期刊文献+

Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Marestail in Identity-Preserved or Glyphosate-Resistant and Glyphosate/Dicamba-Resistant Soybean with Preplant Herbicides

Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Marestail in Identity-Preserved or Glyphosate-Resistant and Glyphosate/Dicamba-Resistant Soybean with Preplant Herbicides
下载PDF
导出
摘要 Two studies, each consisting of six field experiments were conducted in growers’ fields in 2018 and 2019 to determine the optimal herbicide tankmixes, applied preplant (PP) for the control of glyphosate-resistant<b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> (</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">GR</span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">)</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> marestail in</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 1) identity-preserved and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Study 1) and, 2)</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean</span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> (Study 2). </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">There was no significant injury in soybean with the PP herbicides evaluated in both studies. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">In Study 1, at 8 weeks after treatment (WAA), glyphosate + saflufenacil, glyphosate + 2,4-D ester, glyphosate + pyraflufen/2,4-D, glyphosate +, 4-D choline or glyphosate + halauxifen-methyl, applied PP, controlled GR marestail 93%, 58%, 60%, 67% and 71%, respectively</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">.</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> The addition of metribuzin to </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">the tankmixes of glyphosate + </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">saflufenacil</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, 2,4-D ester and pyraflufen/2,4-D increased the control to 98%, 91% and 95%, respectively. The addition of metribuzin + chlorimuron-ethyl to 2,4-D choline/glyphosate and glyphosate + halauxifen-methyl increased the control to 94% and 93%, respectively.</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">In Study 2, a</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">t </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">8 WAA,</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> glyphosate/dicamba</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">,</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">applied PP, </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">controlled GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">89</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">% in glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean. The addition of metribuzin </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">or </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">saflufenacil</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">to glyphosate/dicamba </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">controlled GR marestail 86% and 97%, </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">respectively. At </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">8 WAA</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, </span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">S</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-metolachlor/dicamba controlled GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 83%.</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> The addition of metribuzin or saflufenacil to the above </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">pre</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">mix controlled GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">87% and 97%</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, respectively. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Density and biomass reductions were similar to visible control. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail interference reduced soybean yield </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">60% and 53</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">% in</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Study 1 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">and 2, respectively. Reduce</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">d GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail interference with all the herbicide treatments </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">evaluated in both studies </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">resulted in soybean yield that was similar to the weed-free control.</span> Two studies, each consisting of six field experiments were conducted in growers’ fields in 2018 and 2019 to determine the optimal herbicide tankmixes, applied preplant (PP) for the control of glyphosate-resistant<b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> (</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">GR</span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">)</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> marestail in</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 1) identity-preserved and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Study 1) and, 2)</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean</span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> (Study 2). </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">There was no significant injury in soybean with the PP herbicides evaluated in both studies. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">In Study 1, at 8 weeks after treatment (WAA), glyphosate + saflufenacil, glyphosate + 2,4-D ester, glyphosate + pyraflufen/2,4-D, glyphosate +, 4-D choline or glyphosate + halauxifen-methyl, applied PP, controlled GR marestail 93%, 58%, 60%, 67% and 71%, respectively</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">.</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> The addition of metribuzin to </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">the tankmixes of glyphosate + </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">saflufenacil</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, 2,4-D ester and pyraflufen/2,4-D increased the control to 98%, 91% and 95%, respectively. The addition of metribuzin + chlorimuron-ethyl to 2,4-D choline/glyphosate and glyphosate + halauxifen-methyl increased the control to 94% and 93%, respectively.</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">In Study 2, a</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">t </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">8 WAA,</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> glyphosate/dicamba</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">,</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">applied PP, </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">controlled GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">89</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">% in glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean. The addition of metribuzin </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">or </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">saflufenacil</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">to glyphosate/dicamba </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">controlled GR marestail 86% and 97%, </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">respectively. At </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">8 WAA</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, </span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">S</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-metolachlor/dicamba controlled GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 83%.</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> The addition of metribuzin or saflufenacil to the above </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">pre</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">mix controlled GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">87% and 97%</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, respectively. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Density and biomass reductions were similar to visible control. </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail interference reduced soybean yield </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">60% and 53</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">% in</span><span style="font-family:;" "=""> </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Study 1 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">and 2, respectively. Reduce</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">d GR </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">m</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">arestail interference with all the herbicide treatments </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">evaluated in both studies </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">resulted in soybean yield that was similar to the weed-free control.</span>
作者 Nader Soltani Christy Shropshire Peter H. Sikkema Nader Soltani;Christy Shropshire;Peter H. Sikkema(University of Guelph Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario, Canada)
出处 《American Journal of Plant Sciences》 2020年第6期851-860,共10页 美国植物学期刊(英文)
关键词 Biomass Crop Injury Density GLYPHOSATE Herbicide Tankmixture METRIBUZIN Saflufenacil Yield Biomass Crop Injury Density Glyphosate Herbicide Tankmixture Metribuzin Saflufenacil Yield
  • 相关文献

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部