Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T22:23:38.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Application Rate and Timing of AE F130060 03 plus AE F107892 for Control of Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) in Barley (Hordeum vulgare)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Steven R. King  and
Edward S. Hagood Jr.
Steven R. King*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0331
Edward S. Hagood Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0331
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in 2000 and 2001 to evaluate efficacy of AE F130060 03 plus AE F107892 applied postemergence for the control of Italian ryegrass in barley. AE F130060 03 plus AE F107892 controlled Italian ryegrass when applied at two application rates and at three timings. Barley successfully recovered from initial injury caused by early-postemergence (EP) and middle-postemergence (MP) application timings. The late-postemergence (LP) timing resulted in lower yield than the EP or MP application timings. AE F130060 03 plus AE F107892 applied EP controlled Italian ryegrass similar to flufenacet plus metribuzin applied delayed preemergence (DPRE) when rainfall was received. Barley yields were also similar. However, with insufficient rainfall, AE F130060 03 plus AE F107892 provided superior Italian ryegrass control. EP treatments of AE F130060 03 plus AE F107892 after a DPRE application of flufenacet plus metribuzin or chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron completely controlled Italian ryegrass and resulted in excellent yields.

Keywords

AE F107892, diethyl 1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-5-methyl-2-pyrazoline-3, 5-dicarboxylateAE F115008 00, [methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-ureidosulfonyl]benzoate, sodium salt]AE F130060 00, methyl-2-[3-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)ureidosulfonyl]-4-methane-sulfonamidomethylbenzoatechlorsulfuronflufenacetmetribuzinmetsulfuronItalian ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum (Lam.) #3 LOLMUbarley, Hordeum vulgare (L.) # HORVX ‘Nomini’wheat, Triticum aestivum (L.) # TRZAWCrop tolerancediclofop resistanceDAT, days after treatmentDPRE, delayed preemergenceEP, early postemergenceLP, late postemergenceMP, middle postemergencePOST, postemergencePRE, preemergence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , December 2003 , pp. 866 - 870
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

Anonymous. 2002a. Iodosulfuron-Methyl-Sodium Technical Bulletin. Lyon, France: Aventis CropScience S.A. 32 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2002b. Mesomaxx Technical Bulletin. Lyon, France: Aventis CropScience S.A. 28 p.Google Scholar
Bailey, W. A., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 2002. Flufenacet plus metribuzin for Italian ryegrass control in Virginia wheat. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc 56:82.Google Scholar
Brann, D. E., Holshouser, D. L., and Mullins, G. L. 2000. Agronomy Handbook. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Cooperative Extension. Virginia Tech Extension Publication 424-100. Pp. 3–29.Google Scholar
Crooks, H. L. and York, A. C. 2002. Italian ryegrass control in wheat with mesosulfuron-methyl. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 55:22–23.Google Scholar
[CPR] Crop Protection Reference, 18th edition. 2002. New York: C & P. Pp. 770–776.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2003. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds:. Web page: www.weedscience.org. Accessed: March 18, 2003.Google Scholar
King, S. R. and Hagood, E. S. 2002. Italian ryegrass control in small grains in Virginia. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc 56:101.Google Scholar
Morozov, I. V., Hagood, E. S., and Hipkins, P. L. 1999. Response of Virginia collections of diclofop-resistant Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) to preemergence and postemergence herbicides. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 52:40.Google Scholar
Ritter, R. L. and Menbere, H. 2002. Preemergence control of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 16:55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanger, C. E. and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) accessions tolerant to diclofop. Weed Sci. 37:350–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. M. and Coats, G. E. 1996. Identification of sulfometuron-resistant Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) selections. Weed Technol. 10:943–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[VDACS] Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Sciences. 2000. Virginia Agricultural Statistics Bulletin and Resource Directory. No. 75. Richmond, VA: Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Sciences. Pp. 30.Google Scholar
Ware, G. W. 1994. The Pesticide Book. Fresno, CA: Thomson. 370 p.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2000. Weed survey—southern states grass crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 53:247–274.Google Scholar