Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:08:58.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Management in Dicamba-Resistant Cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Charles W. Cahoon ,
Alan C. York ,
David L. Jordan ,
Wesley J. Everman ,
Richard W. Seagroves ,
A. Stanley Culpepper  and
Peter M. Eure
Charles W. Cahoon*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Alan C. York
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
David L. Jordan
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Wesley J. Everman
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Richard W. Seagroves
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
A. Stanley Culpepper
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31794
Peter M. Eure
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31794
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cotton growers rely heavily upon glufosinate and various residual herbicides applied preplant, PRE, and POST to control Palmer amaranth resistant to glyphosate and acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides. Recently deregulated in the United States, cotton resistant to dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate (B2XF cotton) offers a new platform for controlling herbicide-resistant Palmer amaranth. A field experiment was conducted in North Carolina and Georgia to determine B2XF cotton tolerance to dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate and to compare Palmer amaranth control by dicamba to a currently used, nondicamba program in both glufosinate- and glyphosate-based systems. Treatments consisted of glyphosate or glufosinate applied early POST (EPOST) and mid-POST (MPOST) in a factorial arrangement of treatments with seven dicamba options (no dicamba, PRE, EPOST, MPOST, PRE followed by [fb] EPOST, PRE fb MPOST, and EPOST fb MPOST) and a nondicamba standard. The nondicamba standard consisted of fomesafen PRE, pyrithiobac EPOST, and acetochlor MPOST. Dicamba caused no injury when applied PRE and only minor, transient injury when applied POST. At time of EPOST application, Palmer amaranth control by dicamba or fomesafen applied PRE, in combination with acetochlor, was similar and 13 to 17% greater than acetochlor alone. Dicamba was generally more effective on Palmer amaranth applied POST rather than PRE, and two applications were usually more effective than one. In glyphosate-based systems, greater Palmer amaranth control and cotton yield were obtained with dicamba applied EPOST, MPOST, or EPOST fb MPOST compared with the standard herbicides in North Carolina. In contrast, dicamba was no more effective than the standard herbicides in the glufosinate-based systems. In Georgia, dicamba was as effective as the standard herbicides in a glyphosate-based system only when dicamba was applied EPOST fb MPOST. In glufosinate-based systems in Georgia, dicamba was as effective as standard herbicides only when dicamba was applied twice.

Los productores de algodón dependen mucho del uso de glufosinate y de varios herbicidas residuales aplicados pre-siembra, PRE, y POST, para el control de Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate y resistente a herbicidas inhibidores de acetolactate synthase. Recientemente desregulado en los Estados Unidos, el algodón resistente a dicamba, glufosinate, y glyphosate (algodón B2XF) ofrece una nueva plataforma para el control de A. palmeri resistente a herbicidas. En North Carolina y Georgia, se realizó un experimento de campo para determinar la tolerancia de B2XF a dicamba, glufosinate, y glyphosate y para comparar el control de A. palmeri con dicamba con un programa actualmente usado (sin dicamba) en sistemas basados en glufosinate y glyphosate. Los tratamientos de glyphosate y glufosinate aplicados POST temprano (EPOST) y POST medio (MPOST) en un arreglo factorial de tratamientos con siete opciones de dicamba (sin dicamba, PRE, EPOST, MPOST, PRE seguido de [fb] EPOST, PRE fb MPOST, y EPOST fb MPOST) y un estándar sin dicamba. El estándar sin dicamba consistió en fomesafen PRE, pyrithiobac EPOST, y acetochlor MPOST. Dicamba no causó ningún daño cuando se aplicó PRE y solamente un daño menor y temporal cuando se aplicó POST. Al momento de la aplicación EPOST, el control de A. palmeri con dicamba o fomesafen aplicados PRE, en combinación con acetochlor fue similar, y fue de 13 a 17% mayor al de acetochlor solo. Dicamba fue generalmente más efectivo sobre A. palmeri aplicado POST que PRE, y dos aplicaciones fueron usualmente más efectivas que una. En sistemas basados en glyphosate, un mayor control de A. palmeri y mayor rendimiento del algodón fueron obtenidos con dicamba aplicado EPOST, MPOST, o EPOST fb MPOST al compararse con los herbicidas estándar en North Carolina. En contraste, dicamba no fue más efectivo que los herbicidas estándar en sistemas basados en glufosinate. En Georgia, dicamba fue tan efectivo como los herbicidas estándar en un sistema basado en glyphosate solamente cuando dicamba fue aplicado EPOST fb MPOST. En sistemas basados en glufosinate, en Georgia, dicamba fue tan efectivo como los herbicidas estándar solamente cuando dicamba se aplicó dos veces.

Keywords

AcetochlordicambadiuronfomesafenglufosinateglyphosateMSMApyrithiobacPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Dicamba-resistant cottonglyphosate-resistant weedsweed management systems
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 758 - 770
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: Syngenta Crop Protection, Rosenberg, TX 77471.

Associate Editor for this paper: Daniel O. Stephenson, Louisiana State University.

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous (2015) Bollgard II® XtendFlex™ Cotton Expected On Over 500,000 Acres. http://news.monsanto.com/press-release/products/bollgard-ii-xtendflex-tm-cotton-expected-over-500000-acres. Accessed March 5, 2015Google Scholar
Behrens, MR, Mutlu, N, Chakraborty, S, Dumitru, R, Jiang, WZ, LaVallee, BJ, Herman, PL, Clemente, TE, Weeks, DP (2007) Dicamba resistance: enlarging and preserving biotechnology-based weed management strategies. Science 316:1185–1188 Google Scholar
Ben-Dor, E, Banin, A (1989) Determination of organic matter content in arid-zone soils using a simple “loss-on-ignition” method. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 20:1675–1695 Google Scholar
Bensch, CN, Horak, MJ, Peterson, D (2003) Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), Palmer amaranth (A. palmeri), and common waterhemp (A. rudis) in soybean. Weed Sci 51:37–43 Google Scholar
Bond, JA, Oliver, LR (2006) Comparative growth of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) accessions. Weed Sci 54:121–126 Google Scholar
Bond, JA, Oliver, LR, Stephenson, DO IV (2006) Response of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) accessions to glyphosate, fomesafen, and pyrithiobac. Weed Technol 20:885–892 Google Scholar
Burke, IC, Schroeder, M, Thomas, WE, Wilcut, JW (2007) Palmer amaranth interference and seed production in peanut. Weed Technol 21:367–371 Google Scholar
Byker, HP, Soltani, N, Robinson, DE, Tardif, FJ, Lawton, MB, Sikkema, PH (2013) Control of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) with dicamba applied preplant and postemergence in dicamba-resistant soybean. Weed Technol 27:492–496 Google Scholar
Cahoon, CW, York, AC, Jordan, DL, Everman, WJ, Seagroves, RW (2014) An alternative to multiple protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibitor applications in no-till cotton. Weed Technol 28:58–71 Google Scholar
Corbett, JL, Askew, SD, Thomas, WE, Wilcut, JW (2004) Weed efficacy evaluations for bromoxynil, glufosinate, glyphosate, pyrithiobac, and sulfosate. Weed Technol 18:443–453 Google Scholar
Culpepper, AS, Grey, TL, Vencill, WK, Kichler, JM, Webster, TM, Brown, SM, York, AC, Davis, JW, Hanna, WW (2006) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Sci 54:620–626 Google Scholar
Culpepper, AS, Webster, TM, Sosnoskie, LM, York, AC (2010) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth in the United States. Pages 195–212 in Nandula, VK, ed. Glyphosate Resistance in Crops and Weeds: History, Development, and Management. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley Google Scholar
Culpepper, AS, York, AC (1998) Weed management in glyphosate-tolerant cotton. J Cotton Sci 2:174–185 Google Scholar
Culpepper, AS, York, AC (1999) Weed management and net returns with transgenic, herbicide-resistant, and nontransgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 13:411–420 Google Scholar
Dixon, TH, Dodds, DM, Copeland, JD, Reynolds, DZ, Samples, CA, Barber, LT, Main, CL, Mills, JA (2014) Tolerance of DGT cotton to glufosinate and dicamba. Page 161 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 67th Annual Meeting. Birmingham, AL: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Dodds, DM, Bollman, S, Mills, A, Culpepper, S, Miller, D, Norsworthy, JK, Steckel, L, York, AC (2012) Evaluation of crop safety and weed control programs in dicamba-tolerant cotton. Pages 1529–1530 in Proceedings of the 2012 Beltwide Cotton Conferences. Orlando, FL National Cotton Council Google Scholar
Dunnett, CW (1955) A multicomparisons procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Am Stat Assoc 50:1096–1121 Google Scholar
Edwards, B, Eubanks, TW, Shaw, DR, Steckel, LE (2013) Efficacy of pre- and post-emergence applications of dicamba on glyphosate-resistant palmer amaranth. Page 120 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 66th Annual Meeting. Houston, TX: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Eubank, TW, Poston, DH, Nandula, VK, Koger, CH, Shaw, DR, Reynolds, DB (2008) Glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) control using glyphosate-, paraquat-, and glufosinate-based herbicide programs. Weed Technol 22:16–21 Google Scholar
Everman, WJ, Clewis, SB, York, AC, Wilcut, JW (2009) Weed control and yield with flumioxazin, fomesafen, and S-metolachlor systems for glufosinate-resistant cotton residual weed management. Weed Technol 23:391–397 Google Scholar
Faircloth, WH, Patterson, MG, Monks, CD, Goodman, WR (2001) Weed management programs for glyphosate-tolerant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 15:544–551 Google Scholar
Frans, RE, Talbert, R, Marx, D, Crowley, H (1986) Experimental design and techniques for measuring and analyzing plant responses to weed control practices. Pages 29–46 in Camper, ND, ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Gardner, AP, York, AC, Jordan, DL, Monks, DW (2006) Management of annual grasses and Amaranthus spp. in glufosinate-resistant cotton. J Cotton Sci 10:328–38Google Scholar
Gianessi, LP (2008) Economic impacts of glyphosate resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 64:346–352 Google Scholar
Givens, WA, Shaw, DR, Johnson, WG, Weller, SC, Young, BG, Wilson, RG, Owen, MKD, Jordan, DL (2009) A grower survey of herbicide use patterns in glyphosate-resistant cropping systems. Weed Technol 23:156–151Google Scholar
Grover, R (1977) Mobility of dicamba, picloram, and 2,4-D in soil columns. Weed Sci 25:159–162 Google Scholar
Hayes, RM, Montgomery, R, Reynolds, DB, Dodds, DM, Crow, WD, Wiggins, MS, Goddard, M, Steckel, LE (2014) Evaluation of residual herbicides in BollGard II XtendFlex cotton. Page 166 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science 67th Annual Meeting. Birmingham, AL: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Heap, I (2015) The International Survey of Herbicide-Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org. Accessed March 5, 2015Google Scholar
Helling, CS (1971) Pesticide mobility in soils. II. Applications of soil thin-layer chromatography. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 35:737–743 Google Scholar
Horak, MJ, Loughin, TM (2000) Growth analysis of four Amaranthus species. Weed Sci 48:347–355 Google Scholar
Inman, M, Jordan, J, York, A., Everman, W (2014) Palmer amaranth population dynamics in cotton with herbicide programs including dicamba. Page 1053 in Proceedings of the 2014 Beltwide Cotton Conferences. New Orleans, LA National Cotton Council Google Scholar
[ISAAA] International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (2015) Event name: MON88701 x MON88913 x MON15985. http://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/event/default.asp?EventID=391. Accessed March 2, 2015Google Scholar
Jalaludin A,Yu Q, Powles SB (2015) Multiple resistance across glufosinate, glyphosate, paraquat and ACCase-inhibiting herbicides in an Eleusine indica population. Weed Res 55:82–89 Google Scholar
Jha, P, Norsworthy, J (2009) Soybean canopy and tillage effects on emergence of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) from a natural seed bank. Weed Sci 57:644–651 Google Scholar
Johnson, B, Young, B, Matthews, J, Marquardt, P, Slack, C, Bradley, K, York, A, Culpepper, S, Hager, A, Al-Khatib, K, Steckel, L, Moechnig, M, Loux, M, Bernards, M, Smeda, R (2010) Weed control in dicamba-resistant soybeans. Crop Manag 9(1). DOI: Google Scholar
