Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-wpx69 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-16T21:58:36.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Absorption and Translocation of Mefluidide by Soybean (Glycine max), Common Cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum), and Giant Foxtail (Setaria faberi)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. R. Bloomberg  and
L. M. Wax
J. R. Bloomberg
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Illinois
L. M. Wax
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U. S. Dep. Agric., Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Absorption and translocation characteristics of both root- and shoot-applied mefluidide N-[2,4-dimethyl-5-[[(trifluoromethyl) sulfonyl] amino] phenyl] acetamide were determined in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Wells’], common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.), and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm.). Absorption of 14C-mefluidide was greater through the foliage than the roots of all plant species. Rate of leaf absorption and translocation of 14C initially was greater in giant foxtail than in either soybean or common cocklebur, but these processes failed to increase greatly with time in giant foxtail. Absorption and translocation increased over time in soybean and common cocklebur. Soybean absorbed slightly greater quantities of 14C-mefluidide than common cocklebur, but by 8 days after labeling, common cocklebur translocated approximately 47% more radio-label out of the treated leaf than soybean. The foliar-applied 14C-label appeared to move in the phloem along with the assimilate stream in all species, mainly to areas of high metabolic activity. 14C was associated with the root systems and/or nutrient solutions of soybean and giant foxtail, but not of common cocklebur. Exuded material chromatographed as mefluidide. Movement of 14C-label in all root-treated plants appeared to be confined within the xylem with older tissue containing greater amounts of 14C than the younger tissue. Differences in selectivity between crop and weed species may be partially due to differential mefluidide absorption, translocation, and subsequent concentration in certain plant tissues.

Keywords

Autoradiographacropetalselectivityherbicide
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 26 , Issue 5 , September 1978 , pp. 434 - 440
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Andrilenas, P. A. 1975. Farmer's use of pesticides in 1971 … extent of crop use. Econ. Res. Serv., U. S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Econ. Rep. No. 268. 25 pp.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. March 1976. Embark technical data bulletin. 3M Company, St. Paul, Minnesota.Google Scholar
3. Barrentine, W. L. 1974. Common cocklebur competition in soybeans. Weed Sci. 22:600–603.Google Scholar
4. Bloomberg, J. R. and Wax, L. M. 1977. Absorption and translocation of mefluidide in soybeans and cockleburs (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.). Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 16–17.Google Scholar
5. Crafts, A. S. 1964. Herbicide behavior in the plant. Pages 75–110 in Andus, L. J., ed. The physiology and biochemistry of herbicides. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
6. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. California Agric. Exp. Stn. Ext. Serv. Manual 35. 143 pp.Google Scholar
7. Davis, D. E., Gramlich, J. V., and Funderburk, H. H. Jr. 1965. Atrazine absorption and degradation by corn, cotton, and soybeans. Weeds 13:252–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Gates, D. W. 1976. Sesbania control in soybeans with MBR-12325 and in combinations with other herbicides. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 29:108.Google Scholar
9. Gates, D. W. 1975. Response of several plant species to MBR-12325. Abstr. Plant Growth Reg. Working Group. p. 13.Google Scholar
10. Harrison, H. F. Jr., Gossett, B. J., and Musen, H. L. 1976. Response of soybeans and weeds to MBR-12325 alone and with bentazon and chloroxuron. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 29:103.Google Scholar
11. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water culture method for growing plants without soil. California Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. No. 347.32 pp.Google Scholar
12. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberi with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.Google Scholar
13. McWhorter, C. G. and Hartwig, E. E. 1972. Competition of johnsongrass and cocklebur with six soybean varieties. Weed Sci. 20:56–59.Google Scholar
14. Price, J. H., Slack, C. H., and Rieck, C. E. 1975. Effect of MBR-12325 on soybean yield and johnsongrass control. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. p. 26.Google Scholar
15. Rodgers, R. L., Crawford, S. H., Bannon, J. S., and Gates, D. W. 1976. Weed control in soybeans with MBR-12325, bentazon, and chloroxuron. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 13–14.Google Scholar
16. Roeth, F. W. and Lavy, T. L. 1971. Atrazine uptake by sudangrass, sorghum, and corn. Weed Sci. 19:93–97.Google Scholar
17. Staniforth, D. W. 1965. Competitive effects of three foxtail species on soybeans. Weeds 13:191–193.Google Scholar
18. Stoller, E. W. 1970. Mechanism for the differential translocation of amiben in plants. Plant Physiol. 46:732–737.Google Scholar
19. Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1976. Translocation of MBR-12325 in soybeans and cocklebur. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 14.Google Scholar
20. Wills, G. D. and McWhorter, C. G. 1977. Effect of environment on the translocation of mefluidide in plants. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 24.Google Scholar
21. Yonce, H. D. and Palmer, J. H. 1976. Evaluation of method, rate, and time of application of bentazon for cocklebur control in soybeans. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. 29:104.Google Scholar
22. Zimmerman, M. H. 1960. Transport in the phloem. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 11:167–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar