Chemical Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Goosegrass

Takano, Hudson Kagueyama; Oliveira, Rubem Silvério de; Constantin, Jamil; Silva, V.F.V.; Mendes, Rafael Romero

doi:10.1590/s0100-83582018360100055

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Treatments with clethodim (108 g ha -1 ), haloxifop (60 g ha -1 ), quizalofop-tefuril (both doses), quizalofop-methyl (100 g ha -1 ), glyphosate + haloxifop (960 + 120 g ha -1 ), glyphosate + quizalofop-tefuril (960 + 120 g ha -1 ) and glyphosate + fluazifop (both doses) provided control between 80% and 90% and were in the second level of efficacy. The other treatments were not effective in controlling four-tiller grass plants (TAKANO et al, 2018). Therefore, the results of the treatments found in this experiment corroborate the results mentioned above, since the treatments with quizalofop-P-ethyl obtained a control percentage between 80% and 90%.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…According to data obtained by Takano et al (2018), the herbicides clethodim, haloxifop, quizalofop-tefuril, quizalofop-methyl and fluazifop provided 100% control at 14 DAA for E. indica with one tiller. At 28 DAA, the herbicides clethodim, haloxifop, quizalofop-tefuril, quizalofop-methyl and fluazifop applied solo or in combination with glyphosate, provided control above 96%.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

QUIZALOFOP-P-ETHYL CONTROLLING SOURGRASS (Digitaria insularis) AND GOOSEGRASS (Eleusine indica) IN INFESTED COFFEE AREAS

Vilela

Medeiros²,

Gonçalves³

et al. 2019

C.Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemical control is the main weed management system in coffee crop. Herbicides alternatives controlling grass weeds in infested coffee areas are limited, mainly due to the few options of registered herbicides. Thus, it is important to evaluate selective post-emergence herbicide to control these important weeds in coffee crop. The objective of this work was to evaluate the selectivity, efficiency and agronomic viability of the herbicide IHH 0513 (Quizalofope-P-ethyl 50g ai L-1) compared to Glyphosate on grass control in coffee crop. Two experiments were carried out in randomized blocks with four replications in the municipality of Lavras and Santana da Vargem (MG - Brazil) in a commercial coffee crop cultivar “Mundo Novo” and “Catuai” to evaluate the herbicide effectiveness in the crop rows. The experimental design was a randomized block design with seven treatments and four replications. Treatments consisted of IHH 0513 doses (Quizalofope-P-ethyl 25, 50, 75 and 100 g ai ha-1) compared to the standard GLI OVER (Glyphosate 480 g ia L-1) at the dose of 1680g ai ha-1 + Iharol at 0.5% v/v. Application occurred when sourgrass and goosegrass were at the beginning of development with up to 4 tillers (early vegetative stage) and in a second trial, at advanced stages of development (highly branched and /or flowering). Control assessments in percentage were performed at 7, 14, 21 and 28 days after application (DAA) of the treatments. A note of phytotoxicity was given by the EWRC scale (1964). The control of weeds was evaluated in each experimental plot using the visual notes scale of FRANS et al. (1986), where: 0% represents no control, and 100% total control of the species in question, compared to the population present in the non-weed control. In general, the dose of 1500 and 2000 mL per hectare of IHH 0513 (75 and 100 g ai ha-1) for the weeds at early vegetative stage presented the highest levels of controls (above 90%). The dose of 2000 mL per hectare (100 g ai ha-1) was efficient at 28 DAA to control more developed plants. No symptoms of phytotoxicity caused by the IHH 0513 product were detected at any dose tested. Quizalofop-P-ehtyl can be recommended for integrated weed management in coffee for sourgrass and goosegrass.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

QUIZALOFOP-P-ETHYL CONTROLLING SOURGRASS (Digitaria insularis) AND GOOSEGRASS (Eleusine indica) IN INFESTED COFFEE AREAS

Vilela

Medeiros²,

Gonçalves³

et al. 2019

C.Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The estimated infested area with GR D. insularis, for instance, is estimated to exceed 20 million ha in Brazil (Lopez Ovejero et al, 2017). ACCase inhibitors are the main tools deployed to manage GR grass weeds such as D. insularis, L. multiflorum and E. indica (Yu et al, 2007;Gemelli et al, 2013;Takano et al, 2018). To date, 48 species have been reported as resistant to ACCase inhibitors in the world (Figure 4), and eight of them are in South America (Heap, 2019).…”

Section: Stewardship and Herbicide Resistance Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

ACCase-inhibiting herbicides: mechanism of action, resistance evolution and stewardship

Takano

Ovejero

Belchior³

et al. 2021

Sci. agric. (Piracicaba, Braz.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbicides play an important role in preventing crop yield losses due to both their weed interference ability and their capacity for increasing soil conservation in no-till systems. Group A herbicides or acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACCase) are essential tools the selective management of glyphosate resistance in grass weed species. In this review, we describe important aspects of ACCase biology and herbicides targeting this enzyme, along with a discussion on stewardship programs to delay the evolution of herbicide resistance which can evolve either through target site and/or non-target site mechanisms. Sixteen-point mutations have been reported to confer resistance to ACCase inhibitors. Each mutation confers cross resistance to a different group of herbicides. Metabolic resistance can result in resistance to multiple herbicides with different mechanisms of action (MoA), and herbicide detoxification is often conferred by cytochrome P450 monooxigenases and glutathione-Stransferases. Regardless of whether resistance mechanisms are target or non-target site, using herbicides with the same MoA will result in resistance evolution. Therefore, while field surveys and resistance mechanism studies are crucial for designing reactive management strategies, integrated weed management plays a central role in both reactive and proactive mitigation of herbicide resistance evolution.

show abstract

“…Although certain glyphosate-resistant graminaceous weeds, such as sourgrass and ryegrass (Heap, 2021), may limit the translocation of applied herbicides (hijacking in vacuole) (Powles & Yu, 2010), glyphosate can reach the site of action (EPSPS). Thus, when combined with ACCase inhibitors, glyphosate can enhance grass control, even against species resistant to glyphosate (Takano, Oliveira, Constantin, Silva, & Mendes, 2018). Furthermore, glyphosate is known to promote the which favors the absorption of the second application of herbicides (Fleck, 1994).…”

Section: Experiments Ii: Effect Of Glyphosate Addition To Accase Inhibitors For the Control Of Epsps Inhibitor-resistant Perennial Sourgrmentioning

confidence: 99%

ACCase inhibitor fractionation and glyphosate addition improve perennial sourgrass control

Oliveira

Silva

Dalazen

2022

Semina: Ciênc. Agrár.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glyphosate-resistant sourgrass is difficult to control, particularly when perennial, and strategies that improve the control efficiency against this grass and preserve the useful life of graminicides are warranted. Therefore, the present study aimed to answer the following questions: (i) Does fractionating the doses of ACCase inhibitors improve the control of perennial sourgrass? (ii) Does alternating the chemical groups cyclohexanediones (DIMs) and aryloxyphenoxypropanoates (FOPs) improve the control of perennial sourgrass, and does the order of their application affect sourgrass control efficiency? (iii) Does the addition of glyphosate to ACCase inhibitors improve to the control of perennial sourgrass resistant to 5-enol-pyruvyl-shiquime-3-phosphate synthase inhibitors? Two field experiments (I and II) were performed in 2018 and repeated in 2019. In experiment I, the treatments included a single or fractional application clethodim + quizalofop-P-ethyl (216 + 108 g a.i. ha-1), clethodim (216 g a.i. ha-1), and quizalofop-P-tefuryl (108 g a.i. ha-1), applied in the order of clethodim followed by quizalofop-P-tefuryl and vice versa, as well as a control treatment. In experiment II, the treatments included a single or fractional application of clethodim + quizalofop-P-ethyl (216 + 108 g a.i. ha-1) and clethodim (108 g a.i. ha-1), isolated or associated with glyphosate, as well as a control treatment. In both experiments, the interval between the fractional applications was 7 days. Percentage of control, number of tillers per plant, and height of sourgrass plants were determined. Compared with the unfractionated application, the fractionation of clethodim + quizalofop-P-ethyl and clethodim increased control by respectively 20-24 and 25-30%. Fractionated clethodim has greater

show abstract

Chemical Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Goosegrass

Cited by 14 publications

References 29 publications

QUIZALOFOP-P-ETHYL CONTROLLING SOURGRASS (Digitaria insularis) AND GOOSEGRASS (Eleusine indica) IN INFESTED COFFEE AREAS

QUIZALOFOP-P-ETHYL CONTROLLING SOURGRASS (Digitaria insularis) AND GOOSEGRASS (Eleusine indica) IN INFESTED COFFEE AREAS

ACCase-inhibiting herbicides: mechanism of action, resistance evolution and stewardship

ACCase inhibitor fractionation and glyphosate addition improve perennial sourgrass control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About