Keely, PE, Carter, CH, Thullen, RJ (1987) Influence of planting date on growth of Palmer amaranth ( Amaranthus palmeri) . Weed Sci 35:199–204 Google Scholar
Krzyszowska, AJ, Allen, RD, Vance, GF (1994) Assessment of the fate of two herbicides in a Wyoming rangeland soil: column studies. J Environ Qual 23:1051–1058 Google Scholar
MacRae, AW, Webster, TM, Sosnoskie, LM, Culpepper, AS, Kichler, JM (2013) Cotton yield loss potential in response to length of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) interference. J Cotton Sci 17:227–232 Google Scholar
Mannion, RM, Malven, M (2013) Petitioner's Environmental Report for Dicamba-Tolerant Soybean MON 87708 and Dicamba-and Glufosinate-Tolerant Cotton MON 88701. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/monsanto_submitted_env_rpt.pdf. Accessed February 22, 2015Google Scholar
Mehlich, A (1984) Photometric determination of humic matter in soils, a proposed method. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 15:1417–1422 Google Scholar
Meijer, AD, Edmisten, KL (2015) Cotton production with conservation tillage. Pages 168–176 in 2015 Cotton Information. Publ. AG-417. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service Google Scholar
Morgan, GD, Baumann, PA, Chandler, JM (2001) Competitive impact of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) development and yield. Weed Technol 15:408–412 Google Scholar
Nandula, VK, Reddy, KN, Koger, CH, Poston, DH, Rimando, AM, Duke, SO, Bond, JA, Ribeiro, DN (2012) Multiple resistance to glyphosate and pyrithiobac in Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) from Mississippi and response to flumiclorac. Weed Sci 60:179–188 Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Griffith, G, Griffin, T, Bagavathiannam, M, Gbur, EE (2014) In-field movement of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and its impact on cotton lint yield: evidence supporting a zero-threshold strategy. Weed Sci 62:237–249 Google Scholar
Place, G, Bowman, D, Burton, M, Rufty, T (2008) Root penetration through a high bulk density soil layer: differential response of a crop and weed species. Plant Soil 307:179–190 Google Scholar
Poirier, AH, York, AC, Jordan, DL, Chandi, A, Everman, WJ, Whitaker, JR (2014) Distribution of glyphosate- and thifensulfuron-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in North Carolina. Int J Agron. 2014:747810. DOI: Google Scholar
Reynolds, DZ, Dodds, DM, Reynolds, DB, Dixon, TH, Samples, CA (2013) Evaluation of PRE and POST weed control programs for Palmer amaranth control. Pages 325–326 in Proceedings of the 2013 Beltwide Cotton Conferences. San Antonio, TX National Cotton Council Google Scholar
Rowland, MW, Murray, DS, Verhalen, LM (1999) Full-season Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) interference with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci 45:305–309 Google Scholar
Sanders, CH, Joseph, DD, Marshall, MW (2013) Selected herbicide programs for broadleaf weed control in dicamba-tolerant cotton. Page 35 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 66th Annual Meeting. Houston, TX: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Scott, GH, Askew, SD, Wilcut, JW (2002) Glyphosate systems for weed control in glyphosate-tolerant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 16:191–198 Google Scholar
Sellers, BA, Smeda, RJ, Johnson, WG, Kendig, JA, Ellersieck, MR (2003) Comparative growth of six Amaranthus species in Missouri. Weed Sci 51:329–333 Google Scholar
Smith, AE (1973) Degradation of dicamba in prairie soils. Weed Res 13:373–378 Google Scholar
Smith, AE (1974) Breakdown of the herbicide dicamba and its degradation product 3,6-dichlorosalicylic acid in prairie soils. J Agric Food Chem 22:601–605 Google Scholar
