Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:12:49.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Spray Volume and Droplet Size on Herbicide Deposition and Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

David R. Shaw ,
William H. Morris ,
Eric P. Webster  and
David B. Smith
David R. Shaw*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762
William H. Morris
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762
Eric P. Webster
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762
David B. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A field study was conducted in 1992 and 1993 to identify the spray volume and droplet size combinations to optimize control of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) from acifluorfen by maximizing target deposition. In many instances, acifluorfen controlled common cocklebur better using either small (250 µm) or large (450 µm) spray droplets when applied at the lower carrier volumes of either 56 or 112 L/ha. When sprays were applied at 169 L/ha, there was little difference in control between droplet sizes. Deposition of acifluorfen was determined in 1993. Stepwise regression indicated that acifluorfen deposition amount is less important than environmental conditions for common cocklebur control. Relative humidity was the most significant variable for determining common cocklebur control with acifluorfen.

Keywords

Acifluorfen, 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acidcommon cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. # XANSTAcifluorfendepositionefficacyXANSTVMD, volume median diameterWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 321 - 326
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

Adler, I. L., Augenstein, L. L., and Rogerson, T. D. 1978. Gas-liquid chromatographic determination of sodium 5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoate residues on soybeans and foliage, soil, milk, and liver. J. Assoc. Anal. Chem. 61: 1456–1458.Google Scholar
Ambach, R. M. and Ashford, R. 1982. Effects of variations in drop makeup on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate. Weed Sci. 30: 221–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrentine, W. L. and McWhorter, C. G. 1986. Oil carriers for herbicides on johnsongrass—a summary. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:533.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Burnside, O. C. 1983. Effect of spray components on glyphosate toxicity to annual grasses. Weed Sci. 31: 124–130.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Burnside, O. C. 1984. Effect of application factors on postemergence phytotoxicity of fluazifop-butyl, haloxyfop-methyl, and sethoxydim. Weed Sci. 32: 574–583.Google Scholar
Burt, E. C. and Smith, D. B. 1974. Effects of droplet sizes on deposition of ULV spray. J. Econ. Entomol. 67: 751–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantwell, J. R. and Kapusta, G. 1986. Application of bentazon and sethoxydim in soybean oil with rotary atomizers. Agron. J. 78: 478–482.Google Scholar
Carpenter, W. D. and Derting, C. W. 1992. What is the future? In McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. R., eds. Weeds of Cotton: Characterization and Control. Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation. pp. 579–606.Google Scholar
Gebhardt, M. R., Webber, C. L. III, and Bouse, L. F. 1985. Comparison of rotary atomizer to a fan nozzle for herbicide application. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 28: 382–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. M. 1996. Interaction of surfactant dose and spray volume on rimsulfuron activity. Weed Technol. 10: 508–511.Google Scholar
Hardman, D. 1986. New developments in turbo rotary atomization. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39: 535–537.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Influence of application variables on efficacy of postemergence applications of DPX-PE350. Weed Technol. 7: 619–624.Google Scholar
Lake, J. R. 1977. The effect of drop size and velocity on the performance of agricultural sprays. Pestic. Sci. 8: 515–520.Google Scholar
Lake, J. R. and Merchant, J. A. 1983. The use of dimension analysis in a study of drop retention on barley. Pestic. Sci. 14: 638–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. D. and Oliver, L. R. 1982. Efficacy of acifluorfen on broadleaf weeds. Times and methods for application. Weed Sci. 30: 520–526.Google Scholar
McKinlay, K. S., Brandt, S. A., Morse, P., and Ashford, R. 1972. Droplet size and phytotoxicity of herbicides. Weed Sci. 20: 450–452.Google Scholar
McKinlay, K. S., Ashford, R., and Ford, R. J. 1974. Effects of drop size, spray volume, and dosage on paraquat toxicity. Weed Sci. 22: 31–34.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Hanks, J. E. 1993. Effect of spray volume and pressure on postemergence johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control. Weed Technol. 7: 304–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, T. C. and Womac, A. R. 1997. Effect of formulation and nozzle type on droplet size with isopropylamine and trimesium salts of glyphosate. Weed Technol. 11: 639–643.Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D., Pudelko, J., and Adamezewski, K. A. 1975. Influence of climate and additives on bentazon. Weed Sci. 23: 504–507.Google Scholar
Prasad, R. 1987. A study of droplet size and density in relation to efficacy of herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 27:98.Google Scholar
Ritter, R. L. and Coble, H. D. 1981. Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the activity of acifluorfen. Weed Sci. 29: 480–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, R. B. and Maki, R. 1986. The Effect of Drop Size on Spray Deposit Efficiency. St. Joseph, MO: American Society of Agricultural Engineering Paper No. 86-1508.Google Scholar
Spillman, J. J. 1984. Spray impaction, retention, and adhesion: an introduction to basic characteristics. Pestic. Sci. 15: 97–106.Google Scholar
Wauchope, R. D., Sumner, H. R., and Dowler, C. C. 1997. A measurement of the total mass of spray and irrigation mixtures intercepted by small whole plants. Weed Technol. 11: 466–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar