Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:42:49.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Registered Herbicides for Cheat (Bromus secalinus) Control in Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jeffrey A. Koscelny  and
Thomas F. Peeper
Jeffrey A. Koscelny
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Thomas F. Peeper
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Seven field experiments were conducted in Oklahoma to compare efficacy and wheat response to currently registered cheat suppression or control herbicide treatments. Chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron premix (5:1 w/w) at 26 g ai/ha applied PRE controlled cheat 20 to 61%, increased wheat grain yields at two of seven locations, and decreased dockage due to cheat at five of seven locations. Chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron at 21 g/ha tank-mixed with metribuzin at 210 g/ha, applied early fall POST, controlled cheat 36 to 98% and increased wheat yield at four of seven locations. Metribuzin applied POST in the fall at 420 g/ha controlled cheat 56 to 98% and increased wheat yields at five of seven locations. Both POST treatments decreased dockage at all locations.

Keywords

Chlorsulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidemetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onemetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidcheat, Bromus secalinus L. # BROSEwheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Karl,’ ‘2180.’ChlorsulfuronmetribuzinmetsulfuronBROSE
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 1997 , pp. 30 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by the 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

Driver, J. E., Peeper, T. F., and Koscelny, J. A. 1993. Cheat (Bromus secalinus) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:851–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peek, D. C., and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Phytotoxicity, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin and its ethylthio analog as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 37:419–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peter, C. J., and Weber, J. B. 1985. Adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of metribuzin as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:868–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratliff, R. L., and Peeper, T. F. 1987. Bromus control in winter wheat (Triticum. aestivum) with ethylthio analog of metribuzin. Weed Technol. 1:235–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runyan, T. J., McNeil, W. K., and Peeper, T. F. 1982. Differential tolerance of wheal (Triticum aestivum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:94–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute. 1985. SAS User's Guide. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC, 5:864–871.Google Scholar
Schroeder, J., Banks, P. A., and Nichols, R. L. 1988. Soft red winter wheal cultivar response to metribuzin. Weed Sci. 34:66–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahlman, P. W., and Abd El-Hamid, M. 1994. Sulfonylurea herbicides suppress downy brome (Bromus tectorum) in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 8:812–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar