Herbicides for Reduced Tillage Production in Peanut (<i>Arachis hypogaea</i>) in the Southwest

Grichar, W. James; Colburn, A. E.; Kearney, N. S.

doi:10.1017/s0890037x00038677

Cited by 17 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…S-metolachlor applied PRE was ineffective in 2009 with a PFD of # 1 d after application. This was unexpected considering that previous research has shown metolachlor applied PRE in peanut controlled Palmer amaranth at least 90% (Grichar, 1994;. Differences were found between standing, rolled, and no-cover for flumioxazin PRE and S-metolachlor plus paraquat plus 2,4-DB applied AC.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 74%

Effect of Cover Crop Management and Preemergence Herbicides on the Control of ALS-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Peanut

Dobrow¹,

Ferrell²,

Faircloth³

et al. 2011

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Palmer amaranth is a troublesome species across the southern US, and has become a serious problem in the SE in recent years. Resistance to acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibiting herbicides has made control of Palmer amaranth even more difficult for peanut producers. Field studies were conducted in 2008 and 2009 to determine the impact of three rye cover crop management scenarios combined with non-ALS residual herbicides on the duration of control of ALSresistant Palmer amaranth. Cover crop scenarios included planting into a desiccated rye cover that was left standing, or rolled flat, or no-cover. Within each cover crop scenario five soil residual herbicides were evaluated to determine the duration that each herbicide provided acceptable control of ALS-resistant Palmer amaranth in peanut. Weed counts were conducted weekly to determine the number of Palmer amaranth free days (PFD), which equated to 1 Palmer amaranth per m of row. In 2008, cover crop did not affect the number of PFD and data ranged from 3 to 67 d. In 2009, standing and rolled cover provided greater PFD relative to no-cover. However, herbicide efficacy was reduced in 2009 with PFD ranging between 0.1 and 16 d after treatment. In both years, PFD was ordered as flumioxazin.Smetolachlor (at cracking).S-metolachlor (preemergence), norflurazon .pendimethalin.Key Words: Palmer amaranth, ALS-resistance, peanut, cover crop.Palmer amaranth is a C4 summer annual (Ehleringer, 1983) that is common in the peanutproducing regions of the southeastern United States (Gleason and Cronquist, 1991;Horak and Loughin, 2000). It is one of three dioecious Amaranthus spp. that have become important weed in agronomic cropping systems in North America (Steckel, 2007). Previous research found that Palmer amaranth produced more leaf area, dry weight, and plant volume as compared to common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis S.), another dioecious Amaranthus species (Horak and Loughin, 2000). Interference from Palmer amaranth can be attributed to its tremendous seed production, which ranged from 250,700 to 613,074 seed per female plant (Sellers et al,. 2003;Keeley et al.,1987) and aggressive growth habits, reaching heights of 2 m (Bryson and DeFelice, 2009). Due to these attributes, Palmer amaranth is considered one of the most troublesome weed in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina (Webster, 2005).The competitiveness of Palmer amaranth results in significant interference with crop growth and subsequent reduction in yield. In Kansas, Palmer amaranth populations of 0.5 to 8 plants per m of row reduced corn (Zea mays L.) yield 11 to 91% (Massinga et al., 2001;Massinga and Currie, 2002). Klingman and Oliver (1994) reported soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] yield was reduced 17 to 68% with 0.33 to 10 Palmer amaranth plants per m of row, respectively. In Texas, populations from 1 to 10 Palmer amaranth within 9.1 m of row decreased cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield from 13 to 54% (Morgan, 2001) while Burke et al. (2007) in North Carolina reported that one Palmer amaranth plant per...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 74%

Effect of Cover Crop Management and Preemergence Herbicides on the Control of ALS-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Peanut

Dobrow¹,

Ferrell²,

Faircloth³

et al. 2011

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because of high yellow nutsedge density at Yoakum, no distinguishable reduction in weed density occurred with the nontreated control of the twin-row spacing compared with the single-row spacing. In a previous study, without any herbicide, twin-row peanut provided 66% tumble pigweed (Amaranthus albus L.) control, 80% Texas millet control, and 73% yellow nutsedge control compared with no control in single rows; however, no difference in yield between the two row patterns was observed (Grichar et al 1994).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Effects of Row Pattern Configurations and Reduced (1/2×) and Full Rates (1×) of Imazapic and Diclosulam for Control of Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus Esculentus) in Peanut

Besler

Grichar²,

Senseman³

et al. 2008

Weed technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field studies were conducted from 2000 to 2002 to evaluate yellow nutsedge control and peanut yield when diclosulam and imazapic were applied at the rate recommended by the manufacturer (1×) and reduced (1/2×) rates in single and twin-row planting patterns. In 2001, both diclosulam and imazapic applied to the twin-row pattern at the full and reduced rate provided better yellow nutsedge control than herbicide applications to the single-row spacing. Because of excessive rainfall in 2002, yellow nutsedge control was considerably reduced with all treatments. Imazapic at the full rate (71 g/ha) controlled yellow nutsedge 80 to 96% in the twin-row pattern, and 79 to 86% in single-row spacings. Yellow nutsedge control was less than 65% when diclosulam and imazapic were applied at the reduced rate. The twin-row configuration yielded higher than the single-row pattern when averaged across herbicides in 1 yr. All herbicide treatments enhanced yield relative to the nontreated control, except the reduced rate of imazapic in 2002. This study revealed that to fully maximize yellow nutsedge control, the full rate of either imazapic or diclosulam should be applied to peanuts planted in a single or twin-row spacing. However, these treatments may not necessarily increase peanut yields.

show abstract

“…In the two years, S-metolachlor alone provided 75-78% Texas millet control compared with 75-99% control with pyroxasulfone. Typically, S-metolachlor alone provides poor control of this weed [79,80]. With high populations of Texas millet, Grichar et al [79] reported less than 70% control with 1.7 and 3.4 kg ha −1 of metolachlor in dryland peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) and 25-76% control under irrigated conditions.…”

Section: Annual Grass Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Typically, S-metolachlor alone provides poor control of this weed [79,80]. With high populations of Texas millet, Grichar et al [79] reported less than 70% control with 1.7 and 3.4 kg ha −1 of metolachlor in dryland peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) and 25-76% control under irrigated conditions. Steele et al [80] reported that pyroxasulfone, at a 10-fold lower use rate than S-metolachlor, controlled Texas millet 84-96%, while S-metolachlor provided 75-85% control when rated 9 weeks after treatment.…”

Section: Annual Grass Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Herbicide Programs to Control Weeds in Corn (Zea mays L.) and Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Grichar¹,

McGinty²,

Dotray³

et al. 2017

Herbicide Resistance in Weeds and Crops

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field studies were conducted to evaluate control of Amaranthus species and other weeds in corn and cotton. In corn, Palmer amaranth control was at least 90% with preemergence applications of fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone, atrazine plus either acetochlor, alachlor, dimethenamid-P, S-metolachlor, or S-metolachlor plus mesotrione, saflufenacil plus dimethenamid-P, and S-metolachlor plus mesotrione. When using postemergence herbicides applied to Palmer amaranth less than 5 cm tall, atrazine, prosulfuron, and topramezone alone or the combinations of atrazine plus S-metolachlor plus glyphosate, diflufenzopyr plus dicamba, dimethenamid plus glyphosate, halosulfuron-methyl plus dicamba, mesotrione plus S-metolachlor plus glyphosate, pyroxasulfone plus glyphosate, and thiencarbazone-methyl plus tembotrione provided at least 91% control. In cotton, pyrithiobac applied preemergence resulted in no greater than 63% of control of Palmer amaranth and common waterhemp at the early season rating. Pendimethalin applied preemergence provided varied levels of control of common waterhemp. Trifluralin, applied preplant incorporated, consistently provided at least 86% or greater control of both species. A decreased level of control of both Palmer amaranth and common waterhemp was observed with pendimethalin applied preemergence followed by pyrithiobac-applied early postemergence and followed by glufosinate applied mid-post. Systems which included an early postemergence and mid-postemergence application of glyphosate plus 2,4-D choline provided at least 94% season-long Palmer amaranth control.

show abstract

Herbicides for Reduced Tillage Production in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) in the Southwest

Cited by 17 publications

References 23 publications

Effect of Cover Crop Management and Preemergence Herbicides on the Control of ALS-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Peanut

Effect of Cover Crop Management and Preemergence Herbicides on the Control of ALS-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in Peanut

Effects of Row Pattern Configurations and Reduced (1/2×) and Full Rates (1×) of Imazapic and Diclosulam for Control of Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus Esculentus) in Peanut

Using Herbicide Programs to Control Weeds in Corn (Zea mays L.) and Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About