Although dicamba-resistant crops can provide an effective weed management option, risk of dicamba off-site movement to sensitive crops is a concern. Previous research with indeterminate soybean identified 14 injury criteria associated with dicamba applied at V3/V4 or R1/R2 at 0.6 to 280 g ae ha−1. Injury criteria rated on a 0 to 5 scale (none to severe), along with percent visible injury and plant height reduction, and canopy height collected 7 and 15 d after treatment (DAT) were analyzed using multiple regression with a forward-selection procedure to develop yield prediction models. Variables included in the 15 DAT models (in order of selection) for V3/V4 were lower stem base lesions/cracking, plant height reduction, terminal leaf epinasty, leaf petiole droop, leaf petiole base swelling, and stem epinasty, whereas for R1/R2 variables were lower stem base lesions/cracking, terminal leaf chlorosis, leaf petiole base swelling, stem epinasty, terminal leaf necrosis, and terminal leaf cupping. To validate the models, experiments including the same dicamba rates and application timings used in previous research were conducted at two locations. For the variables specific to each model, data collected for the dicamba rates were used to predict yield. For the V3/V4 15 DAT model, predicted yield reduction (compared with the nontreated control for dicamba at 0.6 to 4.4 g ha−1) underestimated or overestimated observed yield reduction by an average of 1 and 3 percentage points. For 8.8 g ha−1, predicted yield reduction overestimated observed yield reduction by 8 points and for 17.5 g ha−1 by 20 points. For the R1/R2 15 DAT model, predicted yield reduction for 0.6 to 4.4 g ha−1 overestimated observed yield reduction by an average of 3 to 5 percentage points. For dicamba at 8.8 g ha−1, predicted yield reduction underestimated observed yield reduction by 8 points and for 17.5 g ha−1 overestimated by 6 points.

Research conducted in the field identified 14 injury criteria associated with dicamba (Clarity® diglycolamine salt) applied at 0.6 to 280 g ae ha–1 (1/1,000 to 1/2 of 560 g ha–1 use rate) to indeterminate soybean at V3/V4 or R1/R2. For each criterion, injury was rated using a scale of 0=no injury, 1=slight, 2=slight to moderate, 3=moderate, 4=moderate to severe, and 5=severe. Greatest crop injury 15 d after treatment (DAT) was observed for dicamba rates of 0.6 to 4.4 g ha–1 for upper canopy pale leaf margins (3.8 to 4.2) at V3/V4 and for terminal leaf cupping (4.1 to 5.0) at R1/R2, and for rates of 0.6 to 8.8 g ha–1 for upper canopy leaf cupping (3.8 to 4.8) and upper canopy leaf surface crinkling (3.4 to 4.4) at V3/V4. Injury 15 DAT was equivalent to the nontreated control for dicamba rates as high as 4.4 g ha–1 for lower stem base swelling at V3/V4 and for upper canopy leaf rollover/inversion and terminal leaf necrosis at R1/R2; for rates as high as 8.8 g ha–1 for leaf petiole base swelling and stem epinasty at R1/R2, and lower stem base lesions/cracking (V3/V4 and R1/R2 average); and for rates as high as 17.5 g ha–1 for lower leaf soil contact at V3/V4 and leaf petiole droop at R1/R2. The response to increasing dicamba rate observed for the injury criteria was in contrast to the steady increase in visual injury and plant height reduction rated as 0 to 100%. The moderate to severe upper canopy leaf cupping, pale leaf margins, and leaf surface crinkling, and terminal leaf cupping 15 DAT with dicamba at 0.6 to 4.4 g ha–1 corresponded to soybean yield loss of 1% to 9% for application at V3/V4 and 2% to 17% at R1/R2.

The herbicide 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] was applied as sublethal rates to sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy D2’) in the field at different growth stages to determine its effect on growth and yield. The greatest reduction in top growth occurred when the highest rate of 2,4-D, 0.07 kg/ha, was applied to the oldest plants (12-leaf stage). All rates of 2,4-D reduced the components of sucrose yield (percentage sucrose, percentage purity, and root weight) to the extent that, together, the three components contributed to a significant reduction in recoverable sucrose. The yields of recoverable sucrose were reduced 6.8, 7.8, and 13.2% by the 0.017, 0.035, and 0.07 kg/ha rates, respectively.

The persistence of hormone-type herbicides in tissues of susceptible crop plants was studied under growth-chamber and field conditions. The susceptible plants selected were tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.), soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], and turnips (Brassica rapa L.). Foliage of each species was exposed to herbicides at levels that represented spray drift situations, and the decline of residues was investigated through subsequent chemical analysis. The disappearance of 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-acetic acid], 2,4-DB [4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butyric acid], mecoprop {2-[(4-chloro-o-tolyl)oxy]propionic acid}, 2,4,5-T [(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid], and dicamba (3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid) was almost linear when concentration data were plotted against the logarithm of time. The results indicate that for practical purposes a kinetic rate equation [conc. = a – b log (time)] would describe the residue decline.

Field studies were conducted at Morden, Manitoba, in 1994 and 1995 to investigate the effect of crop growth stages on canola and sunflower tolerance to sublethal doses of thifensulfuron:tribenuron (2:1). Thifensulfuron:tribenuron at doses of 0, 0.23, 0.45, 0.9, 1.8, and 3.6 g ai ha−1 plus a nonionic surfactant at 0.5% v/v were applied to canola and sunflower at the two- to three-leaf, four- to five-leaf, and six- to seven-leaf stages. Crop leaf stage at the time of application affected tolerance of both crops to thifensulfuron:tribenuron. Crop injury was lowest, and flowering, seed yield, and seed oil content were least affected when low doses of thifensulfuron:tribenuron were applied at the two- to three-leaf stage. At the highest dose, there was little practical difference among growth stages since yield of both crops was severely reduced. Producers with drift-affected canola or sunflower can expect less effect on crop yield when thifensulfuron:tribenuron injury occurs during early crop growth.

Surfactant concentrations from 0.0008 to 12.5% (w/w) in spray volumes from 19 to 475 L/ha were tested with and without rimsulfuron on giant foxtail. Both factors varied at 5-fold increments so treatments with equal surfactant concentrations and rates could be compared. As surfactant concentration increased from 0.0008 to 0.1%, rimsulfuron activity increased from less than 20% to more than 90% growth inhibition. This increase was dependent on surfactant concentration. As surfactant concentration increased from 0.5 to 12.5%, rimsulfuron activity decreased to less than 20% at all spray volumes. This decreased activity and the associated surfactant phytotoxicity was dependent on surfactant rate, not concentration. Thus rimsulfuron can be much less active when applied with too little or too much surfactant.

When spray mixtures were examined using a laser spray droplet analyzer, the new isopropylamine glyphosate formulation produced more small droplets than a previous isopropylamine salt of glyphosate formulation or glyphosate–trimesium plus nonionic surfactant. The use of a pre-orifice flat-fan nozzle and an impact type flat-fan nozzle reduced the amount of small droplets produced compared to an existing extended range flat-fan nozzle, while maintaining a spray droplet distribution that could still provide good weed control. The new nozzle technologies could provide a useful management tool to manage potential drift situations.

Greenhouse and field studies were conducted in 1992 and 1993 in Manitoba and Saskatchewan to determine the effect of simulated sprayer contamination with thifensulfuron and thifensulfuron:tribenuron (2:1) on canola. In greenhouse studies, canola was more sensitive to tribenuron and thifensulfuron:tribenuron (2:1) than thifensulfuron. Thifensulfuron was more phytotoxic to canola when applied with Merge (50% surfactant blend and 50% petroleum hydrocarbon solvents) than with Agral 90 (non-ionic spreader and activator) at recommended adjuvant concentrations {1% and 0.2% (v/v), respectively}. In the field, canola injury tended to be more severe when thifensulfuron was applied with Merge than with Agral 90, but yields did not differ significantly between adjuvants, Thifensulfuron and thifensulfuron:tribenuron (2:1) at rates as low as 0.1 g ai/ha severely injured canola, delayed flowering, and reduced yield and subsequent seed germination. Thifensulfuron at 0.1 to 0.15 g/ha in mixtures with sethoxydim plus Merge reduced yields up to 61%.

Two studies investigated off-target exposure of soybean to plant growth regulator (PGR) herbicides and determined if simultaneous exposure to PGR herbicides and labeled soybean herbicides increase PGR injury. The PGR herbicides, 2,4-D, clopyralid, and dicamba, as well as dicamba plus the auxin transport inhibitor diflufenzopyr, were applied to glyphosate-resistant soybean at the V3, V7, and R2 soybean growth stages. Two rates were chosen from previous and preliminary research to approximate threshold rates that would cause a yield reduction so as to distinguish differences in sensitivity between growth stages. All four PGR herbicides caused significant soybean injury, height reduction, and yield loss at one or more application rates and growth stages. Relative to other PGR herbicides, dicamba reduced soybean yield at the lowest rate (a potential rate from residues remaining in improperly cleaned application equipment), followed by clopyralid, with 2,4-D requiring the highest rate to reduce soybean yield (a potential rate from a high level of spray drift). Dicamba and dicamba plus diflufenzopyr were applied at equal fractions of labeled use rates for corn to compare them directly at equivalent levels of off-target movement. Dicamba plus diflufenzopyr caused less injury and yield loss than dicamba applied alone. In a second study, the highest labeled soybean use rates of glyphosate, imazethapyr, imazamox, and fomesafen were applied alone and in combination with the highest rate of dicamba used in the first study (1% of a labeled use rate for corn) at the V3 and V7 stages. Dicamba demonstrated synergistic interactions with imazamox, imazethapyr, and fomesafen (but not with glyphosate) to further reduce yield under some circumstances, especially when applied at the V7 stage. Several treatments that included dicamba reduced soybean seed weight when applied at either the V3 or V7 stage and reduced the number of seeds per pod at the V7 stage.

Field studies were conducted to determine the sensitivity of conventional ‘Motte’ and ‘Pioneer 9831’ soybean to simulated glyphosate drift rates applied during vegetative and reproductive development and the effect of glyphosate on progeny. Glyphosate at 8, 84, and 420 g ae/ha was applied to soybean at the V3, V6, R2, and R5 growth stages. Glyphosate at 8 and 84 g/ha did not reduce soybean plant population, growth, or yield or cause deleterious effects on progeny, regardless of the growth stage at application. Soybean population, growth, and yield were reduced as much as 99 to 100% after application of 420 g/ha glyphosate at the V3 growth stage. Glyphosate at 420 g/ha applied at V6 was less detrimental to soybean compared with the V3 timing. Delaying the application of 420 g/ha glyphosate until R2 and R5 reduced soybean yields 22 to 49% and 43 to 44%, respectively. Soybean injury from 420 g/ha glyphosate was generally transient or less severe when applied at the V6 growth stage or later. However, 420 g/ha glyphosate at R5 (initial podfill) caused a 390 to 450 kg/ha yield reduction compared with the V6 application, which indicated greater soybean vulnerability to glyphosate drift during podfill than in the late-stage vegetative development. Although glyphosate at 420 g/ha was injurious to soybean, regardless of application timing, progeny was not affected.

Availability of soybean with dicamba resistance will provide an alternative weed management option, but risk of dicamba injury to sensitive crops from off-target movement and spray tank contamination is of concern. Research conducted at multiple locations and years evaluated soybean injury and yield response to POST applications of the diglycolamine salt of dicamba. Dicamba was applied at the two to three trifoliate stage (V3/V4) at 4.4, 8.8, 17.5, 35, 70, 140, and 280 g ae ha−1 (1/128 to 1/2 of the recommended use rate of 560 g ae ha−1). Soybean injury 7 d after application was 20% following dicamba at 4.4 g ha−1 and increased to 89% at 280 g ha−1. At 14 d after application, injury for the same rates increased from 39 to 97%. In a separate study, dicamba was applied at first flower (R1) at 1.1, 2.2, 4.4, 8.8, 17.5, 35, and 70 g ha−1 (1/512 to 1/8 of use rate). Soybean injury 7 d following dicamba application was 19% at 1.1 g ha−1 and increased to 64% at 70 g ha−1. For the same rates of dicamba, injury from 7 to 14 d after application increased no more than 4 percentage points. For dicamba rates in common for the timing studies, soybean injury 14 d after treatment was greatest for application at V3/V4, but the negative effect on mature soybean height and yield was greatest for application at R1. For dicamba at 4.4 g ha−1 (1/128th of use rate), soybean yield was reduced 4% when applied at V3/V4 and 10% when applied at R1. For 17.5 g ha−1 dicamba (1/32 of use rate), yield was reduced 15% at V3/V4 and 36% at R1. Based on yield reductions for 4.4 and 17.5 g ha−1 dicamba, soybean at flowering was around 2.5 times more sensitive compared with vegetative exposure.

Development and utilization of dicamba-, glufosinate-, and 2,4-D-resistant crop cultivars will potentially have a significant influence on weed management in the southern United States. However, off-site movement to adjacent nontolerant crops and other plants is a concern in many areas of eastern North Carolina and other portions of the southeastern United States, especially where sensitive crops are grown. Cotton, peanut, and soybean are not resistant to these herbicides, will most likely be grown in proximity, and applicators will need to consider potential adverse effects on nonresistant crops when these herbicides are used. Research was conducted with rates of glufosinate, dicamba, and 2,4-D designed to simulate drift on cotton, peanut, and soybean to determine effects on yield and quality and to test correlations of visual estimates of percent injury with crop yield and a range of growth and quality parameters. Experiments were conducted in North Carolina near Lewiston-Woodville and Rocky Mount during 2009 and 2010. Cotton and peanut (Lewiston-Woodville and Rocky Mount) and soybean (two separate fields [Rocky Mount] during each year were treated with dicamba and the amine formulation of 2,4-D at 1/2, 1/8, 1/32, 1/128, and 1/512 the manufacturer's suggested use rate of 280 g ai ha−1 and 540 g ai ha−1, respectively. Glufosinate was applied at rates equivalent to 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, and 1/32 the manufacturer's suggested use rate of 604 g ai ha−1. A wide range of visible injury was noted at both 1 and 2 wk after treatment (WAT) for all crops. Crop yield was reduced for most crops when herbicides were applied at the highest rate. Although correlations of injury 1 and 2 WAT with yield were significant (P ≤ 0.05), coefficients ranged from −0.25 to −0.50, −0.36 to −0.62, and −0.40 to −0.67 for injury 1 WAT vs. yield for cotton, peanut, and soybean, respectively. These respective crops had ranges of correlations of −0.17 to −0.43, −0.34 to −0.64, and −0.41 to −0.60 for injury 2 WAT. Results from these experiments will be used to emphasize the need for diligence in application of these herbicides in proximity to crops that are susceptible as well as the need to clean sprayers completely before spraying sensitive crops.

Herbicide efficacy, coverage, and retention were evaluated for spray applied through Drift Guard, Turbo TeeJet, AI TeeJet, and TurboDrop drift-reducing nozzles compared to a conventional flat-fan nozzle. Percentage spray coverage detected on water-sensitive cards was greater for conventional and Drift Guard nozzles than for Turbo TeeJet, AI TeeJet, and TurboDrop nozzles. Spray without adjuvants was retained better by redroot pigweed for treatments applied with conventional and Drift Guard nozzles than Turbo TeeJet, AI TeeJet, and TurboDrop nozzles. However, spray with adjuvants was retained similarly for all nozzle types when averaged over spray adjuvant and two weed species. The efficiency of spray retention was greater for spray applied in 47 than in 190 L/ha spray volume for all nozzles. Paraquat and glyphosate, representing contact and translocated herbicides, respectively, provided similar grass species control for all nozzle types, regardless of spray volume. Paraquat and glyphosate were also equally or more effective in 47 compared to 190 L/ha spray volume.

Herbicide applications often do not reach their full potential because only a small amount of the active ingredients reaches the intended targets. Selecting the appropriate application parameters and equipment can allow for improved efficacy. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of droplet size on efficacy of six commonly used herbicides. Atrazine (1.12 kg ai ha−1), cloransulam-methyl (0.18 g ai ha−1), dicamba (0.14 kg ae ha−1), glufosinate (0.59 kg ai ha−1), saflufenacil (12.48 g ai ha−1), and 2,4-D (0.20 kg ae ha−1) were applied to seven plant species using an XR11003 nozzle at 138, 276, and 414 kPa and a AI11003 nozzle at 207, 345, and 483 kPa. Each herbicide, nozzle, and pressure combination was evaluated for droplet size spectra. Treatments were applied at 131 L ha−1 to common lambsquarters, common sunflower, shattercane, soybean, tomato, velvetleaf, and volunteer corn. Control from 2,4-D was observed to increase approximately 12% on average for all species except common lambsquarters as droplet size increased from medium to very coarse (Dv0.5 303 to 462 μm; Dv0.5 is droplet size such that 50% of spray volume is contained in droplets of equal or smaller size). Control with atrazine was near 95% for common lambsquarters, common sunflower, and soybean. Atrazine provided the greatest shattercane control using a medium (Dv0.5 325 μm) droplet, whereas the same droplet size provided the lowest tomato control. Control of common lambsquarters, shattercane, and tomato with cloransulam-methyl increased 79% when decreasing droplet size from extremely coarse to fine (Dv0.5 637 to 228 μm). Dicamba control of common lambsquarters increased 17% using a medium droplet compared with a fine droplet (Dv0.5 279 to 204 μm). Dry weight of common sunflower and soybean was reduced 21% using dicamba when using a very coarse spray compared with a fine spray classification (Dv0.5 491 to 204 μm). Common lambsquarters control using glufosinate increased 18% using a fine spray classification (Dv0.5 186 μm) compared with medium (Dv0.5 250 μm) and both very coarse droplet sizes (Dv0.5 470 and 516 μm). Conversely, tomato and velvetleaf control with glufosinate was maximized using a very coarse (Dv0.5 470 and 516 μm) or extremely coarse droplet (Dv0.5 628 μm) with increases of 11 and 25% compared with a fine spray (Dv0.5 186 μm). Saflufenacil control of volunteer corn was 38% greater using extremely coarse droplets (Dv0.5 622 μm) than fine, medium, and very coarse spray classifications (Dv0.5 257 to 514 μm). Overall, spray classifications for the herbicides evaluated play an important role in herbicide efficacy and should be tailored to the herbicide being used and the targeted weed species.

Vapor movement of synthetic auxin herbicides can injure desirable plants outside the treatment zone. Vapor movement of the synthetic auxin herbicides aminocyclopyrachlor and aminocyclopyrachlor methyl was compared with that of the relatively volatile herbicide dicamba and the low volatile herbicide aminopyralid with a soybean bioassay under greenhouse and field conditions. Soybean is very sensitive to these active ingredients. Under greenhouse conditions, 82 (61 to 104) mg ae ha−1 of aminocyclopyrachlor, 26 (18 to 33) mg ae ha−1 of aminocyclopyrachlor methyl, 82 (69 to 95) mg ae ha−1 of aminopyralid, and 61 (47 to 75) mg ae ha−1 of dicamba produced an estimated 25% visual soybean phytotoxicity response when soybean was treated POST at the V3 growth stage (GR25 [95% confidence interval]). In field studies, aminocyclopyrachlor, aminocyclopyrachlor methyl, and aminopyralid were applied at 70 g ae ha−1 and dicamba was applied at 560 g ae ha−1 (labeled application rates) to soybean at the V3 growth stage. All herbicides were applied within an enclosed chamber (3 m by 3 m by 1 m) to mitigate movement of spray droplets. The enclosures were removed shortly after spray application and soybean response immediately surrounding the treated area was recorded in each of eight directions approximately 10 d after treatment. On the basis of bioassay responses, relative amount of vapor movement was dicamba > aminocyclopyrachlor methyl > aminopyralid ≈ aminocyclopyrachlor. Vapor movement of aminocyclopyrachlor was very low indicating that the risk of phytotoxic response of sensitive plants due to volatility of aminocyclopyrachlor is negligible.

Field experiments were conducted to determine the influence of nozzle type, spray volume, and adjuvants on herbicide efficacy. Carfentrazone and imazamox, representing contact and translocated herbicides, respectively, were equally or more effective when applied with drift-reducing TurboDrop or Drift Guard nozzles than the conventional flat-fan nozzle in 95% of the comparisons. Imazamox was equally effective when applied in 47, 94, or 190 L/ha spray volume, regardless of nozzle type or adjuvant. Carfentrazone applied in 47 L/ha spray volume controlled flax and sunflower as well as in 94 or 190 L/ha, provided urea ammonium nitrate fertilizer and either nonionic surfactant or methylated vegetable oil were included in the spray mixture. Conversely, carfentrazone with only urea ammonium nitrate was less effective when applied in 47 than in 94 or 190 L/ha spray volume. Carfentrazone and imazamox applied in low spray volumes (47 L/ha) gave consistent control when an effective adjuvant was included in the spray mixture.

Research was conducted to compare cotton and tomato response to volatility of 2,4-D, dicamba, and triclopyr formulations. Herbicide treatments were applied to tilled soil during August and September, and potted plants were placed in the center of treated strips. To quantify injury, leaf cupping/crinkling/drooping; leaf rolling/strapping; stem epinasty; and stem swelling/cracking were each visually rated on an injury scale of 0 to 5 (0 = none, 1 = slight, 2 = slight to moderate, 3 = moderate, 4 = moderate to severe, and 5 = severe). Leaf cupping/crinkling/drooping injury averaged across herbicide treatments at 1× rates was 1.0 for cotton and 2.0 for tomato 14 d after treatment (DAT). Averaged across crops, leaf cupping/crinkling/drooping injury for the 1× rates 14 DAT was equivalent for the 2,4-D dimethylamine (DMA) salt, 2,4-D acid, dicamba DMA salt, dicamba diglycolamine (DGA) salt, dicamba acid, and triclopyr acid formulations and ranged from 1.1 to 1.8. For tomato, the only herbicide treatments with injury 14 DAT no greater than for the nontreated were 1× rates of 2,4-D DMA and 2,4-D acid for leaf rolling/strapping (1.0); 2,4-D acid, dicamba DMA, dicamba acid, and triclopyr acid for stem epinasty (0.3 to 0.7); and 2,4-D DMA, 2,4-D acid, dicamba DMA, dicamba DGA, dicamba acid, and triclopyr acid for stem swelling/cracking (0.1 to 0.2). A weighted factor assigned to each injury criterion provided an overall total injury estimate of 0 to 100%. When applied at 1× rates, total injury for 2,4-D isooctyl ester was 10% for cotton and 36% for tomato and for triclopyr butoxyethyl ester was 11% for cotton and 50% for tomato. For the 2,4-D DMA, 2,4-D acid, dicamba DMA, dicamba DGA, dicamba acid, and triclopyr acid formulations, total injury was 4 to 8% for cotton and 20 to 24% for tomato, and for both crops, injury was no greater than for the nontreated.

Synthetic auxin herbicides have long been utilized for the selective control of broadleaf weeds in a variety of crop and noncrop environments. Recently, two agrochemical companies have begun to develop soybean with resistance to 2,4-D and dicamba which might lead to an increase in the application of these herbicides in soybean production areas in the near future. Additionally, little research has been published pertaining to the effects of a newly-discovered synthetic auxin herbicide, aminocyclopyrachlor, on soybean phytotoxicity. Two field trials were conducted in 2011 and 2012 to evaluate the effects of sublethal rates of 2,4-D amine, aminocyclopyrachlor, aminopyralid, clopyralid, dicamba, fluroxypyr, picloram, and triclopyr on visible estimates of soybean injury, height reduction, maturity, yield, and yield components. Each of these herbicides was applied to soybean at the V3 and R2 stages of growth at 0.028, 0.28, 2.8, and 28 g ae ha−1. Greater height reductions occurred with all herbicides, except 2,4-D amine and triclopyr when applied at the V3 compared to the R2 stage of growth. Greater soybean yield loss occurred with all herbicides except 2,4-D amine when applied at the R2 compared to the V3 stage of growth. The only herbicide applied that resulted in no yield loss at either stage was 2,4-D amine. When applied at 28 g ae ha−1 at the V3 stage of growth, the general order of herbicide-induced yield reductions to soybean from greatest to least was aminopyralid > aminocyclopyrachlor = clopyralid = picloram > fluroxypyr > triclopyr > dicamba > 2,4-D amine. At the R2 stage of growth, the general order of herbicide-induced yield reductions from greatest to least was aminopyralid > aminocyclopyrachlor = picloram > clopyralid > dicamba > fluroxypyr = triclopyr > 2,4-D amine. Yield reductions appeared to be more correlated with seeds per pod than to pods per plant and seed weight. An 18- to 26-d delay in soybean maturity also occurred with R2 applications of all synthetic auxin herbicides at 28 g ae ha−1 except 2,4-D. Results from this research indicate that there are vast differences in the relative phytotoxicity of these synthetic auxin herbicides to soybean, and that the timing of the synthetic auxin herbicide exposure will have a significant impact on the severity of soybean height and/or yield reductions.