Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T22:15:52.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Injury to Vegetable Crops from Herbicides Applied in Previous Years

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Richard G Greenland
Richard G Greenland*
Affiliation:
Oakes Irrigation Research Site, North Dakota State University, P.O. Box 531, Oakes, ND 58474
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Some herbicides applied to corn or soybean can carry over and injure vegetable crops grown the following year. Injury and yield effects on vegetable crops from carryover of nicosulfuron and flumetsulam 1 yr after application to corn and from carryover of imazethapyr and imazamox 1 yr after application to soybean were evaluated. Experiments were conducted at Oakes, ND, on sandy loam soils with pH 7.7 in 1994 and pH 7.3 in 1996. Nicosulfuron and flumetsulam were applied to corn, and imazethapyr was applied to soybean at a standard herbicide rate (1×) (35, 56, and 70 g ai/ha, respectively) or 2× rates in 1994 and at 1×, 2×, or 4× rates in 1996. Imazamox was also applied to soybean at 1× (35 g ai/ha), 2×, or 4× rates in 1996. Cabbage, carrot, potato, onion, acorn squash, and tomato were planted in 1995, 1997, and 1998. In 1995, residual imazethapyr delayed tomato maturity but did not reduce tomato yield. Other vegetable crops were not injured by herbicide residues. In 1997, flumetsulam carryover injured plants and reduced yields of cabbage and squash; nicosulfuron carryover injured cabbage and onion plants and reduced onion yield; and imazethapyr carryover injured cabbage, onion, and tomato plants and reduced tomato yield. Most crop injury occurred only at the 2× or 4× herbicide rates. Potato and carrot were not injured by herbicide carryover. Herbicides applied to corn or soybean in 1996 did not carry over to injure any vegetable planted in 1998. The low rate of injury to vegetable crops in this study was mostly due to adequate soil moisture and warm summer soil temperatures, which enhanced microbial degradation of these herbicides and hastened their dissipation. Low clay and moderately low soil organic matter, and slightly alkaline soil pH, also promoted dissipation of some herbicides.

Keywords

Flumetsulamimazamoximazethapyrnicosulfuroncabbage, Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata (L.)carrot, Daucus carota L.corn, Zea mays L.onion, Allium cepa L.potato, Solanum tuberosum L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merrsquash, Cucurbita maxima L.tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum MillCrop rotationherbicide carryoverherbicide dissipation in soilsherbicide residuesOM, soil organic matter×, standard herbicide rate
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 73 - 78
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

Beyer, E. M., Duffy, M. J., Hay, J. V., and Schlueter, D. D. 1988. Sulfonylureas. In Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. New York: Marcel Dekker. pp. 117–189.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J. R., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Biodegradation characteristics of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 37: 815–819.Google Scholar
Cobucci, T., Prates, H. T., Falcão, C. L. M., and Rezende, M. M. V. 1998. Effect of imazamox, fomesafen, and acifluorfen soil residue on rotational crops. Weed Sci. 46: 258–263.Google Scholar
Flint, J. L. and Witt, W. W. 1997. Microbial degradation of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 45: 586–591.Google Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gbur, E. E. Jr. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38: 421–428.Google Scholar
Jourdan, S. W., Majek, B. A., and Ayeni, A. O. 1998. Soil persistence of imazethapyr and detection using a sensitive bioassay technique. J. Prod. Agric. 11: 52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, R. G., Fontaine, D. D., and Olberding, E. L. 1993. Soil degradation of flumetsulam at different temperatures in the laboratory and field. Weed Res. 33: 187–195.Google Scholar
Lehmann, R. G., Miller, J. R., Fontaine, D. D., Laskowski, D. A., Hunter, J. H., and Cordes, R. C. 1992. Degradation of a sulfonamide herbicide as a function of soil sorption. Weed Res. 32: 197–205.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on soils, sediments, and selected adsorbents. Weed Sci. 37: 712–718.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M. and Reese, K. D. 1993. Effect of soil type and pH on persistence and carryover of imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 7: 452–458.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R. and Esau, R. 1996. Imidazolinone herbicide effects on following rotational crops in southern Alberta. Weed Technol. 10: 100–106.Google Scholar
Murphy, G. P. and Shaw, D. R. 1997. Field mobility of flumetsulam in three Mississippi soils. Weed Sci. 45: 564–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novosel, K. M., Renner, K. A., Kells, J. J., and Chomas, A. J. 1995. Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) response to and sorption characteristics of nicosulfuron and primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 9: 484–489.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, J., Thomas, R. J., and Bouw, W. J. 1998. Effect of imazethapyr and imazamox soil residues on several vegetable crops grown in Ontario. Can. J. Plant Sci. 78/ 4: 647–651.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, J., Thomas, R. J., and Bouw, W. J. 1999. Effect of flumetsulam plus clopyralid soil residues on several vegetable crops and on sweet corn (Zea mays) cultivars grown in rotation. Weed Technol. 13: 303–307.Google Scholar
Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1988. Effect of soil pH on imazaquin and imazethapyr adsorption to soil and phytotoxicity to corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 36: 78–83.Google Scholar
Rouchaud, J., Neus, O., Bulcke, R., Cools, K., and Callens, D. 1998. Nicosulfuron soil dissipation and mobility in corn crops. Proceedings, 50th International Symposium on Crop Protection; 5 May 1998; Gent, Belgium. Part I. Meded. Fac. Landbouwkd. Toegep. Biol. Wet. Univ. Gent. 63:(2A). 293–296.Google Scholar
[SAS]Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6. 4th ed, Volume 2. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R. and Murphy, G. P. 1997a. Adsorption and relative mobility of flumetsulam. Weed Sci. 45: 573–578.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R. and Murphy, G. P. 1997b. Field persistence of bioavailable flumetsulam. Weed Sci. 45: 568–572.Google Scholar
Stougaard, R. N., Shea, P. J., and Martin, A. R. 1990. Effect of soil type and pH on adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38: 67–73.Google Scholar
Wiese, A. F., Wood, M. L., and Chehault, E. W. 1988. Persistence of sulfonylureas in Pullman clay loam. Weed Technol. 2: 251–256.Google Scholar