Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T23:45:18.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of time of day on dicamba and glyphosate efficacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2021

Jacob R. Kalina Open the ORCID record for Jacob R. Kalina [Opens in a new window] ,
Chris B. Corkern ,
Donn G. Shilling Open the ORCID record for Donn G. Shilling [Opens in a new window] ,
Nicholas T. Basinger Open the ORCID record for Nicholas T. Basinger [Opens in a new window]  and
Timothy L. Grey Open the ORCID record for Timothy L. Grey [Opens in a new window]
Jacob R. Kalina
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Tifton, GA, USA
Chris B. Corkern
Affiliation:
Technology Development Representative, Bayer Crop Sciences, Alapaha, GA, USA
Donn G. Shilling
Affiliation:
Professor, University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Athens, GA, USA
Nicholas T. Basinger*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Athens, GA, USA
Timothy L. Grey
Affiliation:
Professor, University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Tifton, GA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Nicholas T. Basinger, University of Georgia, 4103 Miller Plant Sciences, 120 Carleton Street, Athens, GA 30602. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Renewed interest in studying auxin herbicides (WSSA Group 4) is increasing as a result of the release of genetically engineered crop varieties that are tolerant to preemergence and postemergence applications of specific formulations of dicamba. Auxin-resistant crops were developed in response to the development of weed species resistant to glyphosate and other herbicides. Research was conducted at multiple field locations in Georgia in 2018 and 2019 to examine weed control when postemergence herbicides were applied to dicamba- and glyphosate-resistant cotton at eight different points in time over a 24-h period. Applications were made at 1 h prior to sunrise all the way up to midnight during the same day to examine the effect of herbicide application timing on broadleaf weed control. Glyphosate, dicamba, and glyphosate plus dicamba were applied at each timing. Visual ratings of weed control were scored at 7, 14, 21, and 28 d after treatment (DAT). Weed control was affected by herbicide application timing. Midnight applications resulted in the lowest levels of control. Sicklepod, pitted morningglory, and prickly sida control was 49%, 38%, and 41%, respectively. Greatest control of all three species (up to 99%) occurred from the noon to 1 h prior to sunset application timings. Orthogonal contrasts of timing of application indicated that weed control was improved with day > night and pre-dawn > midnight.

Keywords

Auxindicambaglyphosatepitted morninggloryIpomoea lacunosa L.prickly sidaSida spinosa L.sicklepodSenna obtusifolia L.cottonGossypium hirsutum L.Herbicide-resistant cropsauxinic herbicidegenetically engineeredcircadian rhythm
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , February 2022 , pp. 21 - 27
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: William Johnson, Purdue University

