Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T15:13:22.374Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicide-Resistant Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) Response to Soil Residues of ALS-Inhibiting Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kirk A. Howatt  and
Gregory J. Endres
Kirk A. Howatt*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5051
Gregory J. Endres
Affiliation:
Carrington Research/Extension Center, Box 219, Carrington, ND 58421
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sunflower lines developed to resist some acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides are susceptible to foliar applications of other ALS-inhibiting herbicides. Research was conducted to determine whether imidazolinone (IMI)- or sulfonylurea (SU)-resistant sunflower was affected by soil residues of imazethapyr, metsulfuron, or flucarbazone. In greenhouse experiments, IMI-sunflower displayed 60 and 66% injury 4 wk after emergence with incorporated soil residues of metsulfuron at 4.2 g ai/ha and flucarbazone at 30 g ai/ha, respectively, but response to imazethapyr at 35 g ai/ ha was not different from that of nontreated plants. Metsulfuron at 4.2 g/ha and flucarbazone at 30 g/ha resulted in 56 and 72% less biomass accumulation, respectively, of IMI-sunflower compared with that of nontreated plants. Incorporated soil residues of imazethapyr, metsulfuron, or flucarbazone did not cause significant injury or result in shorter plants or less biomass accumulation of SU-sunflower than nontreated sunflower in greenhouse experiments. In field experiments, nonincorporated residues of imazethapyr, metsulfuron, or flucarbazone did not induce visible chlorosis or significant stunting of IMI- or SU-sunflower compared with nontreated sunflower. Herbicide-resistant sunflower growing in soil with nonincorporated residues of imazethapyr, metsulfuron, or flucarbazone produced seed yield similar to sunflower growing in sulfentrazone-treated soil or nontreated soil.

Keywords

Flucarbazoneimazethapyrmetsulfuronsulfentrazonesunflower, Helianthus annuus L. ‘DeKalb DKF 29-90’, ‘Mycogen 81359’, ‘Mycogen 8N 429 CL’, ‘Pioneer 01 RL 0004’, ‘Pioneer 03 BM 0024’Crop injurycrop rotation intervalherbicide injuryplant-back restrictionWAEweeks after emergence
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , March 2006 , pp. 67 - 73
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

Al-Khatib, K., Baumgartner, J. R., Peterson, D. E., and Currie, R. S. 1998. Imazethapyr resistance in common sunflower (Helianthus annuus). Weed Sci. 46:403–407.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K. and Miller, J. F. 2000. Registration of four genetic stocks of sunflower to imidazolinone herbicides. Crop Sci. 40:869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Prados, J. L., Hernandez-Sevillano, E., Llanos, S., Villarroya, M., and Garcia-Baudin, J. M. 2002. Effects of sulfosulfuron soil residues on barley (Hordeum vulgare), sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and common vetch (Vicia sativa). Crop Prot. 21:1061–1066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aly, R., Goldwasser, Y., Eizenberg, H., Hershenhorn, J., Golan, S., and Kleifeld, Y. 2001. Broomrape (Orobanche cumana) control in sunflower (Helianthus annuus) with imazapic. Weed Technol. 15:306–309.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2001. Label: Ally XP. Web page: http://www.cdms.net/ldat/ld5HS000.pdf. Accessed: April 25, 2005.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2004. Label: Pursuit herbicide. Web page: http://www.cdms.net/ldat/ld01S003.pdf. Accessed: April 25, 2005.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2005. Label: Everest. Web page: http://www.cdms.net/ldat/ld48U007.pdf. Accessed: April 25, 2005.Google Scholar
Bauer-Weston, B., Schultz, A., Oelck, M. M., and Deschamps, R. J. A. 1996. Determination of phosphinothricin acetyltransferase in genetically transformed canola seed by a two-antibody sandwich enzyme immunoassay. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 14:134–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, J. R., Al-Katib, K., and Currie, R. S. 1999a. Cross-resistance of imazethapyr-resistant common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to selected imidazolinone, sulfonylurea, and triazolopyrimidine herbicides. Weed Technol. 13:489–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, J. R., Al-Khatib, K., and Currie, R. S. 1999b. Survey of common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) resistance to imazethapyr and chlorimuron in Northeast Kansas. Weed Technol. 13:510–514.Google Scholar
Bayer, , No date. Technical data bulletin, flucarbazone-sodium. Bayer circular 234-041. 2 p.Google Scholar
Bedmar, F. 1997. Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) control in sunflower (Helianthus annuus), soybean (Glycine max), and potato (Solanum tuberosum) with postemergence graminicides. Weed Technol. 11:683–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Kanashiro, D., Moloney, M. M., and Crosby, W. L. 1994. Growth, yield and quality of canola expressing resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibiting herbicides. Can. J. Plant Sci. 74:745–751.Google Scholar
Blair-Kerth, L. K., Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., Gannaway, J. R., Oliver, M. J., and Quisenberry, J. E. 2001. Tolerance of transformed cotton to glufosinate. Weed Sci. 49:375–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. W., Harker, K. N., O'Donnovan, J. T., Baig, M. N., and Kidnie, M. J. 2002. Glyphosate timing and tillage effects on glyphosate-resistant canola (Brassica napus). Weed Technol. 16:124–130.Google Scholar
Currie, R. S., Kwon, C. S., and Penner, D. 1995. Magnitude of imazethapyr resistance of corn (Zea mays) hybrids with altered acetolactate synthase. Weed Sci. 43:578–582.Google Scholar
Geier, P. W. and Stahlman, P. W. 2001. Grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and sunflower (Helianthus annuus) response to MKH 6561 and MON 37500 residues in soil. Weed Technol. 15:767–770.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gbur, E. E. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:421–428.Google Scholar
Howatt, K. A., Roach, R. F., Johnson, K. R., Zollinger, R. K., Endres, G. J., and Hendrickson, P. E. 2003. ALS-resistant sunflower response to foliar application and soil residues of ALS-inhibiting herbicides. West. Soc. Weed Sci. Proc. 56:92.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Bradley, P. R., Hart, S. E., Buesinger, M. L., and Massey, R. E. 2000. Efficacy and economics of weed management in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 14:57–65.Google Scholar
Karickhoff, S. W. 1981. Semi-empirical estimation of sorption of hydrophobic pollutants on natural sediments and soils. Chemosphere 10:833–846.Google Scholar
Miller, J. F. and Al-Khatib, K. 2002. Registration of imidazolinone herbicide-resistant sunflower maintainer (HA 425) and fertility restorer (RHA 426 and RHA 427) germplasms. Crop Sci. 42:988–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullner, H., Eckes, P., and Donn, G. 1993. Engineering crop resistance to the naturally occurring glutamine synthetase inhibitor phosphinothricin. ACS Symp. Ser. Am. Chem. Soc. 524:38–47.Google Scholar
Padgette, S. R., Kolacz, K. H., and Delannay, X. et al. 1995. Development, identification, and characterization of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line. Crop Sci. 35:1451–1461.Google Scholar
Peel, M. D. and Endres, G. 1997. Replanting after early season crop injury. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University Extension Service. Circular A-934. 4 p.Google Scholar
Rajasekaran, K., Grula, J. W., Hudspeth, R. L., Pofelis, S., and Anderson, D. M. 1996. Herbicide-resistant Acala and Coker cottons transformed with a native gene encoding mutant forms of acetohydroxyacid synthase. Mol. Breed 2:307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandbakken, J., Dufault, M., and Sayler, T. 2003. 2003 U. S. sunflower crop quality report. Bismarck, ND: National Sunflower Association. 12 p.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L. 2000. The impact of glyphosate-tolerant crops on the use of other herbicides and on resistance management. Pest Manag. Sci. 56:320–326.3.0.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vencill, W. K. ed. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th ed. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America. 493 p.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1997. Effect of crop growth stage on tolerance to low doses of thifensulfuron:tribenuron. Weed Sci. 45:538–545.Google Scholar
[WIPO] World Intellectual Property Organization. 2001. Sulfonylurea-tolerant sunflower plants. Web page: http://www.wipo.int/ipdl/en/search/pct/search-adv.jsp. Accessed: May 3, 2005.Google Scholar
Zollinger, R. K., Ries, J. L., and Hammond, J. J. 2003. Survey of weeds in North Dakota—2000. Extension Report No. 83. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University Extension Service. 97 p.Google Scholar