Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T04:21:31.855Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control of Smellmelon (Cucumis melo) in Soybean with Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

W. James Grichar
W. James Grichar*
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, 3507 Highway 59E, Beeville, TX 78102
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted during the 2004 and 2005 growing seasons to evaluate the effects of various herbicides on smellmelon control and soybean yield response. Pendimethalin applied pre-emergence (PRE) alone controlled smellmelon no better than 70%, whereas pendimethalin plus imazethapyr, flumioxazin, or cloransulam applied PRE provided almost complete smellmelon control (99%). Pendimethalin applied PRE followed by acifluorfen applied early postemergence (EPOST) provided similar control. Glyphosate alone applied late postemergence (LPOST) provided complete control (100%), and pendimethalin followed by glyphosate applied EPOST controlled smellmelon at least 95%. Most herbicides increased soybean yield over the nontreated check.

Keywords

AcifluorfencloransulamflumioxazinglyphosateimazethapyrpendimethalinsmellmelonCucumis melo L. var. Dudaim Naud. CUMMEsoybean, ‘HBK 5123’crop tolerancecrop yield
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , September 2007 , pp. 777 - 779
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

Burnside, O. C. 1992. Rationale for developing herbicide-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 6:621–625.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. M. and Griffin, J. L. Benefits of soil-applied herbicides in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 2002. 16:514–547.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. M. and Griffin, J. L. 2003. Glyphosate and broadleaf herbicide mixtures for soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 17:21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Besler, B. A., and Brewer, K. D. 2001. Citronmelon (Citrullus lanatus var. citroides) control in Texas peanut (Arachis hypogaea) using postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 15:481–484.Google Scholar
Livingston, S. D. 2006. Over-the-top and lay-by herbicide treatments to control silverleaf nightshade, desert horse purslane, and Texas smellmelon in RR®, RR-Flex®, and Liberty Link® transgenic cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 59:225.Google Scholar
Livingston, S. D., Janak, J. D., and Matthies, A. Z. Jr. 2004. Early and late-season suppression and control of Texas smellmelon in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 57:27.Google Scholar
Scroggs, D. M., Miller, D. K., Griffin, J. L., Vidrine, P. R., Stewart, A. M., and Mathews, M. S. 2006. Weed management with glyphosate and complimentary herbicides in Roundup Ready® Flex cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 59:84.Google Scholar
[SWSS] Southern Weed Science Society — Weed Identification Guide 1999. Champaign, IL Proceedings of the Southern Weed Sciences Society. Pages 588.Google Scholar
Thompson, A. M., Rosales-Robles, E., Chandler, J. M., Nester, P. R., and Tingle, C. H. 2005. Crop tolerance and weed management systems in imidazolinone-tolerant corn (Zea mays L.). Weed Technol. 19:1037–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tingle, C. H. and Chandler, J. M. 2004. The effect of herbicides and crop rotations on weed control in glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 18:940–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tingle, C. H., Chandler, J. M., Jones, C. A., and Steele, G. L. 2000. Competition and control of smellmelon (Cucumis melo L. var dudaim Naud.) in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:207–208.Google Scholar
Vidrine, P. R., Griffin, J. L., Miller, D. K., and Caylor, J. P. 1999. Herbicide comparisons in Roundup Ready® systems in soybean. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:223.Google Scholar