Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T16:21:53.737Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Broadleaf Weed Control with Sulfentrazone and Flumioxazin in No-Tillage Soybean (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jason W. Niekamp ,
William G. Johnson  and
Reid J. Smeda
Jason W. Niekamp
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
William G. Johnson*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
Reid J. Smeda
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field trials were conducted at two sites in 1996 and 1997 to evaluate weed control and crop response to herbicide programs in no-till soybean that include flumioxazin or sulfentrazone alone and each herbicide tank-mixed with either chlorimuron or imazaquin. A prepackaged mixture of metribuzin plus chlorimuron also was included for comparison. Cool, wet conditions after herbicide application in both years were conducive to soybean injury up to 21% at 3 wk after planting (WAP). Flumioxazin and sulfentrazone alone provided ≥ 89% control of velvetleaf, Pennsylvania smartweed, and common cocklebur. Sulfentrazone alone provided greater control of common waterhemp, common cocklebur, and ivyleaf and pitted morningglories than flumioxazin. Flumioxazin provided greater control of common ragweed than sulfentrazone. The addition of chlorimuron to flumioxazin or sulfentrazone provided greater control of velvetleaf than flumioxazin or sulfentrazone alone. The addition of imazaquin or chlorimuron to flumioxazin provided greater control of common cocklebur than flumioxazin alone. The addition of imazaquin or chlorimuron to sulfentrazone provided greater control of common ragweed than sulfentrazone alone. The addition of chlorimuron or imazaquin to sulfentrazone or flumioxazin provided little or no additional control of pitted morningglory, common waterhemp, or Pennsylvania smartweed. Metribuzin plus chlorimuron provided control of velvetleaf, Pennsylvania smartweed, common ragweed, and common cocklebur that was equal to or better than the control provided by sulfentrazone or flumioxazin plus chlorimuron or imazaquin.

Keywords

ob2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-oneglyphosate, N-(phosphonomethyl)glycinecommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #XANSTcommon ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. # AMBELcommon waterhemp,Amaranthus rudis Sauer # AMATAivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq. # IPOHEPennsylvania smartweed, Polygonum pensylvanicum L. # POLPYpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik. # ABUTHsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Pioneer 9362.’Soybean injurysoybean yieldchlorimuronimazaquinmetribuzinABUTHAMATAAMBELIPOHEIPOLAPOLPYXANSTALS, acetolactate synthaseOM, organic matterPRE, preemergenceWAP, weeks after planting
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 233 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 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.)

Footnotes

1

Contribution from the Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Series 12801.

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous. 1998. Soybean Herbicide Variety Management Guide. Johnston, IA: Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. 4 p.Google Scholar
Bader, B. M., DeFelice, M. S., Dilbeck, J. S., and Holman, C. S. 1994. Herbicide resistant weed populations discovered in Missouri. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:89–90.Google Scholar
Belcher, J. L., Grey, T. L., Walker, R. H., and Wehtje, G. R. 1997. Response of yellow (Cyperus esculentus) and purple (Cyperus rotundus) nutsedge to sulfentrazone. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:74.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Oplinger, E. S. 1990. Influence of tillage systems on annual weed densities and control in solid-seeded soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 38:158–165.Google Scholar
Dayan, F. E., Green, H. M., Weete, J. D., and Hancock, G. 1996. Postemergence activity of sulfentrazone: effects of surfactants and leaf surfaces. Weed Sci. 44:797–803.Google Scholar
Dayan, F. E., Weete, J. D., Duke, S. O., and Hancock, H. G. 1997. Soybean (Glycine max) cultivar differences in response to sulfentrazone. Weed Sci. 45:634–641.Google Scholar
Fawcett, J. A. and Brenneman, L. G. 1997. Common waterhemp management in no till soybeans. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:90.Google Scholar
Hulting, A. G., Wax, L. M., and Simmons, F. W. 1997. Tolerance levels of soybean cultivars to sulfentrazone. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:37.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Kendig, J. A., Massey, R. E., DeFelice, M. S., and Becker, C. D. 1997a. Weed control and economic returns with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in narrow-row soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 11:453–459.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Smeda, R. J., Miller, J. R., Holman, C. S., and Wait, J. D. 1997b. ALS-resistant common sunflower in Missouri. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:132–133.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Dilbeck, J. S., DeFelice, M. S., and Kendig, J. A. 1998a. Weed control with reduced rates of chlorimuron + metribuzin and imazethapyr in no-till narrow-row soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 12:32–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Dilbeck, J. S., DeFelice, M. S., and Kendig, J. A. 1998b. Weed control with reduced rates of imazaquin and imazethapyr in no-till narrow-row soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 46:105–110.Google Scholar
Kendig, A., Fishel, F., and DeFelice, M. 1995. Herbicide Resistance in Weeds. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Cooperative Extension Guide G4907. 8 p.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F. and Kapusta, G. 1997. Weed control in soybean with DE-565 alone and in combination with sulfentrazone. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:138.Google Scholar
Lueschen, W. E. and Hoverstad, T. R. 1991. Imazethapyr for weed control in no-till soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5:845–851.Google Scholar
Niekamp, J. W. 1998. Weed management with sulfentrazone and flumioxazin in no-till soybean. M.S. thesis, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO. 110 p.Google Scholar
Ohmes, G. A., Mueller, T. C., and Hayes, R. M. 1997. Sulfentrazone + chlorimuron PRE and PPI combinations to control common cocklebur and morningglory in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:29.Google Scholar
Owen, M.D.K., Lux, J. F., and Franzenburg, E. L. 1988. Evaluation of V-53482 for weed control in soybeans. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. Res. Rep. 45:154.Google Scholar
Swantek, J. M., Sneller, C. H., and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Evaluation of soybean injury from sulfentrazone and inheritance of tolerance. Weed Sci. 46:271–277.Google Scholar
Wehtje, G. R., Walker, R. H., Grey, T. L., and Hancock, H. G. 1997. Response of purple (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow nutsedges (Cyperus esculentus) to selective placement of sulfentrazone. Weed Sci. 45:382–387.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. 1997. Summary of flumioxazin performance in southeastern peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:7.Google Scholar
Zhaohu, L., Walker, R. H., and Wehtje, G. R. 1997. Laboratory studies for predicting response of soybean cultivars to sulfentrazone. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50:177.Google Scholar