Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:15:30.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) Response to Triflusulfuron and Desmedipham Plus Phenmedipham

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert J. Starke  and
Karen A. Renner
Robert J. Starke
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Karen A. Renner
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Velvetleaf control and sugarbeet response to POST triflusulfuron applied alone and in combination with desmedipham plus phenmedipham, nonionic surfactant, and urea ammonium nitrate (50:50) were evaluated in the greenhouse (velvetleaf only) and field. In a second field study, the effect of POST applications of triflusulfuron, desmedipham plus phenmedipham, ethofumesate, endothall, or combinations of these herbicides on sugarbeet root yield and quality was determined in the absence of weeds. Triflusulfuron controlled velvetleaf only when nonionic surfactant (NIS) was added to the spray solution. Desmedipham plus phenmedipham plus triflusulfuron gave greater velvetleaf control than triflusulfuron in the absence of NIS in the field. However, adding desmedipham plus phenmedipham to triflusulfuron plus NIS decreased velvetleaf control in the greenhouse. Adding desmedipham plus phenmedipham to triflusulfuron plus NIS increased visible sugarbeet response compared to triflusulfuron plus nonionic surfactant or desmedipham plus phenmedipham 14 d after the last POST application in 1994. In the absence of weeds, POST herbicide applications that included triflusulfuron did not reduce sugarbeet root yield more than other POST herbicides.

Keywords

Desmedipham, ethyl[3-[[(phenylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]carbamateendothall, 7-oxabicyclo[2.2.1]heptane-2,3-dicarboxylic acidethofumesate, (±)-2-ethoxy-2,3-dihydro-3,3-dimethyl-5-benzofuranyl methanesulfonatephenmedipham, 3-[(methoxycarbonyl)amino]phenyl (3-methylphenyl)carbamatetriflusulfuron, 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-methylbenzoic acidvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medikcus, #3 ABUTHsugarbeet, Beta vulgaris L. ‘MonoHybrid E4.'Adjuvantcycloateendothallethofumesatepyrazon
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 1996 , pp. 121 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 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

1. Anderson, R. N., Menges, R. M., and Conn, J. S. 1985. Variability in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and reproduction beyond its current range in North America. Weed Sci. 33:507–512.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1994. UpBeet herbicide technical bulletin. E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, Agricultural Products, Wilmington, DE 19898.Google Scholar
3. Bethlenfalvay, G. and Norris, R. F. 1975. Phytotoxic action of desmedipham: influence of temperature and light intensity. Weed Sci. 23:499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Dawson, J. H. 1975. Cycloate and phenmedipham as complementary treatments in sugarbeets. Weed Sci. 23:478–485.Google Scholar
5. Dexter, A. O., Luecke, J. L., and Bredehoeft, M. W. 1992. POST control of broadleaf weeds in sugarbeet. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 47:125.Google Scholar
6. Duncan, D. N., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1982. Basis for increased activity from herbicide combinations with ethofumesate applied on sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 30:195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Fielding, R. J. and Stoller, E. W. 1990. Effects of additives on the efficacy, uptake, and translocation of the methyl ester of thifensulfuron. Weed Sci. 38:172–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Fielding, R. J. and Stoller, E. W. 1990. Effects of additives on efficacy, uptake, and translocation of chlorimuron ethyl ester. Weed Technol. 4:264–271.Google Scholar
9. Hagood, E. S. Jr., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L. Jr., and Schreiber, M. M. 1980. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 28:729–734.Google Scholar
10. Miller, S. D. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1973. Effect of additives upon phenmedipham for weed control in sugarbeets. Weed Sci. 21:67–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Mitich, L. W. 1991. Intriguing world of weeds. Velvetleaf. Weed Technol. 5:253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Prodoehl, K. A., Campbell, L. G., and Dexter, A. G. 1992. Phenmedipham plus desmedipham effects on sugarbeet. Agron. J. 84:1002–1005.Google Scholar
13. Reese, K. D. and Loux, M. M. 1992. Efficacy and timeliness of DPX-66037 for weed control in sugarbeets. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 47:124.Google Scholar
14. Renner, K. A. and Crook, T. M. 1992. Postemergence weed control in sugarbeets with DPX-66037. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 47:126.Google Scholar
15. Renner, K. A. and Powell, G. E. 1991. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) control in sugarbeet. Weed Technol. 5:97–102.Google Scholar
16. Schmenk, R. E. Jr. 1994. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti (Medik.)) competitiveness in corn as affected by preemergence herbicides. , Michigan State Univ., East Lansing. 64 p.Google Scholar
17. Schweizer, E. E. and Bridge, L. D. 1982. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 30:514–519.Google Scholar
18. Schweizer, E. E. and Dexter, A. G. 1987. Weed control in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris) in North America. Rev. Weed Sci. 3:113–133.Google Scholar
19. Spencer, N. R. 1984. Velvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae), history and economic impact in the United States. Econ. Bot. 38:407–416.Google Scholar
20. Starke, R. J. and Renner, K. A. 1993. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) response to triflusulfuron methyl. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf 48:88–89.Google Scholar
21. Starke, R. J., Renner, K. A., Penner, D., and Roggenbuck, F. C. 1996. Influence of adjuvants and desmedipham plus phenmedipham on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) control and sugarbeet response to triflusulfuron methyl. Weed Sci. 44: (in press).Google Scholar
22. Warwick, S. I. and Black, L. D. 1988. The biology of Canadian weeds, 90. Abutilon theophrasti. Can. J. Plant Sci. 68:1069–1085.Google Scholar
23. Wilson, R. G., Smith, J.A., and Yonts, C. D. 1990. Effect of seedling depth, herbicide, and variety on sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) emergence, vigor and yield. Weed Technol. 4:739–742.Google Scholar
24. Wilson, R. G. 1994. New herbicides for POST application in sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris). Weed Technol. 8:807–811.Google Scholar
25. Winter, S. R. and Wiese, A. F. 1978. Phytotoxicity and yield response of sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris) to a mixture of phenmedipham and desmedipham. Weed Sci. 26:1–4.Google Scholar