References

Abdi, H, Williams, LJ (2010) Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) test. Pages 1–5 in Salkind, NJ, ed, Encyclopedia of Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Google Scholar
Amrhein, N, Deus, B, Gehrke, P, Steinrücken, HC (1980) The site of the inhibition of the shikimate pathway by glyphosate: II. Interference of glyphosate with chorismate formation in vivo and in vitro. Plant Physiol 66:830–834 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anonymous (2020) Xtendimax with Vaporgrip Technology product label. Bayer Crop Science publication No. US62211421C. St. Louis MO: Bayer Crop Science. 11p.Google Scholar
Bauerle, MJ, Griffin, JL, Alford, JL, Curry, AB, Kenty, MM (2015). Field evaluation of auxin herbicide volatility using cotton and tomato as bioassay crops. Weed Technol 29:185–197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckie, HJ, Flower, KC, Ashworth, MB (2020) Farming without glyphosate?. Plants 9:96 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowes, J, Crofts, AR, Arntzen, CJ (1980) Redox reactions on the reducing side of photosystem II in chloroplasts with altered herbicide binding properties. Arch Biochem Biophys 200:303–308 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, GA, Burns, ER (1970) Influence of weed competition on cotton. Weed Sci 18:149–154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budd, CM, Soltani, N, Robinson, DE, Hooker, DC, Miller, RT, Sikkema, PH (2017) Efficacy of saflufenacil for control of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) as affected by height, density, and time of day. Weed Sci 65:275–284 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, OW, Prostko, EP (2019) Time of day effects on peanut herbicide efficacy. Peanut Sci 46:174–181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, FY, Vanden Born, WH (1971) Dicamba uptake, translocation, metabolism and selectivity. Weed Sci 19:113–117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, SA, Grey, TL, Vencill, WK, Kichler, JM, Webster, TM, Brown, SM, York, SC, Davis, JW, Hanna, WW (2006) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Sci 54:620–626 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalazen, G, Merotto, A Jr (2016) Physiological and genetic bases of the circadian clock in plants and their relationship with herbicides efficacy. Planta Daninha 34:191–198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darmency, H, Gasquez, J (1990) Appearance and spread of triazine resistance in common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album). Weed Technol 4:173–177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dill, GM (2005). Glyphosate-resistant crops: history, status and future. Pest Manag Sci 61:219–224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duke, SO, Kenyon, WH (1986) Photosynthesis is not involved in the mechanism of action of acifluorfen in cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.). Plant Physiol 81:882–888 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geiger, DR, Kapitan, SW, Tucci, MA (1986) Glyphosate inhibits photosynthesis and allocation of carbon to starch in sugar beet leaves. Plant Physiol 82:468–472 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geiger, DR, Servaites, JC, Fuchs, MA (2000) Role of starch in carbon translocation and partitioning at the plant level. Funct Plant Biol 27:571–582 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, JM (2012). The benefits of herbicide-resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 68:1323–1331 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grossmann, K (2000) Mode of action of auxin herbicides: a new ending to a long, drawn out story. Trends Plant Sci 5:506–508 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grossmann, K (2010) Auxin herbicides: current status of mechanism and mode of action. Pest Manag Sci 66:113–120 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammerton, JL (1967) Environmental factors and susceptibility to herbicides. Weeds 15:330–336 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, I (2018) Trends in the development of herbicide-resistant weeds. Pages 169–190 in Zimdahl, RL, ed, Integrated Weed Management for Sustainable Agriculture. Cambridge, UK: Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Heap, I (2021) Herbicide-resistant weeds by US state. International Herbicide-Resistant Weed Database. http://www.weedscience.org/Vmap/StateMap.aspx. Accessed: September 25, 2021Google Scholar
Johnston, CR, Eure, PM, Grey, TL, Culpepper, AS, Vencill, WK (2018) Time of application influences translocation of auxinic herbicides in Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri). Weed Sci 66:4–14 Google Scholar
Kraatz, GW, Andersen, RN (1980) Leaf movements in sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) in relation to herbicide response. Weed Sci 28:551–556 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudsk, P, Kristensen, JL (1992) Effect of environmental factors on herbicide performance. Pages 173–186 in Proceedings of the First International Weed Control Congress. Victoria, Australia: Weed Science Society of VictoriaGoogle Scholar
Lanoue, J, Leonardos, ED, Grodzinski, B (2018) Effects of light quality and intensity on diurnal patterns and rates of photo-assimilate translocation and transpiration in tomato leaves. Frontiers Plant Sci 9:756 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matringe, M, Camadro, JM, Block, MA, Joyard, J, Scalla, R, Labbe, P, Douce, R (1992) Localization within chloroplasts of protoporphyrinogen oxidase, the target enzyme for diphenylether-like herbicides. J Biochem Phisiol 267:4646–4651 Google ScholarPubMed
McAllister, RS, Haderlie, LC (1985) Translocation of 14C-glyphosate and 14CO2-labeled photoassimilates in Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci 33:153–159 Google Scholar
Mohr, K, Sellers, BA, Smeda, RJ (2007) Application time of day influences glyphosate efficacy. Weed Technol 21:7–13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, GB, Treadway, JA, Reeves, JL, Steckel, LE (2017) Effect of time of day of application of 2,4-D, dicamba, glufosinate, paraquat, and saflufenacil on horseweed (Conyza canadensis) control. Weed Technol 31:550–556 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Oliver, LR, Purcell, LC (1999) Diurnal leaf movement effects on spray interception and glyphosate efficacy. Weed Technol 13:466–470 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peeters, JC, Eilers, P (1978) The relationship between light intensity and photosynthesis—a simple mathematical model. Hydrobio Bulletin 12:134–136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheltrup, F, Grossmann, K (1995) Abscisic acid is a causative factor in the mode of action of the auxinic herbicide quinmerac in cleaver (Galium aparine L.). J Plant Physiol 147:118–126 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciumbato, AS, Chandler, JM, Senseman, SA, Bovey, RW, Smith, KL (2004) Determining exposure to auxin-like herbicides. II. Practical application to quantify volatility. Weed Technol 18:1135–1142 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaner, D, Jachetta, J, Senseman, S, Burke, I, Hanson, B, Jugulam, M, Tan, S, Reynolds, J, Strek, H, McAllister, R, Green, J, Glenn, B, Turner, P, Pawlak, J (2014) Herbicide Handbook. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America Google Scholar
Spaunhorst, DJ, Bradley, KW (2013) Influence of dicamba and dicamba plus glyphosate combinations on the control of glyphosate resistant waterhem (Amaranthus rudis). Weed Technol 27:675–681 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprankle, P, Meggitt, WF, Penner, D (1975) Absorption, action, and translocation of glyphosate. Weed Sci 23:235–240 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, CL, Nurse, RE, Sikkema, PH (2009) Time of day impacts postemergence weed control in corn. Weed Technol 23:346–355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stopps, GJ, Nurse, RE, Sikkema, PH (2013) The effect of time of day on the activity of postemergence soybean herbicides. Weed Technol 27:690–695 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tranel, PJ, Wright, TR (2002) Resistance of weeds to ALS-inhibiting herbicides: what have we learned? Weed Sci 50:700–712 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underwood, MG, Soltani, N, Hooker, DC, Robinson, DE, Vink, JP, Swanton, CJ, Sikkema, PH (2017) Benefit of tank mixing dicamba with glyphosate applied after emergence for weed control in dicamba and glyphosate-resistant soybean. Can J Plant Sci 97:891–901 Google Scholar
[USDA] US Department of Agriculture (2020) National Agricultural Statistics Service. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Surveys/Guide_to_NASS_Surveys/Chemical_Use/#description. Accessed: May 23, 2020Google Scholar
Van Wychen, L (2016) 2016 Survey of the Most Common and Troublesome Weeds in Broadleaf Crops, Fruits & Vegetables in the United States and Canada. Weed Science Society of America National Weed Survey Dataset. https://wssa.net/wssa/weed/surveys/ Accessed: November 12, 2021Google Scholar
Walker, ER, Oliver, LR (2008) Translocation and absorption of glyphosate in flowering sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia). Weed Sci 56:338–343 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, T, Grey, T, Flanders, J, Culpepper, A (2009) Cotton planting date affects the critical period of Benghal Dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) control. Weed Sci 57:81–86 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitaker, J, ed (2019) 2019 Georgia Cotton Production Guide. Athens, GA: University of GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
Wyrill, JB, Burnside, OC (1976) Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in common milkweed and hemp dogbane. Weed Sci 24:557–566 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, B (2006) Changes in herbicide use patterns and production practices resulting from glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol 20:301–307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar