Weed Control, Yield, and Net Returns Using Imazethapyr in Peanuts (<i>Arachis hypogaea</i>L.)

Wilcut, John W.; Walls, F. Robert; Horton, David N.

doi:10.1017/s004317450007154x

Cited by 27 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Akobundu (1981) and Hawkins et al (1971) investigated that the profitability of herbicide use was very high, ranging from US $ 3.30 to 4.89/$ 1 herbicide cost. The results are also in agreement with Wilcut et al (1987Wilcut et al ( , 1991 that net returns haG 1 given by hand weeding and weed-free are $ 213 and $ 146-426 respectively. On the basis of present findings, ronstar, stomp, tolkan, tribunil are recommended as pre-emergence weedicides, while fusilade and flex as post-emergence.…”

Section: Economic Analysissupporting

confidence: 88%

Economic Efficacy of Different Pre- and Post-emergence Herbicides to Control Weeds in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Malik¹,

Haqqani²,

Habib-ur-Rehman³

et al. 2001

J. of Biological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study on weed control in chickpea was conducted at the National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad to evaluate the performance of selected Pre-emergence herbicides; ronstar, stomp, tolkin and tribunil and post-emergence herbicides; flex, fusilade and tribunil. Treatment-wise per hectare cost incurred on pre-emergence herbicides was Rs.540, Rs.247, Rs. 270 and Rs.369, whereas on post-emergence herbicides,it was Rs.36, Rs. 225, Rs.261, Rs.374, Rs. 369 and Rs.1050. These herbicides were applied alone and in combinations to study broad spectrum performance, if any. Two checks, hand weeded and weedy plots were kept for comparison of yield and economic gains. Chickpea variety was CM-72. Almost all the herbicides treated and hand weeded plots controlled the weeds density per unit area by 21 to 141% and significantly increased the grain yield by 14 to 141% or 332 kg haG 1 to 735 kg haG 1 . Amongst pre-emergence herbicides, ronstar and Stomp gave the highest net return/per rupee investment of Rs.1:3.76 and Rs.1:2.74 respectively, followed by tribunil and tolkan to the tune of Rs.1: 2.70, while the post-emergence herbicide Fusilade applied at 0.75 and 0.50 kg a.i. haG 1 gave net return of Rs.2.36 and 2.10. post-emergence herbicide flex followed these treatments and earned net return of Rs.1.99. Low return from flex alone or when mixed with fusilade are likely due to phytotoxicity caused by flex being non-selective against broadleaf plants. Hand weeding though gave quite reasonable yield of 776 kg haG 1 , yet its return were lowest because of low labor efficiency at high cost of prevailing daily wages.

show abstract

Section: Economic Analysissupporting

confidence: 88%

Economic Efficacy of Different Pre- and Post-emergence Herbicides to Control Weeds in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Malik¹,

Haqqani²,

Habib-ur-Rehman³

et al. 2001

J. of Biological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Imazethapyr is the first herbicide registered in peanut to provide residual broadleaf and perennial nutsedge weed control (Richburg et al, 1995(Richburg et al, , 1996Wilcut et al, 1991aWilcut et al, , 1991bWilcut et al, , 1994. Based on these results, a differential peanut cultivar response to imazethapyr should not be a problem.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Imazethapyr is registered for use in peanut as a PPI, PRE, EPOST, or POST treatment. Imazethapyr provides soil residual control of numerous broadleaf weeds and perennial sedges (Richburg et al, 1995(Richburg et al, , 1996Wilcut et al, 1991aWilcut et al, , 1991bWilcut et al, , 1994. The registration of new peanut herbicides necessitates determination if tolerance differs among peanut cultivars (Hammons, 1976).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of Runner, Spanish, and Virginia Peanut cultivars to Imazethapyr

Richburg¹,

Wilcut²,

Grichar³

2006

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field experiments conducted in 1992 and 1993 in Georgia and Texas evaluated response of five runner-, three virginia-, and four spanish-type peanut cultivars to imazethapyr applied earlypostemergence (EPOST) at 71 g/ha. Visual injury was less than 11% at Tifton and no visible injury on any cultivar was noted later in the season. Canopy width was similar with or without imazethapyr for each cultivar at Tifton in 1992. In 1993, all cultivars at Tifton exhibited a linear canopy width response and regression coefficients were less for Florunner, Southern Runner, Sunrunner, NC 7, and NC-V11 treated with imazethapyr indicating slower canopy closure. The only significant effect on peanut grade factors and yield was the main effect of cultivar. The occurence of late and early leafspot, tomato spotted wilt, and southern stem rot was independent of both cultivar and imazethapyr. In Texas, the cultivar Spanco had higher canopy height and width 3 weeks after treatment (3 WAT) when treated with imazethapyr. The only significant effect on canopy height and width in Texas at 6 WAT was cultivar. There were no significant effects on damaged and other kernels, total sound mature kernels, or peanut yield in Texas.

show abstract

“…), spurred anoda [Anoda cristata (L.) Schlecht. ], and wild poinsettia (Euphorbia heterophylla L.) [2][3][4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Simulated Imazapic and Imazethapyr Herbicide Carryover on Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)

Grichar¹,

Dotray

Baughman³

2012

International Journal of Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field studies were conducted during the 2001 and 2002 growing seasons in the Texas peanut growing regions to simulate residual concentrations of imazapic and imazethapyr in the soil and subsequent effects on cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.). Simulated imazapic or imazethapyr rates included 0, 1/64X (1.09 g ai/ha), 1/32X (2.19 g ai/ha), 1/16X (4.38 g ai/ha), 1/8X (8.75 g ai/ha), 1/4X (17.5 g ai/ha), and 1/2X (35 g ai/ha) of the full labeled rate for peanut (Arachis hypogaeaL.) and incorporated prior to cotton planting. Cotton stunting with imazapic or imazethapyr was more severe at Denver City than other locations. All rates of imazapic and imazethapyr resulted in cotton stunting at Denver City while at Munday and Yoakum the 1/8X, 1/4X, and 1/2X rates of imazapic resulted in reduced cotton growth when compared with the untreated check. At all locations imazapic caused more stunted cotton than imazethapyr. Cotton lint yield was reduced by imazapic or imazethapyr at 1/4 X and 1/2 X rates at all locations when compared with the untreated check.

show abstract

Weed Control, Yield, and Net Returns Using Imazethapyr in Peanuts (Arachis hypogaeaL.)

Cited by 27 publications

References 8 publications

Economic Efficacy of Different Pre- and Post-emergence Herbicides to Control Weeds in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Economic Efficacy of Different Pre- and Post-emergence Herbicides to Control Weeds in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Response of Runner, Spanish, and Virginia Peanut cultivars to Imazethapyr

Influence of Simulated Imazapic and Imazethapyr Herbicide Carryover on Cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About