L., Street, J. E., and Kurtz, M. E. 1984. Postemergence control of red rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Sci. 32:382384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. De Datta, S. K. 1981. Principles and Practices of Rice Production. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 618 pp.Google Scholar
4. Dunand, R. T. 1985. Red rice control in rice production by seedhead suppression. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 38:35.Google Scholar
5. Goss, W. L. and Brown, E. 1939. Buried red rice seed. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 31:633637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hoagland, R. E. and Paul, R. N. 1978. A comparative SEM study of red rice and several commercial rice (Oryza sativa) varieties. Weed Sci. 26:619625.Google Scholar
7. Huey, B. A. and Baldwin, F. L. 1978. Red rice control. Page 1925 in Red Rice Research and Control. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1270. 46 pp.Google Scholar
8. Jain, R. and Vanden Born, W. H. 1983. Morphological and histological effects of sethoxydim, fluazifop-butyl and Dowco 453 on wild oats (Avena fatua). Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 23:7374.Google Scholar
9. Kells, J. J., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1984. Absorption, translocation and activity of fluazifop-butyl as influenced by plant growth stage and environment. Weed Sci. 32:143149.Google Scholar
10. Khodayari, K., Smith, R. J. Jr., and Black, H. L. 1987. Red rice (Oryza sativa) control with herbicide treatments in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 35:127129.Google Scholar
11. Richardson, J. M., Gealy, D. R., and Morrow, L. A. 1987. Preventing downy brome (Bromus tectorum) seed production with DPX-Y6202 and fluazifop. Weed Sci. 35:277281.Google Scholar
12. Smith, R. J. Jr. 1979. How to control hard-to-kill weeds in rice. Weed Today. 10(1):1214.Google Scholar
13. Smith, R. J. Jr. 1981. Control of red rice (Oryza sativa) in water-seeded rice (O. sativa). Weed Sci. 29:663666.Google Scholar
14. Sonnier, E. A. 1978. Cultural control of red rice. Page 1015 in Red Rice: Research and Control. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 1270. 46 pp.Google Scholar