Smith, AE, Cullimore, DR (1975) Microbiological degradation of the herbicide dicamba in moist soils at different temperatures. Weed Res 15:59–62 Google Scholar
Smith, DT, Baker, RV, Steele, GL (2000) Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) impacts on yield, harvesting, and ginning in dryland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 14:122–126 Google Scholar
Sosnoskie, LM, Culpepper, AS (2014) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) increases herbicide use, tillage, and hand-weeding in Georgia cotton. Weed Sci 62:393–402 Google Scholar
Sosnoskie, LM, Kichler, JM, Wallace, RD, Culpepper, AS (2011) Multiple resistance in Palmer amaranth to glyphosate and pyrithiobac confirmed in Georgia. Weed Technol 59:321–325 Google Scholar
Steckel, LE, Craig, CC, Hayes, RM (2006) Glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) control with glufosinate prior to planting no-till cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 20:1047–1051 Google Scholar
Steckel, LE, Eubank, TW, Montgomery, R, Scott, B, Smeda, R, Blinka, E, Mills, A, Stanislav, S, Seifert-Higgins, S, Zabala, F (2013) Palmer amaranth weed control programs for Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybeans in the mid-south. Page 179 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 66th Annual Meeting. Houston, TX: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
[USDA-AMS] United States Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Marketing Service (2014) Cotton Varieties Planted 2014 Crop. Publ. mp_cn 833. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 9 pGoogle Scholar
[USDA-APHIS] United States Department of Agriculture–Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (2015) Monsanto Co.; Determination of Nonregulated Status of Herbicide Resistant Soybean and Cotton. https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/01/20/2015-00723/monsanto-co-determination-of-nonregulated-status-of-herbicide-resistant-soybean-and-cotton. Accessed March 5, 2015Google Scholar
Vink, JP, Soltani, N, Robinson, DE, Tardif, FJ, Lawton, MB, Sikkema, PH (2012) Glyphosate-resistant giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) control in dicamba tolerant soybean. Weed Technol 26:422–428 Google Scholar
Voos, G, Groffman, PM (1997) Relationships between microbial biomass and dissipation of 2,4-D and dicamba in soil. Biol Fertil Soils 24:106–110 Google Scholar
Webster, TM (2013) Weed survey–southern states: broadleaf crops subsection. Pages 275–287 in Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 66th Annual Meeting. Houston, TX: Southern Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Whitaker, JR, York, AC, Jordan, DL, Culpepper, AS (2011a) Weed management with glyphosate- and glufosinate-based systems in PHY 485 WRF cotton. Weed Technol 25:183–191 Google Scholar
Whitaker, JR, York, AC, Jordan, DL, Culpepper, AS, Sosnoskie, LM (2011b) Residual herbicides for Palmer amaranth control. J Cotton Sci 15:89–99 Google Scholar
Wilson, RG, Young, BG, Matthews, JL, Weller, SC, Johnson, WG, Jordan, DL, Owen, MKD, Dixon, PM, Shaw, DR (2011) Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 4: weed management practices and effects on weed populations and soil seedbanks. Pest Manag Sci 67:771–780 Google Scholar
Wright, SR, Jennette, MW, Coble, HD, Rufty, TW (1999) Root morphology of young Glycine max, Senna obtusifolia, and Amaranthus palmeri . Weed Sci 47:706–711 Google Scholar
York, AC (2015) Weed management in cotton. Pages 80–130 in 2015 Cotton Information. Publ. AG-417. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service Google Scholar
York, AC, Cahoon, CW, Oliver, GW (2015) Palmer amaranth management with Engenia in BollGard II XtendFlex cotton. Proceedings of the Southern Weed Science Society 68th Annual Meeting. Savannah, GA: Southern Weed Science Society [In press]Google Scholar