Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T00:23:44.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Response to Simulated Triclopyr Drift

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles E. Snipes ,
Joe E. Street  and
Thomas C. Mueller
Charles E. Snipes
Affiliation:
Delta Branch Exp. Stn., Stoneville, MS
Joe E. Street
Affiliation:
Delta Branch Exp. Stn., Stoneville, MS
Thomas C. Mueller
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, South. Weed Sci. Lab., Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cotton response to triclopyr was evaluated when it was applied over-the-top at simulated drift rates to pin-head square and early bloom cotton growth stages in 1987 and 1988. The herbicidal effects of triclopyr were most evident after a lag period of 10 to 15 d. Triclopyr at 60 g ai ha-1 applied at pin-head square reduced cotton height in 1987, but not in 1988. Triclopyr applied at pin-head square and early bloom reduced cotton flowering initially, as measured by white bloom counts, in both years. Total blooms were reduced in 1987, but not in 1988. Cotton maturity was delayed by triclopyr application during early bloom, as shown by a decrease in percent open bolls, and a decrease in first pick cotton yields. Cotton yield was lower in plots receiving triclopyr, with the greatest yield reduction caused by a 60 g ha-1 triclopyr application at early bloom.

Keywords

Triclopyr, [(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acidcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘DES 119’Aerial applicationnon-target applicationfiber qualitymaturity
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 493 - 498
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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. 1988. Herbicide Handbook. Weed Science Society of America. Champaign, IL. p. 249–250.Google Scholar
2. Black, H. L., Smith, R. J. Jr., and Khodayari, K. 1986. Triclopyr for weed control in rice. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:69.Google Scholar
3. Bovey, R. W., and Meyer, R. E. 1981. Effects of 2,4,5-T, triclopyr, and 3,6-dichloropicolinic acid on crop seedlings. Weed Sci. 29:256–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Fratesi, K. T., Wray, M. W., and Paroonagian, D. H. 1988, Cotton and soybean tolerance to triclopyr amine, 2,4-D amine, and bromoxynil. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:355.Google Scholar
5. Hurst, H. R. 1982. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to simulated drift from selected herbicides. Weed Sci. 30:311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Jacoby, P. W., Meadors, C. H., and Clark, L. E. 1990. Effects of triclopyr, clopyralid, and picloram on growth and production of cotton. J. Prod. Agric. 3:297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Jotcham, J. R., Smith, D. W., and Stephenson, G. R. 1989. Comparative persistence and mobility of pyridine and phenoxy herbicides in soil. Weed Technol. 3:155–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Kerby, T. A., and Buxton, D. R. 1981. Competition between adjacent fruiting forms in cotton. Agron. J. 73:867–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Mauney, J. R. 1986. Vegetative growth and development of fruiting sites, p. 11–28 in Mauney, J. R. and Stewart, J. McD. (ed.). Cott Physiology. The Cotton Foundation, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
10. Stewart, McD.J. 1986. Integrated events in the flower and fruit, p. 261–300 in Mauney, J. R., and Stewart, J. McD. (ed.). Cotton Physiology. The Cotton Foundation, Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
11. Miller, J. H., Kempen, H. M., Wilkerson, J. A., and Foy, C. L. 1963. Response of cotton to 2,4-D and related herbicides. USDA-ARS Tech. Bull. 1289. U.S. Gov. Print. Off., Washington, DC.Google Scholar
12. Smith, R. J. Jr. 1988. Tolerance of rice (Oryza sativa) to acifluorfen and triclopyr applied alone or in mixtures with propanil. Weed Sci. 36: 379–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Snipes, C. E. and Street, J. E. 1987. Fenoxaprop for postemergence barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control in rice (Oryza sativa) Weed Sci. 35:224–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar