Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T13:45:53.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Herbicides for Pumpkin (Cucurbita spp.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Desmond Brown  and
John Masiunas
Desmond Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
John Masiunas*
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field and greenhouse studies were conducted to evaluate herbicides in pumpkin. Field experiments at three Illinois locations determined weed control and crop injury from clomazone, dimethenamid, ethalfluralin, sulfentrazone, imazamox, RPA 201772, flumiclorac, and halosulfuron applied preemergence. Clomazone plus sulfentrazone controlled redroot pigweed 78 to 99%, ivyleaf morningglory 80 to 97%, common lambsquarters 97%, common purslane 84 to 99%, and velvetleaf 55 to 99%. Imazamox plus clomazone commonly provided more consistent broadleaf weed control than did ethalfluralin plus clomazone. RPA 201772 when used on sandy soils killed the pumpkin. Sulfentrazone initially caused chlorosis and necrosis on pumpkin seedlings when soil organic matter was low (< 1%) or when soil moisture was high. However, plants recovered rapidly, and yields were not affected. In a greenhouse study pumpkin was more tolerant to clomazone plus sulfentrazone than to sulfentrazone.

Keywords

Clomazonedimethenamidethalfluralinflumiclorachalosulfuron, imazamoxRPA 201772 (proposed name, isoxaflutole), 5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulphonyl)-4-trifluoromethyl-benzoyl isoxazolesulfentrazonecommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. #3 CHEALcommon purslane, Portulaca oleracea L. # POROLivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq. # IPOHEredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medicus # ABUTHpumpkin, Cucurbita pepo var. pepo L. ‘Howden’Herbicide combinationsherbicide interactionsDAT, days after treatmentPRE, preemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , June 2002 , pp. 282 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Blackshaw, R. E. 1998. Postemergence weed control in pea (Pisum sativum) with imazamox. Weed Technol. 12: 64–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottenberg, H. and Masiunas, J. B. 1997. Annual weed control in jack-olantern pumpkin. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 54: 40–41.Google Scholar
Buker, R. S., Stall, W. M., and Olson, S. M. 1998. Watermelon tolerance to halosulfuron applied preemergence and postemergence. Proc. Annu. Meet. Fla. State Hortic. Soc. 110: 323–325.Google Scholar
Cohen, R., Blaier, B., and Katan, J. 1992. Chloroacetamide herbicides reduce the incidence of fusarium wilt melons. Crop Prot. 11: 181–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15: 20–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dayan, F. E., Duke, S. O., Reddy, K. N., Hamper, B. C., and Leschinsky, K. L. 1997. Effect of isoxazoles on protoporphyrinogen oxidase and porphyrin physiology. J. Agric. Food Chem. 52: 967–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, B. A. and Weston, L. A. 1996. Influence of cover crop and herbicide treatment on weed control and yield in no-till sweet corn (Zea mays L.) and pumpkin (Cucurbita maxima Duch). Weed Technol. 10: 341–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grey, T. L., Walker, R. H., Wehtje, G. R., and Hancock, H. G. 1997. Sulfentrazone adsorption and mobility as affected by soil and pH. Weed Sci. 45: 733–738.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., Albright, J. W., Anthon, T. M., and Kutil, J. L. 1995. Annual weed control in canning peas study. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52: 16–17.Google Scholar
Hatzios, K. K. and Penner, D. 1985. Interactions of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1: 1–63.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 1998. Stale seedbed weed control in cucumber. Weed Sci. 46: 698–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1998. Sulfentrazone for weed control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 12: 684–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H. K., Duke, M. V., and Duke, S. O. 1993. Cellular localization of protoporphyrinogen oxidizing activities of etiolated barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) leaves. Plant Physiol. 102: 881–889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehnen, L. P., Sherman, T. D., Becerril, J. M., and Duke, S. O. 1990. Tissue and cellular localization of acifluorfen-induced porphyrins in cucumber cotyledons. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 37: 239–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niekamp, J. W., Johnson, W. G., and Smeda, R. J. 1999. Broadleaf weed control with sulfentrazone and flumioxazin in no-tillage soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 13: 233–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peachey, R. E. and Williams, R. D. 1998. Weed management in cucurbits with sulfentrazone, dimethenamid, and direct seeding. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 51: 71–74.Google Scholar
Porter, W. C. 1990. Clomazone for weed control in sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas). Weed Technol. 4: 648–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, K. N. and Locke, M. A. 1998. Sulfentrazone sorption, desorption, and mineralization in soils from two tillage systems. Weed Sci. 46: 494–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. E., Weston, L. A., and Jones, R. T. 1995. Clomazone for weed control in transplanted cole crops (Brassica oleracea). Weed Sci. 43: 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starke, R. J. and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Interaction of glyphosate with chlorimuron, fomesafen, imazethapyr, and sulfentrazone. Weed Sci. 46: 652–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umeda, K. 1998. Weed control in melons using preemergence and postemergence herbicides. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 51:74.Google Scholar
University of Illinois Coop. Ext. 2000. Midwestern Production Guide for Commercial Vegetable Growers. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Coop. Ext. 150 p.Google Scholar
Vencill, W. K., Hatzios, K. K., and Wilson, H. P. 1990. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of 14C-clomazone in soybean (Glycine max) and three Amaranthus spp. J. Plant Growth Regul. 9: 127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vizantinopoulos, S. and Katranis, N. 1998. Weed management of Amaranthus species in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 12: 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werling, V. L. and Buhler, D. D. 1988. Influence of application time clomazone activity in no-till soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 36: 629–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteside, B. and Shoemaker, B. 1998. Pumpkin Weed Control Experiments. St. Charles, IL: University of Illinois Horticulture Research Center. 6 p.Google Scholar
Wicks, G. A., Mahnken, G. W., and Hanson, G. E. 1996. Weed control in ecofallow corn (Zea mays) with clomazone. Weed Technol. 10: 495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, T. R., Fuerst, E. P., Ogg, A. G. Jr., Nandihalli, U. B., and Lee, H. J. 1995. Herbicidal activity of UCC-C4243 and acifluorfen is due to inhibition of protophyrinogen oxidase. Weed Sci. 43: 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar