Dry Bean Response to Preemergence-Applied KIH-485

Sikkema, Peter H.; Shropshire, Christy; Soltani, Nader

doi:10.1614/wt-06-050.1

Cited by 12 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In other studies, linuron applied PRE at various doses did not cause any adverse affect on the yield of cranberry, kidney, and white beans but yield of black bean was reduced 16% compared to the nontreated control at 2500 g·ha −1 [16]. These results are similar to other studies in which flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone, and alachlor applied preemergence which caused no losses in cranberry and kidney bean seed yield [6,25,26].…”

Section: Seed Moisture Content and Yieldsupporting

confidence: 84%

Response of cranberry and kidney beans to linuron

Soltani¹,

Shropshire²,

Sikkema³

2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. One week after emergence (WAE), linuron applied PRE caused 0.4% to 1.2% injury in "Etna", "Hooter", "SVM Tayler", and "Capri" cranberry bean and 3.1% to 3.6% injury in "Red Hawk", "Pink Panther", "Calmont", and "Majesty" kidney bean. At 2 and 4 WAE, there was no difference in injury among the dry bean cultivars. Contrast comparing injury due to linuron in cranberry vs kidney bean cultivars indicated 2.3%, 1.7%, and 1.2% greater injury in kidney bean compared to cranberry bean at 1, 2, and 4 WAE, respectively. Linuron PRE caused slightly greater injury in kidney bean compared to cranberry bean but crop injury was minimal with no adverse effect on plant height, shoot dry weight, seed moisture content, and yield under the environments evaluated. Based on this research, linuron applied PRE at the proposed rate of 1125 g·ai·ha −1 can be safely used in cranberry and kidney beans in Ontario.

show abstract

Section: Seed Moisture Content and Yieldsupporting

confidence: 84%

Response of cranberry and kidney beans to linuron

Soltani¹,

Shropshire²,

Sikkema³

2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When compared to AP-3, Georgia Green is considered to be a small-seeded peanut cultivar (Branch 1996;Gorbett 2007). Previous research concluded that smaller-seeded market classes of dry bean were more sensitive to PRE applications of pyroxasulfone than dry beans with larger seeds (Sikkema et al 2007). In soybean, it has been speculated that plants developing from larger seeds could survive lethal herbicide doses better than plants developing from smaller seeds because they could survive on more cotyledonary food reserves until the herbicide dosage reaches a non-lethal level (Anderson 1970).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In other legume crops, PPI or PRE applications of pyroxasulfone at rates $ 209 g ai/ha caused significant yield reductions (Soltani et al 2008;Sikkema et al 2007). While there was significant crop injury (stunting) from pyroxasulfone applied PRE at Plains, there was no correlation between this injury and peanut yield for application timing at either location (Figure 3).…”

Section: Yieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Generally, PRE applications of pyroxasulfone at 125 to 314 g ai/ha in soybean have provided similar weed control and crop response as S-metolachlor (Young and Young 2005;Moody et al 2005). In dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), PRE applications of pyroxasulfone at 210 and 420 g ai/ha caused unacceptable crop injury and yield loss in some market classes (Sikkema et al 2007). Pinto and small red Mexican beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) were not tolerant of pyroxasulfone when applied preplant incorporated (PPI) at 209 or 418 g ai/ha (Soltani et al 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Peanut Tolerance to Pyroxasulfone

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to limited hectares and production in comparison to field corn, soybean, and wheat, commercial research and development efforts by major manufacturers for potential new peanut herbicides are minimal. Therefore, new herbicides developed for large hectare crops should be evaluated for potential use in peanut. Field trials were conducted in Ty Ty and Plains Georgia in 2007 and 2008 to evaluate the tolerance of peanut to PRE and POST applications of pyroxasulfone at five rates (0, 120, 240, 360, and 480 g ai/ha). Pyroxasulfone did not cause significant peanut injury at the Ty Ty location. In Plains, PRE applications of pyroxasulfone caused significant crop stunting, particularly at the 360 and 480 g/ha rates. In Ty Ty, PRE applications of pyroxasulfone also resulted in greater expression of tomato spotted wilt virus than POST applications. Peanut yields were not reduced by any rate or timing of pyroxasulfone. These results suggest that pyroxasulfone may have some potential to be utilized in peanut.Key Words: crop injury, tomato spotted wilt virus, yield.In 2010, peanut was planted on 522,000 ha in the U.S. (Anonymous 2011). In contrast, field corn, soybean, and wheat were planted on 36,000,000, 31,000,000, and 22,000,000 ha, respectively (Anonymous 2011). Consequently, commercial research and development efforts for new herbicides are focused in these crops and not in peanut Pyroxasulfone is an inhibitor of very-longchain-fatty acids and should be categorized within the K3 group of herbicides (Tanetani et al. 2009). Other common K3 herbicides include acetochlor, alachlor, butachlor, dimethenamid-p, flufenacet, Smetolachlor, and propachlor (Senseman 2007). Smetolachlor is frequently used in peanut for the control of various weeds including yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) and Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis L.) (Grichar et al. 2001;Grichar et al. 2008;Prostko et al. 2005).Little information about the tolerance of legume crops to pyroxasulfone has been published in the literature. Although pyroxasulfone was initially targeted for PRE weed control in corn, soybean has shown good tolerance The soil type at the Ponder Research Station was a Tifton sand with 96% sand, 2% silt, 2% clay, 1.2% organic matter, and pH 6.0. The soil type at the Southwest Experiment Station was a Greenville sandy loam with 71% sand, 13% silt, 16% clay, 1% organic matter, and pH 6.0. Cultivars, planting dates, inverting, and harvest dates are presented in Table 1. Common production practices and Cooperative Extension recommendations were used at all times. Supplemental irrigation was applied as needed.Herbicide treatments were arranged in a factorial design that included two application timings (PRE or POST) and five pyroxasulfone rates (0, 120, 240, 360, and 480 g ai/ha). All treatments were replicated four times. PRE treatments were activated with irrigation within 48 hours of application. POST treatments of pyroxasulfone were applied between 44 and 51 days after peanut planting and included a non-ionic surfactant...

show abstract

“…Previous research indicated decreased pyroxasulfone injury with legumes grown in soils with greater clay contents [19]. Canadian dry bean research indicated that pyroxasulfone injury at 210 g/ha was 11% or less [55]. These data indicate that at rates up to 160 g ha −1 wheat had tolerance in sandy loam, loamy sand, and sandy clay loam soils of the Southeastern United States.…”

Section: Crop Response and Weed Controlmentioning

confidence: 72%

Winter Wheat Response to Weed Control and Residual Herbicides

Grey¹,

Newsom²

2017

Wheat Improvement, Management and Utilization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Italian ryegrass has become one of the most common and troublesome weeds of wheat production in the Southern United States. There are multiple reports in this region of Italian ryegrass herbicide resistance to acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACCase), acetolactate synthase (ALS), and glyphosate herbicides. One commonality for Italian ryegrass resistance in this area is that most of these mechanisms of action for these herbicides are all postemergence (POST) applied. In order to have profitable soft red winter wheat production, applications of preemergence (PRE) herbicides with residual control of Italian ryegrass and other winter weed species would benefit growers. There are a very limited number of herbicides that can be applied at the time of wheat planting, primarily only when pyroxasulfone is registered for this timing. Research was conducted to establish weed control information when herbicides were applied to soft red winter wheat PRE, at wheat emergence (AE), or POST at Feekes stages 1.0-1.9, depending on herbicide label recommendations. Injury from any pyroxasulfone PRE treatments up to 120 g a.i. ha −1 was transient and did not affect wheat yield for any experiment. Italian ryegrass control was variable depending on location and year. Susceptible and diclofop-resistant Italian ryegrass control was 86% or greater with pyroxasulfone at 60 g a.i. ha −1 and greater with applied PRE. Italian ryegrass control was variable ranging from 27 to 49% with pendimethalin ME-applied PRE, diclofop at Feekes sage 1.0, and pinoxaden applied at Feekes stage 1.9.

show abstract

Dry Bean Response to Preemergence-Applied KIH-485

Cited by 12 publications

References 12 publications

Response of cranberry and kidney beans to linuron

Response of cranberry and kidney beans to linuron

Peanut Tolerance to Pyroxasulfone

Winter Wheat Response to Weed Control and Residual Herbicides

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About