Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:39:25.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mesquite Root Inhibition Tests to Study Inhibitory Activity, Absorption and Translocation of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Richard Behrens  and
Howard L. Morton
Richard Behrens
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul 1, Minnesota
Howard L. Morton
Affiliation:
Crops Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, College Station, Texas
Get access

Extract

The technique used in the tests herein reported is based on the inhibition of root elongation by growth substances, an exceedingly sensitive response. Two procedures are used in the application of the growth substances. The first consists of applying known amounts of test compounds to the root bathing solution of mesquite seedlings, and the second procedure consists of applying these compounds to the cotyledons. After addition of the growth regulator to the solution subsequent root inhibition is dependent on absorption by the root tissue and accumulation in an active form at the site of action. In cotyledonary applications, translocation as well as absorption is necessary before inhibition of root elongation will occur. It was the objective of this study to investigate various possibilities for using these procedures in herbicide absorption and translocation experiments.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , July 1960 , pp. 427 - 435
Copyright
Copyright © 1960 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. Aberg, B. Auxin relations in roots. Ann. Rev. Plant Phys. 8:153–180. 1957.Google Scholar
2. Audus, L. J. Studies in pH relationships of root growth and its inhibition by 2,4-D acid and coumarin. New Phyt. 48:97–114. 1949.Google Scholar
3. Barton, L. V., and Trelease, S. R. Stimulation, toxicity and antagonism of calcium nitrate and magnesium chloride as indicated by growth of wheat roots. Torrey Bot. Club 54:559–577. 1927.Google Scholar
4. Blair, B. O. Mesquite seed and seedling response to 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Bot. Gaz. 112:518–521. 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bonner, J., and Koepfli, J. B. The inhibition of root growth by auxins. Amer. Jour. Bot. 26:557–566. 1939.Google Scholar
6. Burstrom, H. Physiology of root growth. Ann. Rev. Plant Phys. 4:237–252. 1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Crafts, A. S. Translocation of herbicides. I. Mechanism of translocation: Methods of study with C14 labeled 2,4-D. Hilgardia 26:287–334. 1956.Google Scholar
8. Erickson, L. C., Wedding, R. T., and Brannaman, B. L. Influence of pH on 2,4-D and acetic acid activity in Chlorella. Plant Phys. 30:69–74. 1955.Google Scholar
9. Fang, S. C., Jaworski, E. G., Logan, A. V., Freed, V. H., and Butts, J. S. The absorption of radioactive 2,4-D and the translocation of C14 by bean plants. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 32:249–255. 1951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Hay, J. R. The effect of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-triiodobenzoic acid on the transport of IAA. Plant Phys. 31:118–120. 1956.Google Scholar
11. Hay, J. R. Translocation of herbicides in marabu. II. Translocation of 2,4-D following foliage application. Weeds 4:349–356. 1956.Google Scholar
12. Hay, J. R. and Thimann, K. V. The fate of 2,4-D in bean seedlings. I. Recovery of 2,4-D and its breakdown in the plant. Plant Phys. 31:382–387. 1956.Google Scholar
13. Lane, R. The inhibition of roots by growth hormones. Amer. Jour. Bot. 23:532–535. 1936.Google Scholar
14. Leaper, J. M. F., and Bishop, J. R. Relation of halogen position to physiological properties in the mono-, di- and trichlorophenoxyacetic acids. Bot. Gaz. 112:250–258. 1951.Google Scholar
15. Mullison, W. R. The tomato as a test plant for growth regulators. Bot. Gaz. 112:521–524. 1951.Google Scholar
16. Simon, E. W., and Beevers, H. The effect of pH on the biological activities of weak acids and bases. I. The most usual relationship between pH and activity. New Phytol. 51:163–190. 1952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Thimann, K. V. Auxins and the growth of roots. Amer. Jour. Bot. 23:561–569. 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Torrey, J. G. Physiology of root elongation. Ann. Rev. Plant Phys. 7:237–266. 1956.Google Scholar
19. van Overbeek, J. Absorption and translocation of plant regulators. Ann. Rev. Plant Phys. 7:355–372. 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Wedding, R. T., and Erickson, L. C. The role of pH in the permeability of Chlotella to 2,4-D. Plant Phys. 32:503–512. 1957.Google Scholar