Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T18:17:57.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential Tolerance of Corn (Zea mays) Inbreds to Four Sulfonylurea Herbicides and Bentazon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jerry M. Green
Jerry M. Green*
Affiliation:
DuPont Agricultural Products, Stine-Haskell Research Center Building 210, P.O. Box 30, Newark, DE 19714, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nine corn inbreds were selected from a test on 250 inbreds based on distinctly different response to herbicides. These inbreds showed up to 50,000-fold differences, which varied by inbred and herbicide. Only the inbred GA209 was sensitive to bentazon and the four sulfonylurea herbicides. GA209 and B90 were the most sensitive inbreds to the sulfonylurea herbicides. F2R was generally the most tolerant inbred. The pattern of herbicide tolerance varied greatly. For example, the relative tolerance of F2 to thifensulfuron was 12-fold more than to rimsulfuron while Mo17 was 56-fold more tolerant to rimsulfuron than thifensulfuron. F2 was fivefold more tolerant of chlorsulfuron than chlorimuron, whereas B80 was 100-fold the reverse. These inbreds provide a small subset of varieties to evaluate the large and inherent differences in herbicide tolerance of corn.

Keywords

Bentazon, 3-(1-methylethyl)-(1H)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-4-(3H)-one 2,2-dioxidechlorimuron, 2-[[[[(4-chloro-6-methoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidchlorsulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidethifensulfuron, 3-[[[[4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-2-thiophenecarboxylic acidrimsulfuron, N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]-3-(ethylsulfonyl)-2-pyridinesulfonamidecorn, Zea mays L.ALSchlorimuronchlorsulfuronthifensulfuronrimsulfuroncrop safetymaizemetabolismresistancevarieties
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 1998 , pp. 474 - 477
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Anderson, R. N. 1964. Differential response of corn inbreds to simazine and atrazine. Weeds 12:60–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous. 1989. How a Corn Plant Develops. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Cooperative Extension Service Spec. Rep. 48. 21 p.Google Scholar
Barrett, M., Polge, N., Baerg, R., Bradshaw, L., and Poneleit, C. 1997. Role of cytochrome P-450S in herbicide metabolism and selectivity and multiple herbicide metabolizing cytochrome P-450 activities in maize. In Hatzios, K. K., ed. Regulation of Enzymatic Systems Detoxifying Xenobiotics in Plants. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. pp. 35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, G., Kishore, G., Padgette, S., et al. 1992. Inhibitors of amino acid biosynthesis: strategies for imparting glyphosate tolerance to crop plants. In Singh, B. K., Flores, H. E., and Shannon, J. C., eds. Biosynthesis and Molecular Recognition of Amino Acids in Plants. Am. Soc. Plant Physiol. Rockville, MD: Springer-Verlag. pp. 47–81.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Rosow, K. M., Geadelmann, J. L., and Openshaw, S. J. 1989. Differential tolerance of corn genotypes to DPX- M6316. 37:651–657 Google Scholar
Fleming, A. A., Banks, P. A., and Legg, J. G. 1988. Differential response of maize inbreds to bentazon and other herbicides. Can. J. Plant Sci. 68:501–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forlani, G. and Racchi, M. L. 1995. Glyphosate tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.). 1. Differential response among inbred lines. Euphytica 82:157–164.Google Scholar
Francis, T. R. and Hamill, A. S. 1980. Inheritance of maize seedling tolerance to alachlor. Can. J. Plant Sci. 60:1045–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geadelmann, J. L. and Anderson, R. N. 1977. Inheritance of tolerance to alachlor to HOE 23408 in corn. Crop Sci. 17:601–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. M. and Green, J. H. 1993. Surfactant structure and concentration strongly affect rimsulfuron activity. Weed Technol. 7:633–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. M. and Ulrich, J. F. 1993. Response of Corn (Zea mays L.) inbreds and hybrids to sulfonylurea herbicide. Weed Sci. 41:508–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. M. and Ulrich, J. F. 1994. Response of maize (Zea mays) inbreds and hybrids to rimsulfuron. Pestic. Sci. 40:187–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, M. S. 1993. Inheritance of susceptibility to nicosulfuron herbicide in maize. J. Heredity 84:216–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landi, P., Vicari, A., and Catizone, P. 1989. Response of maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines and hybrids to chlorsulfuron. Weed Res. 29:265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGonigle, B., Lau, S.-M.C., and O'Keefe, D. P. 1997. Endogenous reactions and substrate specificity of herbicide metabolizing enzymes. In Hatzios, K. K., ed. Regulation of Enzymatic Systems Detoxifying Xenobiotics in Plants. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. pp. 9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mucha Hirata, C., Brown, H. M., Green, J. M., and Casini, M. S. 1997. Metabolism of sulfonylurea herbicides in tolerant and sensitive corn inbreds. Plant Physiology 114(Suppl.): 747.Google Scholar
Newhouse, K. E., Singh, B., and Stidham, M. 1991. Mutations in corn (Zea mays L.) conferring resistance to imidazoline herbicides. Theor. Appl. Genet. 83:65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newhouse, K. E., Wang, T., and Anderson, P. C. 1991. Imidazoline- resistant crops. In Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 139–150.Google ScholarPubMed
Polge, N. D. and Barrett, M. 1995. Characterization of cytochrome P450-mediated chlorimuron ethyl hydroxylation in maize microsomes. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 53:193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasche, E., Cremer, J., Donn, G., and Zink, J. 1995. The development of glufosinate ammonium tolerant crops intro the market. In Proc. Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. London: British Crop Protection Council. pp. 791–800.Google Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log– logistic analysis of herbicide dose–response relationships. Weed Technol. 9:218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streibig, J. C., Rudemo, M., and Jensen, J. E. 1993. Dose–response curves and statistical models. In Streibig, J. C. and Kudsk, P., eds. Herbicide Bioassays. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 30–55.Google Scholar