Herbicide Programs for Enhanced Glyphosate-Resistant and Glufosinate-Resistant Cotton (<i>Gossypium hirsutum</i>)

Riar, Dilpreet S.; Norsworthy, Jason K.; Griffith, Griff M.

doi:10.1614/wt-d-11-00027.1

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Eubank et al (2012) also observed this synergistic effect with the addition of metribuzin to paraquat on control of glyphosate-resistant horseweed [ Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq.]. It is well established that contact herbicides are less effective than glyphosate in controlling grasses (Riar et al 2011; Whitaker et al 2011). Although significantly less fresh biomass weight was observed in the glufosinate-treated plots compared with the nontreated check, dry biomass weights did not show such differences among treatments on both cover crops (Table 8).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of Chemical Termination Options for Cover Crops

Palhano¹,

Norsworthy

Barber

2018

Weed Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover crop acreage has substantially increased over the last few years due to the intent of growers to capitalize on federal conservation payments and incorporate sustainable practices into agricultural systems. Despite all the known benefits, widespread adoption of cover crops still remains limited due to potential cost and management requirements. Cover crop termination is crucial, because a poorly controlled cover crop can become a weed and lessen the yield potential of the current cash crop. A field study was conducted in fall 2015 and 2016 at the Arkansas Agricultural Research and Extension Center in Fayetteville to evaluate preplant herbicide options for terminating cover crops. Glyphosate-containing treatments controlled 97% to 100% of cereal rye and wheat, but glyphosate alone controlled less than 57% of legume cover crops. The most effective way to control hairy vetch, Austrian winterpea, and crimson clover with glyphosate resulted from mixtures of glyphosate with glufosinate, 2,4-D, and dicamba. Higher rates of auxin herbicides improved control in these mixtures. Glufosinate alone or in mixture controlled legume cover crops 81% or more. Paraquat plus metribuzin was effective in terminating both cereal and legume cover crops, with control of cereal cover crops ranging from 87% to 97% and control of legumes ranging from 90% to 96%. None of these herbicides or mixtures adequately controlled rapeseed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of Chemical Termination Options for Cover Crops

Palhano¹,

Norsworthy

Barber

2018

Weed Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Residual herbicides are crucial for obtaining season-long control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Jha and Norsworthy 2009;Neve et al 2011). Improved early season control of glyphosate-resistant and glyphosate-susceptible weed species with PPI residual herbicides in RR and LL soybean and cotton has been widely reported (Culpepper et al 2000;Riar et al 2011a). The average cost of herbicides in RR soybean was US$78 ha À1 and in LL soybean was US$91 ha À1 in the midsouth collectively.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Weed Management Practices and Problem Weeds in the Midsouth United States—Soybean: A Consultant's Perspective

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Th is report explores the impact of the adoption of genetically engineered (GE) corn, soybean, and cotton on pesticide use in the United States, drawing principally on data from the United States Department of Agriculture. Th e most striking fi nding is that GE crops have been responsible for an increase of 383 million pounds of herbicide use in the U.S. over the fi rst 13 years of commercial use of GE crops (1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008).Th is dramatic increase in the volume of herbicides applied swamps the decrease in insecticide use attributable to GE corn and cotton, making the overall chemical footprint of today' s GE crops decidedly negative. Th e report identifi es, and discusses in detail, the primary cause of the increase --the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds.Th e steep rise in the pounds of herbicides applied with respect to most GE crop acres is not news to farmers. Weed control is now widely acknowledged as a serious management problem within GE cropping systems. Farmers and weed scientists across the heartland and cotton belt are now struggling to devise aff ordable and eff ective strategies to deal with the resistant weeds emerging in the wake of herbicide-tolerant crops.But skyrocketing herbicide use is news to the public at large, which still harbors the illusion, fed by misleading industry claims and advertising, that biotechnology crops are reducing pesticide use. Such a claim was valid for the fi rst few years of commercial use of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton. But, as this report shows, it is no longer.An accurate assessment of the performance of GE crops on pesticide use is important for reasons other than correcting the excesses of industry advertising. It is also about the future direction of agriculture, research, and regulatory policy.Herbicides and insecticides are potent environmental toxins. Where GE crops cannot deliver meaningful reductions in reliance on pesticides, policy makers need to look elsewhere. In addition to toxic pollution, agriculture faces the twin challenges of climate change and burgeoning world populations. Th e biotechnology industry' s current advertising campaigns promise to solve those problems, just as the industry once promised to reduce the chemical footprint of agriculture. Before we embrace GE crops as solution to these new challenges, we need a sober, data-driven appraisal of its track record on earlier pledges.Th e government has the capability, and we would argue a responsibility, to conduct periodic surveys of suffi cient depth to track and accurately quantify the impacts of GE crops on major performance parameters, including pesticide use. While the USDA continued to collect farm-level data on pesticide applications during most of the 13 years covered in this report, the Department has been essentially silent on the impacts of GE crops on pesticide use for almost a decade. Th is is why the groups listed in the Acknowledgements commissioned this study by Dr. Benbrook, the third he has done on this t...

show abstract

“…Fomesafen and glufosinate are used to control broadleaf weeds in major agronomic crops in the US and have become effective and widely used alternatives to glyphosate in these crops, especially when glyphosate-resistant weed biotypes are present [17][18][19][20][21][22]. There is concern that widespread and repeated use of these herbicides could lead to selection for resistance to the modes of action represented by fomesafen and glufosinate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution of Glyphosate- and Thifensulfuron-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in North Carolina

Poirier

York

Jordan

et al. 2014

International Journal of Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glyphosate resistance in Palmer amaranth was first confirmed in North Carolina in 2005. A survey that year indicated 17 and 18% of 290 populations sampled were resistant to glyphosate and thifensulfuron, respectively. During the fall of 2010, 274 predetermined sites in North Carolina were surveyed to determine distribution of Palmer amaranth and to determine if and where resistance to fomesafen, glufosinate, glyphosate, and thifensulfuron occurred. Palmer amaranth was present at 134 sites. When mortality for each biotype was compared to a known susceptible biotype for each herbicide within a rate, 93 and 36% of biotypes were controlled less by glyphosate (840 g ae ha−1) and thifensulfuron (70 g ai ha−1), respectively. This approach may have underestimated resistance for segregating populations due to lack of homogeneity of the herbicide resistance trait and its contribution to error variance. When mortality and visible control were combined, 98% and 97% of the populations were resistant to glyphosate and the ALS inhibitor thifensulfuron, respectively, and 95% of the populations expressed multiple resistance to both herbicides. This study confirms that Palmer amaranth is commonly found across the major row crop production regions of North Carolina and that resistance to glyphosate and ALS-inhibiting herbicides is nearly universal. No resistance to fomesafen or glufosinate was observed.

show abstract

Herbicide Programs for Enhanced Glyphosate-Resistant and Glufosinate-Resistant Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Cited by 21 publications

References 26 publications

Evaluation of Chemical Termination Options for Cover Crops

Evaluation of Chemical Termination Options for Cover Crops

Assessment of Weed Management Practices and Problem Weeds in the Midsouth United States—Soybean: A Consultant's Perspective

Distribution of Glyphosate- and Thifensulfuron-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in North Carolina

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About