Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T16:02:54.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AC 263,222 and Imazethapyr Rates and Mixtures for Weed Management in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John S. Richburg III
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Univ. Georgia, Tifton, GA 31794
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Univ. Georgia, Tifton, GA 31794
Gerald L. Wiley
Affiliation:
American Cyanamid Co., Tifton, GA 31794

Abstract

Field experiments conducted at three locations in Georgia during 1991 and 1992 evaluated AC 263,222 and imazethapyr rates alone at 18, 36, 54, or 72 g ai/ha and in mixture for a total of 36, 54, or 72 g/ha of herbicide applied early-POST for weed control, peanut injury, and yield. An application of AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha controlled (> 90%) Ipomoea morningglories, sicklepod, smallflower morningglory, and yellow nutsedge in all experiments and coffee senna and Florida beggarweed at Chula in 1991. Bristly starbur was controlled at least 90% with AC 263,222 at 72 g/ha at Tifton in 1991, but less than 62% at Chula in 1991. Imazethapyr applied at 72 g/ha controlled coffee senna, Ipomoea morningglories, and smallflower morningglory at least 85%, but did not control Florida beggarweed or sicklepod and provided inconsistent bristly starbur and yellow nutsedge control. Bristly starbur and yellow nutsedge control was increased with several AC 263,222 plus imazethapyr mixtures. High peanut yields comparable to the standard were indicative of the AC 263,222 rate applied whether alone or in mixture with imazethapyr.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. Brown, S. M. 1992. Imazethapyr (Pursuit) in peanuts: Observations in Georgia from the first year. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:104.Google Scholar
2. Cardina, J. and Hook, J. E. 1989. Factors influencing germination and emergence of Florida beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum). Weed Technol. 3:402407.Google Scholar
3. Dowler, C. D. 1992. Weed survey-southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:430464.Google Scholar
4. Grichar, W. J., Nester, P. R., and Colburn, A. E. 1992. Nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) with imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 6:396400.Google Scholar
5. Kendig, J. A. and DeFelice, M. S. 1994. ALS resistant cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) in Missouri. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 34:34.Google Scholar
6. Monks, C. D., Wilcut, J. W., and Richburg, J. S. III. 1993. Broadleaf weed control in soybean {Glycine max) with chlorimuron plus acifluorfen or thifensulfuron mixtures. Weed Technol. 7:317321.Google Scholar
7. Richburg, J. S., HI, Wilcut, J. W., and Wehtje, G. R. 1993. Toxicity of foliar and/or soil applied imazethapyr to purple (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow (C. esculentus) nutsedge. Weed Technol. 7:900905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., and Wiley, G. 1993. Cadre rates and applications in Georgia peanut. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46:39.Google Scholar
9. Richburg, J. S. III, Wilcut, J. W., and Wehtje, G. R. 1994. Toxicity of foliar and/or soil applied AC 263,222 to purple (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow (C. esculentus) nutsedge. Weed Sci. 42:398402.Google Scholar
10. Riley, D. G. and Shaw, D. R. 1988. Influence of imazapyr on the control of pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) with chlorimuron, imazaquin, and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 36:63666.Google Scholar
11. Riley, D. G. and Shaw, D. R. 1989. Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) control with imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 3:9598.Google Scholar
12. Stidham, M. A. and Singh, B. K. 1991. Imidazolinone-acetohydroxyacid synthase interactions. p. 7190 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 33431.Google Scholar
13. Swann, C. W. 1994. Imazethapyr, AC 263,222 and metolachlor systems for control of nutsedge in peanut. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:2930.Google Scholar
14. Wehtje, G. R., Wilcut, J. W., and McGuire, J. A. 1992. Influence of bentazon on the phytotoxicity of paraquat to peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 40:9095.Google Scholar
15. Wilcut, J. W., Wehtje, G. R., Hicks, T. V., and Cole, T. A. 1990. Postemergence weed management systems for peanuts. Weed Technol. 4:7680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Wilcut, J. W., Walls, F. R. Jr., and Horton, D. N. 1991. Weed control, yield, and net returns using imazethapyr in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 39:238242.Google Scholar
17. Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., and Wehtje, G. R. 1994. The control and interaction of weeds in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Rev. Weed Sci. 6:177205.Google Scholar
18. Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Eastin, E. F., Wiley, G. R., Walls, F. R. Jr., and Newell, S. 1994. Imazethapyr and paraquat systems for weed management in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 42:601607.Google Scholar
19. Wilcut, J. W., Richburg, J. S. III, Wiley, G., Walls, F. R. Jr., Jones, S. R., and Iverson, M. J. 1994. Imidazolinone herbicide systems for peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Sci. 21:2328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Wrubel, R. P. and Gressel, J. 1994. Are herbicide mixtures useful for delaying the rapid evolution of resistance? A case study. Weed Technol. 8:635648.Google Scholar
21. York, A. C. and Wilcut, J. W. 1993. Insecticides do not affect cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 41:269280.Google Scholar
22. York, A. C. and Wilcut, J. W. 1995. Potential for Pursuit and Cadre applied to peanuts to carry over to cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:602.Google Scholar