Investigations of the relevance of low-tunnel methodology and air sampling concerning the off-target movement of dicamba were conducted from 2018 to 2022, focused primarily on volatility. This research, divided into three experiments, evaluated the impact of herbicides and adjuvants added to dicamba and the type of surface treated on dicamba volatility. Treatment combinations included glyphosate and glufosinate, the presence of a simulated contamination rate of ammonium sulfate (AMS), the benefit of a volatility reduction agent (VRA), and a vegetated (dicamba-resistant cotton) or soil surface treated with dicamba. Volatility assessments included air sampling collected over 48 h. Dicamba treatments were applied four times to each of two bare soil or cotton trays and placed inside the tunnels. Dicamba from air samples was extracted and quantified. Field assessments included the maximum and average visible injury in bioindicator soybean and the lateral movement of dicamba damage expressed by the farthest distance from the center of the plots to the position in which plants exhibited 5% injury. Adding glufosinate and glyphosate to dicamba increased the dicamba amount in air samples. A simulated tank contamination rate of AMS (0.005% v/v) did not affect dicamba emissions compared to a treatment lacking AMS. Adding a VRA reduced dicamba in air samples by 70% compared to treatment without the adjuvant. Dicamba treatments applied on vegetation generally produced greater detectable amounts of dicamba than treatments applied to bare soil. Field assessment results usually followed differences in dicamba concentration by treatments tested. Results showed that low-tunnel methodology allowed simultaneous comparisons of several treatment combinations concerning dicamba volatility.

Weed management systems were established near Lubbock, TX in 2013, 2014, and 2015 to assess the effectiveness of premixed 2,4-D choline+glyphosate alone and in combination with glufosinate and soil-residual herbicides for Palmer amaranth control. Systems consisted of trifluralin applied preplant incorporated followed by an early POST application followed by a mid-POST application. Palmer amaranth control 21 days after the early POST application ranged from 75 to 90% for all treatments that included 2,4-D choline+glyphosate alone or in a tank-mixture in 2013. Twenty-eight days after the mid-POST application, Palmer amaranth was controlled 86 to 99% for all herbicide systems with the exception of systems that included a mid-POST application of glufosinate alone. Combined across 2014 and 2015, Palmer amaranth control 21 days after the early POST application ranged from 96 to 98% for all systems that included 2,4-D choline+glyphosate, 2,4-D choline alone, or 2,4-D choline in a tank-mixture. Combined across 2014 and 2015, Palmer amaranth control 28 days after the mid-POST application ranged from 95 to 100% with the exception of the following: trifluralin preplant incorporated followed by glufosinate with or without acetochlor applied early POST followed by glufosinate mid-POST and trifluralin preplant incorporated followed by glyphosate early POST followed by glyphosate mid-POST. Overall, numerous effective systems were identified; however, systems containing 2,4-D choline+glyphosate or 2,4-D choline early POST and/or mid-POST were among the most effective. Glyphosate or glufosinate only systems or systems that relied on glufosinate alone at the mid-POST timing were inconsistent and often performed poorly.

Field experiments were conducted in Louisiana and Mississippi from 2011 through 2013 to evaluate crop injury, weed control, and yield in field corn following pyroxasulfone applied PRE and POST. Pyroxasulfone PRE or POST did not injure corn at any evaluation. Barnyardgrass control was not improved with the addition of any POST treatment to pyroxasulfone alone or atrazine plus pyroxasulfone PRE; however, all POST treatments increased barnyardgrass control to at least 95% at all evaluations following atrazine PRE. All treatments that contained a PRE followed by POST application controlled browntop millet ≥90% at all evaluations. All POST treatments increased ivyleaf morningglory control to ≥92% following atrazine or pyroxasulfone alone PRE. However, control with atrazine plus pyroxasulfone PRE was similar or greater 28 d after POST than all treatments that received a POST application. In the absence of a POST treatment, pyroxasulfone or atrazine plus pyroxasulfone PRE controlled Palmer amaranth 93 to 96% at all evaluations, but atrazine alone PRE provided 84, 82, and 66% control 7, 14, and 28 d after POST, respectively. All programs that contained a PRE followed by POST herbicide treatment controlled Palmer amaranth >90% at all evaluations. Corn yield following all treatments except atrazine alone PRE and the nontreated were similar and ranged from 10990 to 12330 kg ha−1. This research demonstrated that pyroxasulfone can be a valuable tool for weed management in a corn weed management program.

Effects of seven herbicides and two herbicide formulations on the phytotoxicity of glyphosate {[N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine]} were studied in the greenhouse. All herbicide formulations tested reduced glyphosate toxicity; the degree of reduction among herbicides varied. Type of formulation did not alter the reducing effects of propazine [2-chloro-4,6-bis(isopropylamino)-s-triazine] or propachlor (2-chloro-N-isopropylacetanilide). Liquid formulations of cyanazine {2-[[4-chloro-6-(ethylamino)-s-triazin-2-yl] amino]-2-methylpropionitrile} and linuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea] caused less reduction than the wettable powder formulations, but the liquid formulation of atrazine [2-chloro-4-(ethylamino)-6-(isopropylamino)-s-triazine] caused greater reduction than the wettable powder. Inert ingredients of the herbicide formulations were primarily responsible for reduced glyphosate toxicity.

Acifluorfen {5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid} applied alone and in mixtures with propanil [N-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)propanamide] reduced rough grain yield of rice (Oryza sativa L. ‘Lebonnet’ or ‘Bond’) by 7% when applied at the late-booting or heading growth stages, averaged over several rates of application. Earlier applications did not reduce rice yield. The highest rate (0.6 kg ai/ha) of acifluorfen alone and in mixtures with propanil at 3.4 kg ai/ha reduced grain yields more than lower rates (0.1 or 0.3 kg ai/ha). Triclopyr {[(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl)oxy] acetic acid} alone and in mixtures with propanil reduced rough grain yields of rice by 18% when applied at the late-booting growth stage, averaged over several rates of applications, but did not affect yields when applied at the early-tillering, jointing, or early-booting growth stages. Whole-grain milling yield and germination of rice seed were not affected by acifluorfen or triclopyr alone or in mixtures with propanil, regardless of rate or growth stage of application.

Field studies were conducted to study the interaction of sethoxydim or fluazifop-P with clopyralid and/or ethametsulfuron applied as tank mixtures to canola. Control of the indicator species barley, broadbean, and wild mustard with the tank mixtures was comparable to, or sometimes better than, that attained with each herbicide alone. Canola tolerated all herbicides applied individually and all tank mixtures of these herbicides except fluazifop-P and ethametsulfuron. Tank mixtures of fluazifop-P and ethametsulfuron, with or without clopyralid included in the mixture, suppressed early growth of canola in two of four tests and reduced seed yield in one. Sethoxydim, clopyralid, and ethametsulfuron combined in tank mixtures provide an effective POST alternative for selective control of grass and broadleaf weeds in canola.

Field experiments were conducted during 1984 and 1985 to determine the influence of 2,4-D and MCPA amine and ester formulations on control of foxtail millet with diclofop. Foxtail millet control increased as the diclofop rate increased from 0.6 to 1.7 kg ai/ha whether diclofop was applied alone or with 2,4-D or MCPA amine and ester formulations; however, foxtail millet control was lower when diclofop was applied with 2,4-D or MCPA amine and ester formulations compared to diclofop applied alone. MCPA ester, MCPA amine, 2,4-D ester, or 2,4-D amine at 0.14 kg ai/ha added to a diclofop spray mixture reduced foxtail millet control 8, 15, 20, and 30% compared to diclofop applied alone, averaged over diclofop rates of 0.6, 0.8, 1.1, 1.4, and 1.7 kg/ha. Adding a petroleum oil to diclofop increased foxtail millet control with diclofop at 0.6 kg/ha but not at 0.8 kg/ha. The petroleum oil additive did not overcome the antagonism of foxtail millet control when diclofop at 0.6 kg/ha was applied with 2,4-D or MCPA amine and ester formulations. The amount of 14C-diclofop absorbed by oats was greater when diclofop was applied with the ester formulations of 2,4-D or MCPA compared to the amine formulations. Either once-refined sunflower oil or sunflower oil methyl ester applied with 14C-diclofop increased the amount of 14C absorbed and translocated in oat plants compared to 14C-diclofop applied alone.

Field experiments were conducted to determine the effects of tank-mix and sequential postemergence (POE) applications of the insecticides carbaryl and dimethoate with sethoxydim on large crabgrass control and cotton tolerance. Large crabgrass control was similar with sethoxydim and sethoxydim-dimethoate tank mixtures. Although tank mixing carbaryl with sethoxydim reduced control, it was not reduced when carbaryl was applied 2 days before or 2 days after applying sethoxydim. Neither the insecticides nor sethoxydim applied alone or as tank mixtures injured cotton or affected lint yield, percent lint, fiber length, fiber length uniformity, fiber strength, or micronaire.

Johnsongrass control in the field was greater with fenoxaprop or haloxyfop than with sethoxydim in 1985 and 1986. Johnsongrass control was reduced under field and greenhouse conditions by adding a dimethylamine salt of 2,4-D. Generally, the antagonism was overcome by increasing the rate of fenoxaprop, haloxyfop, or sethoxydim. Sethoxydim showed less antagonism from 2,4-D than did fenoxaprop or haloxyfop in the greenhouse.

Field experiments were conducted to determine the effects of tank-mixing fluometuron {N,N-dimethyl-N′-[3-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl] urea} or MSMA (monosodium salt of methylarsonic acid) with sethoxydim {2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-one} or the butyl ester of fluazifop {(±)-2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]oxy] phenoxy] propanic acid} on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) tolerance and large crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. # DIGSA] control. Postemergence (over-the-top) application of 1.7 kg ai/ha of fluometuron reduced cotton lint yield 17 to 23% in three of four tests. No yield reduction resulted from postemergence application of 1.1 kg ae/ha of MSMA. Tank-mixing 0.1 or 0.2 kg ai/ha of sethoxydim or 0.1 or 0.2 kg ae/ha of fluazifop with fluometuron or MSMA did not alter the effect of fluometuron or MSMA on cotton yield. Tank mixtures of 1.1 to 2.2 kg/ha of fluometuron plus sethoxydim or fluazifop were antagonistic. No antagonism was observed when fluometuron was applied 3 days before or 6 h following sethoxydim or fluazifop application. Tank-mixing 1.1 or 2.2 kg/ha of MSMA with sethoxydim or fluazifop initially reduced control of large crabgrass. Antagonism was not observed at 4 weeks after tank-mix application of MSMA plus sethoxydim, and was observed in only one of three experiments 4 weeks following tank-mix application of MSMA plus fluazifop. When antagonism was observed with tank mixtures of fluazifop plus MSMA, sequential application of MSMA 1 to 7 days before application of fluazifop did not overcome the antagonism. No antagonism occurred when MSMA was applied 6 or more hours after fluazifop application.

Field studies were conducted to identify herbicides suitable for improved control of hairy nightshade, redroot pigweed, and common lambsquarters in pinto beans. Fomesafen at 0.25 kg ai ha-1 did not adequately control these weeds. Clomazone at 0.5 kg ai ha-1 controlled common lambsquarters but only suppressed the growth of redroot pigweed and hairy nightshade. Ethalfluralin at 0.84 to 1.1 kg ai ha-1 gave excellent initial control of these weeds but did not control later flushes of hairy nightshade. Imazethapyr applied PPI or POST at 50 to 75 g ai ha-1 controlled hairy nightshade, redroot pigweed, and common lambsquarters throughout the growing season. Imazethapyr combined with ethalfluralin gave superior weed control and resulted in greater yields than the most commonly used herbicides in pinto beans in western Canada.

Field experiment were conducted to determine interactions of chlorimuron or imazaquin with fomesafen, lactofen, or acifluorfen on three-leaf and eight-leaf common cocklebur, hemp sesbania, pitted morningglory, and prickly sida. Antagonism was the most common interaction with common cocklebur, and was most severe with chlorimuron combined with fomesafen or acifluorfen, whereas lactofen did not antagonize common cocklebur control. Reductions in control were greater when low rates of chlorimuron were used. On three-leaf prickly sida, control synergistically increased when imazaquin was combined with fomesafen or acifluorfen, but the majority of these combinations were additive on eight-leaf prickly sida. Three-leaf pitted morningglory control synergistically increased when 36 g ai ha–1 imazaquin was combined with 210 g ai ha–1 fomesafen or 110 or 220 g ai ha–1 lactofen. With eight-leaf pitted morningglory, synergism occurred when 2 g ai ha–1 chlorimuron was combined with the high rate of any diphenylether herbicide tested, and when 36 g ha–1 imazaquin was combined with 110 g ha–1 lactofen or 210 g ai ha–1 acifluorfen; however, at higher rates of chlorimuron or imazaquin, several antagonistic interactions occurred. Hemp sesbania was controlled over 90% by all combinations, and no interactions occurred.

Sulfonylurea-tolerant soybean (STS soybean) tolerance to imazethapyr (70 g/ha) plus thifensulfuron (4.4 g/ha) tank mixture was evaluated in 1993 and 1994 at two locations in Illinois. Thifensulfuron injury was reduced from 27% in non-STS soybean to 1% in STS soybean 14 days after treatment (DAT). STS and non-STS soybean did not differ in response to imazethapyr alone with < 6% injury 14 DAT. Injury from the tank mix was reduced from 40% in non-STS soybean to 24% in STS soybean 14 DAT. However, a synergistic interaction between the herbicides exists in STS soybean. The yield of injured soybean was not reduced in either STS or non-STS soybean. Injury to STS soybean from the tank mix was decreased by reducing the rate of imazethapyr from 70 g/ha to 52.5 or 35 g/ha. Reducing the thifensulfuron rate mixed with imazethapyr at 70 g/ha did not decrease injury in STS soybean. Control of smooth pigweed, common lambsquarters, and common cocklebur was not affected by reducing the rate of either herbicide in the tank mixture.

Field, greenhouse, and laboratory studies were conducted to examine the potential for antagonism of postemergence graminicides when tank-mixed with cloransulam and to determine the role of herbicide absorption and translocation in observed antagonistic responses. Cloransulam antagonized annual grass control with aryloxyphenoxypropionate herbicides fluazifop-P, quizalofop, and the prepackaged formulation of fluazifop-P plus fenoxaprop. Cloransulam did not affect annual grass control with the cyclohexandiones clethodim and sethoxydim. In the greenhouse, increasing the rate of the graminicides was a more effective strategy for overcoming antagonism for quizalofop than for fluazifop-P or fluazifop-P plus fenoxaprop, and success was species dependent. Annual grass control with clethodim, sethoxydim, and glyphosate was not adversely affected by tank mixtures with cloransulam. Control of large rhizome johnsongrass was initially reduced when cloransulam was mixed with sethoxydim, fluazifop-P plus fenoxaprop, or quizalofop. By 6 wk after treatment, control of rhizome johnsongrass was antagonized only when cloransulam was mixed with sethoxydim. Rainfall within 1.5 h of application reduced johnsongrass control with glyphosate and sethoxydim but did not affect activity of the other herbicides. Absorption of 14C-fluazifop-P and 14C-quizalofop into broadleaf signalgrass was not affected by cloransulam 6 or 24 h after treatment. Translocation of 14C-fluazifop-P to broadleaf signalgrass shoot tissue above and below the treated leaf was decreased when fluazifop-P was combined with cloransulam. Translocation of quizalofop was not affected by cloransulam.

Ground ivy and khakiweed are troublesome broadleaf weeds of warm-season turfgrass. Field studies were conducted in Tennessee (TN) and Texas (TX) from 2008 to 2010 to evaluate the efficacy of sulfentrazone plus metsulfuron and carfentrazone plus metsulfuron tank mixtures compared with metsulfuron alone for control of ground ivy and khakiweed. In TN, sulfentrazone plus metsulfuron and carfentrazone plus metsulfuron provided accelerated control of ground ivy compared with metsulfuron alone. Over a 2-yr period, ground ivy control with metsulfuron at 10, 21, and 42 g ai ha−1 ranged from 0 to 5% 7 d after treatment (DAT) and 12 to 60% 14 DAT. Ground ivy control with mixtures of sulfentrazone plus metsulfuron ranged from 40 to 72% 7 DAT and 87 to 100% 14 DAT. Similarly, carfentrazone plus metsulfuron controlled ground ivy 5 to 32% 7 DAT and 23 to 93% 14 DAT. In TX, carfentrazone plus metsulfuron and sulfentrazone plus metsulfuron controlled khakiweed greater than metsulfuron alone 7 and 14 DAT as well. Few differences in ground ivy and khakiweed control were detected 56 DAT because metsulfuron applied alone at 21 g ai ha−1 controlled both weeds > 77%, similar to each mixture. These data indicate that when applied in mixtures, sulfentrazone and carfentrazone accelerate ground ivy and khakiweed control with metsulfuron but do not affect long-term efficacy.

Field studies were established in 1999 and 2000 to evaluate Italian ryegrass, wheat, and double-crop soybean response to fall and spring postemergence applications of flucarbazone, sulfosulfuron, clodinafop, diclofop, and tralkoxydim applied alone and in combination with thifensulfuron + tribenuron to winter wheat. Fall-applied herbicides caused 5% or less wheat injury. Spring-applied herbicides caused 3 to 45% wheat injury, and the greatest injury occurred with the combination of flucarbazone with thifensulfuron + tribenuron in the spring of 2001. Spring-applied sulfosulfuron, tralkoxydim, diclofop, and clodinafop caused 3 to 6% and 16 to 26% wheat injury in 2000 and 2001, respectively. Herbicide injury to wheat did not reduce wheat grain yield compared with the hand-weeded treatment. Italian ryegrass competition in the nontreated plots reduced wheat yield by as much as 33% compared with herbicide-treated plots. Italian ryegrass control was 89 to 99% from clodinafop and diclofop and 78 to 97% from flucarbazone, with no differences because of application timing in either year of the study. Italian ryegrass control from sulfosulfuron and tralkoxydim was greater from the spring of 2000 applications (94 to 99%) compared with the fall of 1999 applications (65 to 88%). However, in 2001, application timing (fall vs. spring) for sulfosulfuron and tralkoxydim did not affect Italian ryegrass control. Thifensulfuron + tribenuron combined with tralkoxydim reduced control of Italian ryegrass control compared with tralkoxydim alone in both years of the study. Italian ryegrass control was not reduced when thifensulfuron + tribenuron was combined with sulfosulfuron, flucarbazone, diclofop, or clodinafop. Italian ryegrass was controlled effectively by the acetyl-CoA carboxylase–inhibiting herbicides diclofop, clodinafop, and tralkoxydim. However, control of Italian ryegrass with the acetolactate synthase–inhibiting herbicides flucarbazone and sulfosulfuron was inconsistent. Double-crop soybean after wheat did not have foliar symptoms or yield loss from fall- or spring-applied herbicides.

Field experiments in winter wheat were initiated at two locations in the fall of 2006 and 2007 to evaluate winter annual broadleaf weeds and winter wheat response to POST applications of two saflufenacil formulations applied alone and in combination with 2,4-D amine. Emulsifiable concentrate (EC) and water-dispersible granule (WG) formulations of saflufenacil at 13, 25, and 50 g ai ha−1 were applied with 1.0% (v/v) crop oil concentrate (COC) and mixed with 2,4-D amine at 533 g ae ha−1 without adjuvant. Regardless of rate or formulation, saflufenacil plus COC and saflufenacil plus 2,4-D amine controlled blue mustard ≥ 91% at 17 to 20 d after treatment (DAT) compared with ≤ 50% control with 2,4-D amine alone. At least 25 g ha−1 of saflufenacil EC was necessary to control flixweed > 90%. Excluding COC from saflufenacil plus 2,4-D amine reduced flixweed control from the saflufenacil WG formulation more than the EC formulation. Most saflufenacil treatments did not control henbit satisfactorily (≤ 80%). Wheat foliar necrosis increased with increasing saflufenacil rate to as high as 30% at 3 to 6 DAT, but declined to < 15% at 10 to 20 DAT and was not evident at 30 DAT. Saflufenacil rate, formulation, and mixing with 2,4-D amine also influenced wheat stunting, but to a lesser extent than foliar necrosis. Saflufenacil EC consistently caused greater foliar necrosis and stunting on wheat than saflufenacil WG. Leaf necrosis and stunting were reduced by tank-mixing saflufenacil formulations with 2,4-D amine without COC. Grain yields of most saflufenacil treatments were similar to 2,4-D amine under weedy conditions and herbicide treatments had no effect on grain yield in weed-free experiments. Saflufenacil formulations at 25 to 50 g ha−1 with 2,4-D amine and saflufenacil WG at 25 to 50 g ha−1 with COC can control winter annual broadleaf weeds with minimal injury (< 15%) and no grain yield reductions. The addition of saflufenacil as a POST-applied herbicide would give wheat growers another useful tool to control annual broadleaf weeds, including herbicide-resistant weed species.

Field and greenhouse studies were conducted to evaluate mesotrione alone and in combinations with low rates of atrazine and bentazon for control of yellow and purple nutsedge. Mesotrione alone at rates of 105 to 210 g ai/ha controlled yellow nutsedge 43 to 70%. Mixtures of mesotrione with atrazine at 280 g ai/ha did not always improve yellow nutsedge control over that by mesotrione alone, but increasing atrazine to 560 g ai/ha in these mixtures generally provided more consistent control of yellow nutsedge. Mesotrione at 105 g ai/ha mixed with bentazon at 280 or 560 g ai/ha controlled yellow nutsedge 88% or greater which was similar to control from the standard halosulfuron at 36 g ai/ha. Mesotrione, atrazine, and bentazon alone did not control purple nutsedge. Mixtures of mesotrione plus bentazon, however, did improve control of purple nutsedge over either herbicide applied alone, but this control was not considered commercially acceptable.

Field and greenhouse studies were conducted to investigate the compatibility of MSMA in a tank mixture with glyphosate or glufosinate for broadleaf and grass weed control. Glyphosate, glufosinate, and MSMA were evaluated at 0.5×, 1×, and 2× rates, with 1× rates of 0.84 kgae/ha, 0.5 kgai/ha, and 2.2 kgai/ha, respectively. Glyphosate and glufosinate provided similar levels of control for most weed species and were often more efficacious than MSMA alone. Glyphosate controlled Palmer amaranth better than glufosinate. Glufosinate controlled hemp sesbania, pitted morningglory, and ivyleaf morningglory better than glyphosate at one location. Weed control was not improved with the addition of MSMA to glyphosate or glufosinate when compared with either herbicide alone. MSMA antagonized glyphosate efficacy on barnyardgrass, browntop millet, hemp sesbania, Palmer amaranth, and redroot pigweed. MSMA antagonized glufosinate efficacy on browntop millet, hemp sesbania, ivyleaf morningglory, johnsongrass, Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, prickly sida, redroot pigweed, and velvetleaf. Antagonism of glyphosate or glufosinate by MSMA was often overcome by applying the 2× rate of either herbicide alone. MSMA is not a compatible tank-mixture partner with glyphosate or glufosinate for weed control in cotton.

Field studies were conducted in Louisiana and Mississippi in 2009 and 2010 to evaluate coapplications of glyphosate, pyrithiobac, and residual herbicides on growth and yield of glyphosate-resistant cotton. Treatments were a factorial arrangement of glyphosate (0 and 860 g ae ha−1), pyrithiobac (0 and 470 g ai ha−1), and two residual herbicides (pendimethalin [1,120 g ai ha−1], S-metolachlor [1,070 g ai ha−1], and no residual herbicide). Cotton injury was greatest 3 d after treatment (DAT) and decreased at each evaluation interval until 28 DAT when pyrithiobac was coapplied with glyphosate. Cotton injury ranged from 4 to 17% through 14 DAT when pyrithiobac was applied alone (no residual herbicide) or with pendimethalin, but injury decreased to ≤ 3% after 14 DAT. Cotton injury 3 to 21 DAT following pyrithiobac plus S-metolachlor ranged from 4 to 31%, but S-metolachlor alone injured cotton 1 to 7%. When pyrithiobac was included, cotton injury following S-metolachlor was 3 to 15% greater than that following pendimethalin from 3 to 14 DAT. Pendimethalin did not reduce plant height at 21 or 42 DAT compared with treatments receiving no residual herbicide, but S-metolachlor reduced plant heights 5 and 4% at 21 and 42 DAT, respectively. Although cotton injury was severe in some cases and persisted until 21 DAT, the injury did not cause reductions in yield. This indicates the early-season cotton injury was transient, and cotton was able to recover from the injury with no observed differences in yield.