Cotton growers commonly use glufosinate-based programs to control glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. Palmer amaranth must be small (≤7.5 cm) for consistent control by glufosinate, and growers often miss the optimum application timing. XtendFlex™ cotton may provide growers a tool to control larger Palmer amaranth. Glufosinate, dicamba, and glufosinate plus dicamba were compared for Palmer amaranth control in a rescue situation. Herbicides were applied to 16- to 23-cm weeds (POST-1) followed by a second application (POST-2) 12 d later. Glufosinate-ammonium at 590 g ai ha−1 plus dicamba diglycolamine salt at 560 g ae ha−1 POST-1 followed by glufosinate plus dicamba POST-2 was more effective than glufosinate at 880 g ha−1 POST-1 followed by glufosinate at 590 g ha−1 POST-2 or dicamba alone applied twice. Following a directed layby application of glyphosate, diuron, and S-metolachlor 14 d after POST-2, Palmer amaranth was controlled 99% by any system containing dicamba or glufosinate plus dicamba POST-1 followed by dicamba, glufosinate, or glufosinate plus dicamba POST-2 compared with 87% to 91% control by glufosinate alone applied twice. Cotton height and number of main stem nodes at layby were reduced in systems with dicamba only POST-1 followed by dicamba or glufosinate plus dicamba POST-2, presumably due to competition from the slowly dying Palmer amaranth with dicamba only POST-1. These treatments also delayed cotton maturity and reduced lint yield compared with systems containing glufosinate plus dicamba at POST-1.

Glufosinate controls glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth, but growers struggle to make timely applications. XtendFlexTM cotton, resistant to dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate, may provide growers an option to control larger weeds. Palmer amaranth control and cotton growth, yield, and fiber quality were evaluated in a rescue situation created by delaying the first POST herbicide application. Treatments consisted of two POST applications of dicamba plus glufosinate, separated by 14 d, with the first application timely (0-d delay) or delayed 7, 14, 21, or 28 d. All treatments included a layby application of diuron plus MSMA. Palmer amaranth, 14 d after first POST, was controlled 99, 96, 89, 75, and 73% with 0-, 7-, 14-, 21-, or 28-d delays, respectively. Control increased following the second application, and the weed was controlled at least 94% following layby. Cotton yield decreased linearly as first POST application was delayed, with yield reductions ranging from 8 to 42% with 7- to 28-d delays. Delays in first POST application delayed cotton maturity but did not affect fiber quality.

Cotton [Gossypium hirsutum (L.) ‘Hancock’] lint yield or quality was not adversely affected under weed free conditions by three consecutive annual preemergence applications of up to 1.68 kg/ha fluometuron [1,1-dimethyl-3-(a,a,a-trifluoro-m-tolyl)urea] alone or in combination with 0.84 kg/ha trifluralin (a,a,a-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine) preplant incorporated on silt loam soils of the Memphis catena containing less than 1% organic matter. Similar applications of fluometuron at 3.36 kg/ha delayed maturity of cotton plants and ultimately reduced lint yields. Trifluralin treatments tended to overcome the detrimental effects of high rates of fluometuron. There was no effect on fiber development and maturation because fiber length and fineness (micronaire) were virtually identical for all treatments. The effect on maturity as determined by percent first harvest was a reflection of slower plant growth and fruiting and not of the development of the fiber itself. These results indicate no detrimental effects on cotton yield, maturity, and quality from annual applications of these herbicides at rates recommended and normally used in Tennessee.

Cotton tolerance of DPX-PE350 applied POST alone, mixed with acephate, carbaryl, or dimethoate applied at 220, 1100, or 280 g ai ha−1, respectively, or following aldicarb, disulfoton, or phorate applied in the seed furrow at 1.0, kg ai ha−1 was evaluated. DPX-PE350 at 170 g ae ha−1 did not adversely affect seed cotton yield, fiber length, fiber length uniformity, or micronaire but did decrease fiber strength. The insecticides did not alter cotton response to DPX-PE350. Entireleaf morningglory was controlled 92, 95, and 96% with DPX-PE350 applied POST at 56, 110, and 170 g ha−1, respectively. Mixing acephate, carbaryl, or dimethoate with DPX-PE350 did not affect control.

Field experiments were conducted in 1991 and 1992 near Stoneville, MS and Greenville, MS, to determine the impact of pyrithiobac on cotton fruiting, maturity, and yield. Trials were conducted in areas maintained weed-free with standard production practices to optimize yields. Pyrithiobac was applied at 105 or 210 g ae/ha either PRE or POST to cotton in the cotyledon to 2-leaf, 5- to 7-leaf, and matchhead-square (MHS) stages of growth. At one location, monosodium salt of methylarsonic acid (MSMA) and fluometuron plus MSMA were applied as standard comparisons. At the Stoneville location, injury 1 wk after treatment (WAT) with pyrithiobac ranged from 2.5% with 105 g/ha applied at cotyledon to 2-leaf to 26% with 210 g/ha applied at MHS. Injury was transient in nature and was rarely detectable 4 wk after treatment in either year. Injury was not evaluated at the Greenville location. At Stoneville, a reduction in height occurred with MHS applications of pyrithiobac and MSMA. There was no reduction in yield for any treatment compared to the untreated check in 1991 at Stoneville and in both years at Greenville. In 1992 at Stoneville, treatments of 210 g/ha pyrithiobac, MSMA, and fluometuron plus MSMA at all application timings reduced yield. Pyrithiobac at 105 g/ha applied PRE also reduced yield. Greatest yield loss occurred with treatments of MSMA applied at MHS. There were no yield reductions at either location with postemergence application of 105 g/ha pyrithiobac.