Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:01:22.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Control of Volunteer Glyphosate-Resistant Corn (Zea mays) in Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

William Deen*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
Allan Hamill
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada
Christy Shropshire
Affiliation:
Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON N0P 2C0, Canada
Nader Soltani
Affiliation:
Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON N0P 2C0, Canada
Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON N0P 2C0, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Volunteer corn in soybean can reduce yields, interfere with harvest, and cause unacceptable levels of contamination by its presence in the harvested soybean. In Ontario, soybean frequently follow corn in rotation. The use of glyphosate-resistant corn and soybean varieties has increased dramatically in Ontario. Field studies were conducted at two locations in southwestern Ontario to determine whether quizalofop-p-ethyl, clethodim, and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl can be tank mixed with glyphosate to provide effective control of volunteer glyphosate-resistant corn in glyphosate-resistant soybean. Soybean plots were overseeded with glyphosate-resistant corn and treatments consisting of glyphosate applied alone and tank mixed with full and reduced rates of each graminicide with and without a recommended surfactant. Tank mixing the graminicides and adjuvants with glyphosate did not affect glyphosate weed control or crop tolerance. Use of a recommended adjuvant significantly improved the effectiveness of the graminicides, particularly when reduced rates were applied. Quizalofop-p-ethyl was the most effective graminicide for controlling glyphosate-resistant volunteer corn, followed by clethodim and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl.

Type
Research Article
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

Andersen, R. N. 1976. Control of volunteer corn and giant foxtail in soybeans. Weed Sci. 24:253256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. N. and Geadelmann, J. L. 1982. The effect of parentage on the control of volunteer corn (Zea mays) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 30:127131.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. N., Ford, J. H., and Lueschen, W. E. 1982. Controlling volunteer corn (Zea mays) in soybeans (Glycine max) with diclofop and glyphosate. Weed Sci. 30:132136.Google Scholar
Beckett, T. H. and Stoller, E. W. 1988. Volunteer corn (Zea mays) interference in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 36:159166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, T. H., Stoller, E. W., and Bode, L. E. 1992. Quizalofop and sethoxydim activity as affected by adjuvants and ammonium fertilizers. Weed Sci. 40:1219.Google Scholar
Dale, J. E. 1981. Control of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and volunteer corn (Zea mays) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 29:708711.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1998. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Young, B. G. and Hart, S. E. 1997. Control of volunteer sethoxydim-resistant corn (Zea mays) in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 11:649655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar