Weed Control in Glyphosate-resistant Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.)

Guza, Corey J.; Ransom, Corey V.; Mallory-Smith, C.A.

doi:10.5274/jsbr.39.3.109

Cited by 18 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…better than the base microrate treatment, except for a full rate of s-metolachlor in the third or the fourth microrate application and a full rate of dimethenamid-P in the fourth microrate application. Similar increases in control of common lambsquarters and redroot pigweed were observed by Dexter and Luecke (2004) and Guza et al (2002). Velvetleaf control did not increase when s-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P were included in the microrate treatments (Table 6).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

“…At the combined locations, a full rate of dimethenamid-P PRE or in the first or second microrate applications provided greater control of common lambsquarters compared with s-metolachlor. In other research, Guza et al (2002) found that the addition of dimethenamid-P to glyphosate increased control of common lambsquarters in glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet. This treatment also resulted in greater common lambsquarters control than the glyphosate Table 4.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Ethofumesate can be applied preemergence (PRE) or can be tank-mixed with microrates and applied POST to improve control of common lambsquarters, pigweed, kochia [Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. ], and hairy nightshade (Solanum physalifolium Rusby) (Dale et al 2006;Guza et al 2002;Wilson 1994). PRE ethofumesate can provide some residual control of late-emerging weeds; however, POST ethofumesate is applied at rates much lower than PRE ethofumesate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, POST ethofumesate provides little or no residual weed control (Anonymous 2006). Inclusion of ethofumesate in weed control programs also has been shown to increase sugarbeet injury (Dale et al 2006;Guza et al 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Optimizings-Metolachlor and Dimethenamid-P in Sugarbeet Microrate Treatments

Bollman

Sprague

2007

Weed technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field trials were conducted in East Lansing, MI in 2004 and 2005 and in St. Charles, MI in 2004, 2005, and 2006 to compare weed control and sugarbeet tolerance from microrate herbicide treatments that includeds-metolachlor and dimethenamid-P. Treatments included the base microrate treatment alone and with full- and split-application rates ofs-metolachlor at 1.4 kg/ha or dimethenamid-P at 0.84 kg/ha at the various microrate application timings. All treatments injured sugarbeet. In 2004 and 2006, full rates of boths-metolachlor and dimethenamid-P applied PRE or in the first microrate application injured sugarbeet more than the base microrate treatment. Whens-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P were split-applied between PRE and the third microrate application or between the first and the third microrate applications, injury was still greater than from the base microrate treatment. Furthermore, applying dimethenamid-P at one-fourth the full rate in all four microrate applications injured sugarbeet more than the base microrate treatment. A full rate ofs-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P applied in either the third or fourth microrate applications or splitting the applications between the second and fourth microrate treatments did not increase sugarbeet injury compared with the base microrate treatment. Control of common lambsquarters and giant foxtail from all treatments containings-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P, regardless of the time of application, was greater than from the base microrate treatment at all locations. Pigweed spp. control was 94% or greater from all treatments. In 2004, late-season control of giant foxtail was greater from all treatments that includeds-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P compared with the base microrate treatment. In 2005, the only treatments that did not improve late-season giant foxtail control compared with the base microrate treatment were the treatments that included a full rate ofs-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P applied in the fourth microrate application. Even though some herbicide treatments that includeds-metolachlor or dimethenamid-P injured sugarbeet more than the base microrate treatment, recoverable sucrose per hectare was similar among treatments.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Optimizings-Metolachlor and Dimethenamid-P in Sugarbeet Microrate Treatments

Bollman

Sprague

2007

Weed technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Glufosinate tolerance in dodder growing on LL hosts has been reported by other researchers. Guza () observed that dodder growing on LL sugar beet readily survived glufosinate‐ammonium foliar treatment at 0.8 kg ha −1 , even when the herbicide application was repeated three times on a weekly interval. Nadler‐Hassar et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inter‐species protein trafficking endows dodder (Cuscuta pentagona) with a host‐specific herbicide‐tolerant trait

Jiang

et al. 2013

New Phytologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBesides photosynthates, dodder (Cuscuta spp.) acquires phloem-mobile proteins from host; however, whether this could mediate inter-species phenotype transfer was not demonstrated. Specifically, we test whether phosphinothricin acetyl transferase (PAT) that confers host plant glufosinate herbicide tolerance traffics and functions inter-specifically.Dodder tendrils excised from hosts can grow in vitro for weeks or resume in vivo by parasitizing new hosts. The level of PAT in in vivo and in vitro dodder tendrils was quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The glufosinate sensitivity was examined by dipping the distal end of in vivo and in vitro tendrils, growing on or excised from LibertyLink â (LL; PATtransgenic and glufosinate tolerant) and conventional (CN; glufosinate sensitive) soybean hosts, into glufosinate solutions for 5 s. After in vitro tendrils excised from LL hosts reparasitized new CN and LL hosts, the PAT level and the glufosinate sensitivity were also examined. When growing on LL host, dodder tolerated glufosinate and contained PAT at a level of 0.3% of that encountered in LL soybean leaf. After PAT was largely degraded in dodders, they became glufosinate sensitive. PAT mRNA was not detected by reverse transcription PCR in dodders.In conclusion, the results indicated that PAT inter-species trafficking confers dodder glufosinate tolerance.

show abstract