Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:30:29.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Residual Herbicides Used in the Last POST-Directed Application on Weed Control and Cotton Yield in Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Resistant Cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Clifford H. Koger ,
Andrew J. Price ,
Joel C. Faircloth ,
John W. Wilcut  and
Steve P. Nichols
Clifford H. Koger*
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, Southern Weed Science Research Unit, 141 Experiment Station Road, P.O. Box 350, Stoneville, MS 38776
Andrew J. Price
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, National Soil Dynamics Laboratory, 411 Donahue Drive, Auburn, AL 36832
Joel C. Faircloth
Affiliation:
Soil, and Environmental Sciences, Tidewater AREC, Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg, VA 24061
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Crop Science Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Steve P. Nichols
Affiliation:
Fiber Max Cotton, Lubbock, TX 79424
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted to evaluate weed control and cotton response to glyphosate or glufosinate applied alone or with residual herbicides applied in the last POST-directed application (LAYBY) in glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant cotton. Glyphosate (0.86 kg ae/ha) or glufosinate (0.47 kg ai/ha) were applied alone over the top of glyphosate- or glufosinate-resistant cotton early POST (EPOST) followed by (fb) late POST (LPOST) fb one of the herbicides applied either alone or with a residual herbicide at LAYBY. Glyphosate- and glufosinate-based treatments were applied only to glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant cotton, respectively. Residual herbicides evaluated included prometryn (1.12 kg ai/ha), fluometuron (1.12 kg ai/ha), diuron (1.12 kg ai/ha), oxyfluorfen (1.12 kg ai/ha), pendimethalin (1.0 kg ai/ha), prometryn + trifloxysulfuron (1.33 kg ai/ha + 12 g ai/ha), or linuron + diuron (0.56 + 0.56 kg ai/ha). Glyphosate-and glufosinate-based weed management systems with and without residual LAYBY herbicides resulted in little to no injury to cotton. Three applications of glyphosate or glufosinate alone provided better full-season control of most species when compared to two applications of either herbicide. The addition of a residual herbicide to glyphosate or glufosinate at LAYBY did not improve cotton yields, but did improve overall control of barnyardgrass and yellow nutsedge and reduced weed dry biomass present at time of cotton harvest when compared to three applications of glyphosate or glufosinate alone.

Keywords

Diuronfluometuronglufosinateglyphosatelinuronoxyfluorfenpendimethalinprometryntrifloxysulfuronbarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. ECHCGyellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L. CYPEScotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘DPL 555BG/RR’, ‘Fibermax 958LL, 966LL, and 989RR’CGA-362622crop injuryglyphosate-resistant cottonLiberty Link® cottonresidual weed controlRoundup Ready® cottontransgenic crops
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , June 2007 , pp. 378 - 383
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: Assistant Research Professor, Delta Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 197, Stoneville, MS 38776.

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous, 1995. Weed survey—southern states, broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48: 290–305.Google Scholar
Anonymous, 2001. Weed survey—southern states, broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54: 244–259.Google Scholar
Ashford, D. L. and Reeves, D. W. 2003. Use of a mechanical roller–crimper as an alternative kill method for cover crops. Amer. J. Altern. Agric. 18: 37–45.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D., Bailey, W. A., Scott, G. H., and Wilcut, J. W. 2002. Economic assessment of weed management for transgenic and nontransgenic cotton in tilled and nontilled systems. Weed Sci. 50: 512–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Askew, S. D., Shaw, D. R., and Arnold, J. C. 1997. Weed control in Liberty–Link soybean. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 50: 59.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 1999. Cost and weed management with herbicide programs in glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 13: 308–313.Google Scholar
Bryson, C. T. 1990. Intereference and critical time of removal of hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata) in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 4: 833–837.Google Scholar
[CDMS] Crop Data Management Systems, Inc 2007. NCFAP Cotton Case Study Summaries. http://www.cdms.net/manuf/acproducts.asp. Accessed: September 16, 2005.Google Scholar
Coetzer, E., Al-Khatib, K., and Peterson, D. E. 2002. Glufosinate efficacy on Amaranthus species in glufosinate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 16: 326–331.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. L., Askew, S. D., Thomas, W. E., and Wilcut, J. W. 2004. Weed efficacy evaluations for bromoxynil, glufosinate, glyphosate, pyrithiobac, and sulfosate. Weed Technol. 18: 443–453.Google Scholar
Faircloth, W. H., Patterson, M. G., Monks, C. D., and Goodman, W. R. 2001. Weed management programs for glyphosate-tolerant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L). Weed Technol. 15: 544–551.Google Scholar
Fischer, D. W. and Harvey, R. G. 2002. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) and annual weed control in glyphosate-resistant field corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 16: 482–487.Google Scholar
Frans, R., Talbert, R., Marx, D., and Crowley, H. 1986. Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. 37–38. In Camper, N.D., ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. 3rd ed. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society.Google Scholar
Franz, J. E., Mao, M. K., and Sikorski, J. A. 1997. Glyphosate: A Unique Global Herbicide. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. 617–642. ACS Monograph No. 189.Google Scholar
Gianessi, L. 2005. Economic and herbicide use impacts of glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Manag. Sci. 61: 241–245.Google Scholar
Hydrick, D. E. and Shaw, D. R. 1995. Non-selective and selective herbicide combinations in stale seedbed soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 9: 158–165.Google Scholar
Jones, C. A., Chandler, J. M., Morrison, J. E. Jr., Senseman, S. A., and Tingle, C. H. 2001. Glufosinate combinations and row spacing for weed control in glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 15: 141–147.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 42: 568–573.Google Scholar
Koger, C. H., Price, A. J., and Reddy, K. N. 2005. Weed control and cotton response to combinations of glyphosate and trifloxysulfuron. Weed Technol. 19: 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leblanc, M. L., Cloutier, D. C., Legere, A., Lemieux, C., Assemat, L., Benoit, D. L., and Hamel, C. 2002. Effect of the presence or absence of corn on common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) and barnyardgrass [Echinochla crus-galli (L.) Beauv.] emergence. Weed Technol. 16: 638–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, M. S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75: 153–155.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. A., Renner, K. A., and Penner, D. 2002. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) control and tuber yield with glyphosate and glufosinate. Weed Technol. 16: 360–365.Google Scholar
Nishimoto, R. K. and McCarty, L. B. 1997. Fluctuating temperature and light influence seed germination of goosegrass (Eleusine indica). Weed Sci. 45: 426–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. L., Shaw, D. R., and Snipes, C. E. 2002. Influence of row spacing and residual herbicides on weed control in glufosinate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 16: 319–325.Google Scholar
Rajcan, I., Chandler, K. J., and Swanton, C. J. 2004. Red–far-red ratio of reflected light: a hypothesis of why early-season weed control is important in corn. Weed Sci. 52: 774–778.Google Scholar
SAS 1998. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Release 7.00. 1028.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J., Weaver, S., Cowan, P., van Acker, R., Deen, W., and Shretstha, A. 1999. Weed thresholds: theory and applicability J. Crop Prod. 2: 9–29.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. and Askew, S. D. 1999. Chemical weed control. 627–661. In Ruberson, J.R., ed. Handbook of Pest Management. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar