Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:59:23.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cotton (Gossypium Hirsutum) Response to DPX-PE350 Applied Postemergence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

David L. Jordan ,
Robert E. Frans  and
Marilyn R. McClelland
David L. Jordan
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ark., Fayetteville, AR 72701
Robert E. Frans
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ark., Fayetteville, AR 72701
Marilyn R. McClelland
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ark., Fayetteville, AR 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted from 1989 through 1991 to determine the effect of DPX-PE350 applied postemergence over-the-top on cotton yield and fiber quality. DPX-PE350, at rates ranging from 50 to 280 g ae ha−1 applied to cotton in the VC to R6 growth stages, had no adverse effect on seed cotton yield, micronaire, fiber length, fiber length uniformity, or fiber strength. Cotton injury was 10% or less in all experiments.

Keywords

DPX-PE350, 2-chloro-6-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-ylthio)benzoatecotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Stoneville 825’, ‘Deltapine 50’, and ‘Stoneville 453’Cotton tolerancefiber qualitymicronairefiber lengthfiber length uniformityfiber strength
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 159 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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. Bryson, C. T., Snipes, C. E., and Shaw, D. R. 1991. Effects of DPX-PE350 on weed control and cotton growth and yield. p. 957 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1991. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
2. Byrd, J. D. Jr. and York, A. C. 1987. Interaction of fluometuron and MSMA with sethoxydim and fluazifop. Weed Sci. 5:270–276.Google Scholar
3. Carey, V. F., Frans, R. E., McClelland, M. R., and Jordan, D. L. 1991. Cotton response and weed control with nicosulfuron (DPX-V9360). Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:79.Google Scholar
4. Crawford, S. H., Vidrine, P. R., and Collins, R. K., 1989. Preliminary evaluation of DPX-T9595 and KIH-8921 for weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:106.Google Scholar
5. Eisner, J. E., Smith, C. W., and Owens, D. F. 1979. Uniform growth stage description in upland cotton. Crop Sci. 19:361–363.Google Scholar
6. Frans, R. E., Jordan, D. L., and McClelland, M. R. 1990. Morningglory management in Arkansas cotton. p. 364 in Brown, J. M. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod.–Res. Conf., Las Vegas, NV. Jan. 9–14, 1990. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
7. Frans, R. E., Morris, G., and Appleberry, M. 1971. Effect of topical herbicide applications on growth and yield of cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:92.Google Scholar
8. Guthrie, D. S. and York, A. C. 1989. Cotton development and yield following fluometuron postemergence applied. Weed Technol. 3: 501–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Henniger, C. G., Keeling, J. W., and Abernathy, J. R. 1992. Influence of DPX-PE350 application rate and method on cotton yield and fiber quality. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:28.Google Scholar
10. Hogue, C. W. 1971. Directed versus topical application of herbicide combinations in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:93–98.Google Scholar
11. Holshouser, D. L. and Chandler, J. M. 1991. Susceptibility of eight morningglory species to DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:78.Google Scholar
12. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1992. Summary of DPX-PE350 cotton response trials in Arkansas. p. 1314 in Herber, D. A. and Richter, D. J., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., Nashville, TN. Jan. 7–10, 1992. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
13. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Insecticides do not modify cotton response to DPX-PE350. Weed Technol. 6:(in press).Google Scholar
14. McWhorter, C. G. and Bryson, C. T. 1992. Herbicide use trends in cotton. p. 233–294 in McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. R., eds. Weeds of cotton: characterization and control. Cotton Foundation. Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
15. Mitchell, W. H. 1991. Cotton weed control with DPX-PE350 “A southern perspective.” p. 958 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1991. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
16. Oakley, S. R., Frans, R. E., and Terhune, M. E. 1983. Studies document yield loss from MSMA applied over-the-top. Ark. Farm Res. 32:(2)10.Google Scholar
17. Patterson, M. G., Monks, C. D., Rayburn, T., and Wehtje, G. 1990. Effects of chlorimuron applied postemergence to cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 4:314–317.Google Scholar
18. Perkins, H. H. Jr., Ethridge, D. E., and Bragg, C. K. 1984. Fiber. p. 437–509 in Kohel, R. J. and Lewis, C. F., eds. Cotton. Agron. Monograph 24. Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
19. Sims, B. D., Guethle, D. R., and House, J. L. 1991. Effects of over-the-top use of Cotoran and Probe on cotton yield and lint quality. p. 965 in Herber, D. J. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–13, 1991. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
20. Sims, B. D., Guethle, D. R., House, J. L., and Muyonga, C. K. 1991. Effects of DPX-PE350 on weed control, cotton yield, and lint quality. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:75.Google Scholar
21. Wells, R. G., Guy, C. B., and Beaty, J. W. 1991. Cotton response to DPX-PE350, fluometuron, and MSMA. Abstr. Ark. Agric. Pest. Assoc. 30:23.Google Scholar