Layered‐residual herbicide programs for waterhemp control in glufosinate‐resistant soybean

Arneson, Nicholas J.; Smith, Daniel H.; DeWerff, Ryan P.; Oliveira, Maxwel C.; Werle, Rodrigo

doi:10.1002/cft2.20207

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Means were compared by grouping letters using emmeans and cld functions of "emmeans" (Lenth et al., 2021) and "multcomp" (Hothorn et al., 2008) packages. Herein, weed control results are discussed based on “effective control” (>90% control of a species), which is common procedure in chemical weed control research to support management recommendations (Arneson et al., 2020; Etheridge et al., 2011; Werle et al., 2023).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of two‐pass herbicide programs for broad‐spectrum weed control in conventional tillage non‐transgenic corn production in Wisconsin atrazine prohibition areas

Mobli,

DeWerff,

Arneson

et al. 2023

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Achieving effective weed control is crucial for Wisconsin conventional corn growers farming in atrazine prohibition areas. Upon request from our extension clientele, a field study was conducted at Arlington and Brooklyn, WI, in 2021 and 2022 (four site‐years). The study aimed to evaluate the weed control efficacy of comprehensive two‐pass (PRE followed by POST) herbicide program treatments containing products with a wide range of active ingredients and sites of action from various manufacturers without atrazine and glyphosate, in conventional tillage non‐transgenic corn production. Nine and eight out of the 11 two‐pass herbicide programs investigated provided >90% giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.), velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik) and waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) J.D. Sauer] control in 2021, respectively. However, only three treatments provided >90% waterhemp control and the greatest giant foxtail control in 2022 was 79%. Greater end‐of‐season broadleaf and grass weed control was observed in 2021 compared to 2022 due to lower weed pressure and timely early‐season rainfall in 2021. The two‐pass programs, acetochlor/mesotrione fb dicamba/tembotrione (94%–100%) and acetochlor/flumetsulan/clopyralid fb nicosulfuron + dicamba/diflufenzopyr (85%–100%), provided the most consistent broadleaf control across all site‐years. These results demonstrate that a well‐designed and timely deployed two‐pass herbicide program can provide effective control of common broadleaf and grass weeds in conventional corn production assuming moderate weed pressure and timely rainfall for soil residual herbicide activation, otherwise effective weed control, particularly of grass weeds, in the absence of atrazine and glyphosate can be challenging. These results are also translatable to support weed management decisions for glyphosate‐resistant corn hybrids in non‐atrazine prohibition areas.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of two‐pass herbicide programs for broad‐spectrum weed control in conventional tillage non‐transgenic corn production in Wisconsin atrazine prohibition areas

Mobli,

DeWerff,

Arneson

et al. 2023

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Results of the current study indicate that no single active ingredient POST herbicide provided complete control of established waterhemp plants at Brooklyn, WI. Our previous research demonstrated that herbicides with soil residual activity are effective tools for waterhemp and can provide additional sites of action toward more effective chemical weed management programs (Arneson et al., 2019; Ribeiro et al., 2022). Weed management programs containing multiple effective herbicide sites of action pre‐ and post‐emergence (Hydrick & Shaw, 1994; Kumar et al., 2021) accompanied by non‐chemical strategies (i.e., cover crops, narrow row spacing, harvest weed seed control) are recommended to extend the spectrum of chemical weed control and reduce the risk of selection of further herbicide‐resistant biotypes for both giant ragweed and waterhemp in Wisconsin and beyond.…”

Section: Soil Conditions Site and Year Average Weed Density M−2 Her...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of foliar‐applied post‐emergence corn–soybean herbicides on giant ragweed and waterhemp control in Wisconsin

Werle

Mobli

DeWerff

et al. 2023

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida L.) and waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus [Moq.] J.D.Sauer) are highly competitive and the most troublesome weeds in corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max Merr.) cropping systems in Wisconsin. Field experiments were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of multiple foliar-applied POSTemergence herbicides on giant ragweed at Janesville, WI (2020 and 2021), and on groups 2-and 9-resistant waterhemp at Brooklyn, WI (2019 and 2020), respectively.Several herbicides from site of action groups 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, and 27 were evaluated. Herbicide treatments were applied when giant ragweed and waterhemp reached ~10 cm in height. Herbicide efficacy (0-100% visual control) was evaluated 14 days after treatment (DAT). Group 2 herbicides provided poor (<45%) control of giant ragweed and waterhemp 14 DAT. Several herbicides encompassing different sites of action provided >90% giant ragweed control. Certain herbicides from groups 4, 10, 14, and 27 provided the best control (74-87%) of waterhemp, but no herbicide evaluated in this study provided = 90% waterhemp control. Weed management programs containing multiple effective herbicide sites of action PRE-and POST-emergence accompanied by non-chemical strategies are recommended to extend the spectrum of chemical control and reduce the risk of selection of further herbicide-resistant biotypes for both giant ragweed and waterhemp in Wisconsin and beyond.Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida L.) and waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus [Moq.] J.D. Sauer) are highly competitive weeds in corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max Merr.) cropping systems (Ganie & Jhala, 2017;Wu & Owen, 2014). There are 22 (groups 2 and 9) unique cases of giant ragweed and 62 (groups 2, 4, 5, 9, 14, and 27) unique cases of waterhemp accessions with either single or multiple herbicide resistance reported in the United States (Heap, 2022). A survey of Wisconsin growers from 54 counties documented these two species as the most troublesome agricultural weeds across the state (Werle & Oliveira, 2018). A broad range of herbi-This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Layered‐residual herbicide programs for waterhemp control in glufosinate‐resistant soybean

Cited by 2 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluation of two‐pass herbicide programs for broad‐spectrum weed control in conventional tillage non‐transgenic corn production in Wisconsin atrazine prohibition areas

Evaluation of two‐pass herbicide programs for broad‐spectrum weed control in conventional tillage non‐transgenic corn production in Wisconsin atrazine prohibition areas

Evaluation of foliar‐applied post‐emergence corn–soybean herbicides on giant ragweed and waterhemp control in Wisconsin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About