Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T03:59:00.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

HOE 075032 for Wild Mustard (Sinapis arvensis) Control in Canola (Brassica rapa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Kenneth J. Kirkland
Kenneth J. Kirkland*
Affiliation:
Agric. Can. Exp. Farm, P.O. Box 10, Scott, Saskatchewan, Canada, S0K 4A0
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The tolerance of canola and wild mustard to postemergence HOE 075032 was investigated in greenhouse and field studies. In the greenhouse, the tolerance of canola to HOE 075032 applied at the 2 Ho 3-leaf stage was approximately twice the tolerance of wild mustard. In the field, HOE 075032 applied at 5 and 10 g ai/ha at the 2 to 3-leaf stage reduced wild mustard plant density and fresh weight by over 95%. Wild mustard contamination in canola seed was reduced from 45 to less than 1%. Application of HOE 075032 at 5 g/ha significantly increased canola yield and fresh weight in each year. Canola yield increases of 25, 139, and 86% were observed for the 5 g/ha treatment in 1991, 1992, and 1993, respectively. HOE 075032 could provide a postemergent alternative to the existing herbicide for wild mustard control in canola.

Keywords

HOE 075032, 3(4,b-dimethoxyprimidin-2-yl)-1-(N-methyl-N-methylsulfonyl-aminosulfonyl)-urea, wild mustard, Sinapis arvensis L. # SINARcanola, Brassica rapaGrowth stageseed yieldweed control
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , September 1995 , pp. 541 - 545
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. Beversdorf, W. D. and Hume, D. J. 1984. OAC Triton spring rapeseed. Can. J. Plant Sci. 64:1007–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Blackshaw, R. E., Anderson, G. W., and Dekker, J. 1987. Interference of Sinapis arvensis L. and Chenopodium album L. in spring rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Weed Res. 27:207–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Blackshaw, R. E. 1989. Control of Cruciferae weeds in canola (Brassica napus) with DPX-A7881. Weed Sci. 37:706–711.Google Scholar
4. Buchanan, F. S., Swanton, C. J., and Gillespie, T. J. 1990. Postemergence control of weeds in winter rapeseed, Brassica napus, with DPX-A7881. Weed Sci. 38:389–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Buchanan, F. S., Gillespie, T. J., and Swanton, C. J. 1990. Environmental factors affecting the herbicidal activity of DPX-A7881. Weed Res. 30:271–278.Google Scholar
6. Kirkland, K. J. 1990. Control of broadleaved weeds in wheat. Res. Rep., Expert Committee on Weeds (Western Canada). 2:477–478.Google Scholar
7. Mulligan, G. A. and Bailey, L. G. 1975. The biology of Canadian weeds. 8. Sinapis arvensis L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:171–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Saskatchewan Agriculture. 1991. Weed control in field and forage crops. 35M-1-91, Regina, SK. 128 p.Google Scholar
9. Swanton, C. J. and Chandler, K. 1989. Control of wild mustard in canola with postemergent herbicides. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:889–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Thomas, A. G. and Wise, R. F. 1986. Weed survey of Saskatchewan cereal and oilseed crops, 1986. Weed Survey Series, Publ. 87-1, Agric. Canada, Regina. 251 p.Google Scholar
11. Thomas, P. 1984. Weeds, insects and diseases of canola. 1001–1064, Canola growers manual. Canola Counc. Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba.Google Scholar
12. Wall, D. A. 1992. Flurtamone for wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) control in canola (Brassica napus and B. campestris). Weed Technol. 6:878–883.Google Scholar