Response of Vegetable Crops to Sublethal Application of 2,4-D

Hemphill, Delbert D.; Montgomery, M. W.

doi:10.1017/s0043174500040182

Cited by 46 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Before application and throughout the sampling period each season, plants from the untreated check had low concentrations of PGR residue present in foliage (Table 5). Other studies have reported positive PGR residue detection on control samples (Cessna, 1980; Hemphill and Montgomery, 1981; Smith, 1984). In addition, 10 random soybean samples taken in 2000 from fields that had no visual PGR injury symptoms had 2,4‐D detections ranging from 0.009 to 0.036 μg g −1 and three had positive dicamba detections (unpublished data, 2000).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Soybean Foliage Residues of Dicamba and 2,4‐D and Correlation to Application Rates and Yield

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1979;Weidenhamer et al., 1989; Kelley et al., 2002). Small amounts of PGR herbicides left in spray tanks Plant growth regulator (PGR) herbicides dicamba (3,6-dichloro-2-methyloxybenzoic acid) and 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid] after treating labeled crops also can result in soybean can severely injure soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] by drift or tank injury. Injury symptoms include leaf cupping, stunting, contamination and reduce yield. Often in regulatory disputes, tissue death of the apical bud, and malformations of the stem is analyzed for PGR residue. However, relationships between grain (Fribourg and Johnson, 1955; Auch, 1977; Behrens and yield reduction and foliar residue concentrations at various times after Lueschen, 1979; Al-Khatib and Peterson, 1999). In addiexposure are not well documented. This 2-yr study quantified the tion, yield loss due to PGR exposure can be substantial amount of dicamba and 2,4-D in soybean foliage 0, 6, 12, 24, and 48 d after treatment (DAT) when treated with 1 to 20% of 0.56 kg a.e. under some conditions. ha Ϫ1 [labeled rate for corn (Zea mays L.)] at the three-leaf (V3) stage Low detection levels are needed to document PGR of growth and determined if these concentrations were correlated to herbicide contamination due to the low concentrations initial application rate or grain yield. Herbicide concentrations were that can cause soybean injury. In addition, sampling for determined using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry techniques residue frequently occurs long after herbicide exposure. with selective ion monitoring. Visual symptoms were slight (Ͻ10%) Concentrations may be low due to volatilization losses to severe (90%) and included leaf cupping, epinasty and, in some cases, death of the apical bud. Grain yields from dicamba-treated from the plant leaf, dilution due to plant growth, and/or plants were reduced from 14 to 93% compared with untreated plant degradation of the herbicide within the growing plant. yield, whereas only 2,4-D at the highest rate reduced yield. In both Extraction of PGR herbicides from plant tissue requires years, foliar residue concentrations were correlated with initial appliacidification along with alkaline hydrolysis to remove cation rates and yield reduction up to 24 DAT for dicamba and 12 free, bound, and conjugated forms of the herbicide (Yip DAT for 2,4-D, with all treatments having residue amounts similar to untreated plants after these intervals. The data suggest that plant and Ney, 1966; Chow et al., 1971). Detection and quantisamples should be collected as soon as possible after suspected PGR fication of PGR residue in tissue extract has been probexposure for accurate detection and quantification of PGR residue.lematic due to poor sensitivity and background interference when using gas chromatography (GC) and electron capture (ECD) techniques (Marquardt and Luce, 1961;

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Soybean Foliage Residues of Dicamba and 2,4‐D and Correlation to Application Rates and Yield

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Few researchers have reported secondary shoot initiation or increased branching of flower species in response to low rates of plant growth regulators. Hemphill and Montgomery (1981) reported that 2,4-D at 2.1 g·ha -1 increased pep- per branching and flowering, which resulted in increased yield compared to the untreated crop. However, pepper was the only species of the 15 tested that responded in this manner.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Annual Flower Injury from Sublethal Rates of Dicamba, 2,4-D, and Premixed 2,4-D + Mecoprop + Dicamba

Hatterman‐Valenti¹,

Mayland²

2005

HortSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greenhouse experiments were conducted to compare visible injury from sublethal rates of 2,4-D, dicamba, and a premixed product of 2,4-D + mecoprop + dicamba for eight annual flowers and to describe herbicide injury symptoms for these annual species. Herbicides were applied at rates 0.05×, 0.1×, and 0.2× of their highest labeled rate for turfgrass to simulate spray drift conditions. Visible injury varied between species, herbicide rate, and time after herbicide application. Alyssum (Lobularia maritima Desv.) showed the greatest initial injury and ageratum (Ageratum houstonianum Mill.) showed the greatest injury at 4 weeks after treatment. Symptom severity increased as herbicide rate increased, with the greatest injury from the premixed product, followed by 2,4-D, and then dicamba. The eight species varied in their degree of visible injury and flower production to dicamba, 2,4-D, and the premixed product. Reduced flowering was most obvious for prolific flowering species such as alyssum. Impatiens (Impatiens wallerana L.), salvia (Salvia splendens Sello), and snapdragon (Antirrhinum majus L.) produced more flowers in response to sublethal dicamba rates compared to the untreated plant. All rates of 2,4-D generally reduced flowering compared to untreated plants, except the lowest rate of 2,4-D for geranium (Pelargonium xhortorum Bailey) and snapdragon. Dahlia (Dahlia hortensis Cav.) sprayed with dicamba at the highest rate produced three times as many stems as plants untreated or those sprayed with 2,4-D. Overall order of species susceptibility to sublethal rates of dicamba, 2,4-D, or the premixed product from most susceptible to least susceptible was ageratum > alyssum > marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) > dahlia > geranium = salvia = snapdragon = impatiens. Differences in overall susceptibility to the plant growth regulator herbicides evaluated should provide useful information to horticulturalists designing annual flower beds and borders and lawn care applicators.

show abstract

“…Tomato sensitivity to auxin herbicides has been the subject of several published studies (Bennet 1989;Breeze and West 1987;Fagliari et al 2005;Hemphill and Montgomery 1981;Jordan and Romanowski 1974;Smith and Geronimo 1984;Van Rensburg and Breeze 1990). Visual symptoms can be observed at 1 to 2 g ae ha À1 of 2,4-D and gross yield reductions have been reported in the range of approximately 3 to 20 g ae ha À1 for plants in the flowering stage.…”

Section: Nontarget Plant Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other vegetable crops show a range of sensitivity to low rates of 2,4-D. Hemphill and Montgomery (1981) reported no significant yield effects on broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italic L.), cabbage (Brassica oleracea var.…”

Section: Nontarget Plant Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

2,4-D Past, Present, and Future: A Review

Peterson

McMaster

Riechers³

et al. 2016

Weed technol.

250

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its discovery and initial commercialization in the 1940s, 2,4-D has been an important tool for weed control in a wide variety of crop and noncrop uses. Work studying its chemistry, physiology, mode of action, toxicology, environmental behavior, and efficacy has not only helped elucidate the characteristics of 2,4-D but also provided basic methods that have been used to investigate the properties of hundreds of herbicides that followed it. Much of the information published by researchers over 60 yr ago is still pertinent to understanding the performance of 2,4-D today. Further, new studies continue to be published, especially regarding the mechanisms of 2,4-D action at the molecular level. New uses for 2,4-D, sometimes enabled by biotechnology, continue to be developed. This review strives to provide an overall understanding of 2,4-D activity in plants, plant sensitivity to 2,4-D, toxicological impacts, and current and future uses.

show abstract

Response of Vegetable Crops to Sublethal Application of 2,4-D

Cited by 46 publications

References 7 publications

Soybean Foliage Residues of Dicamba and 2,4‐D and Correlation to Application Rates and Yield

Soybean Foliage Residues of Dicamba and 2,4‐D and Correlation to Application Rates and Yield

Annual Flower Injury from Sublethal Rates of Dicamba, 2,4-D, and Premixed 2,4-D + Mecoprop + Dicamba

2,4-D Past, Present, and Future: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About