Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T05:21:49.768Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential Selectivity of Herbicides on Six Setaria Taxa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Lawrence R. Oliver  and
Marvin M. Schreiber
Lawrence R. Oliver
Affiliation:
Crops Res. Div. Agr. Res. Serv., U. S. Dep. of Agr., Dep. of Botany
Marvin M. Schreiber
Affiliation:
Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Indiana 47907
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Differential selectivity was shown for 2-chloro-4-(ethylamino)-6-(isopropylamino)-s-triazine (atrazine), 2-chloro-4, 6-bis(isopropylamino)-s-triazine (propazine), and S-ethyl diisobutylthiocarbamate (butylate) on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi Herrm.) yellow foxtail (Setaria glauca (L.) Beauv.), giant green foxtail (Setaria viridis var. major (Gaud.) Posp.), robust white foxtail (Setaria viridis var. robusta-alba Schreiber), and robust purple foxtail (Setaria viridis var. robusta-purpurea Schreiber). The differentials obtained could explain the reports of uncontrolled Setaria species and the apparent increase of the latter three varieties. The two new varieties of green foxtail, robust white and robust purple foxtails, were the most tolerant varieties or species to atrazine and propazine with giant green foxtail intermediate between the robust foxtails and green, giant, and yellow foxtail. The ED50 values for the robust foxtails were also higher than for the other varieties and species studied. Yellow foxtail was the most tolerant to butylate. The effective rate, measured as percent of control, was directly related to soil organic matter content.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , July 1971 , pp. 428 - 431
Copyright
Copyright © 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. Fairbrothers, D. E. 1959. Morphological variations of Setaria faberii and Setaria viridis . Brittonia 11:44–48.Google Scholar
2. Hubbard, F. T. 1915. A taxonomic study of Setaria italica and its immediate allies. Amer. J. Bot. 2:169–198.Google Scholar
3. McWhorter, C. G. and Holstun, J. T. Jr. 1961. Phytotoxicity of s-triazine herbicides to corn and weeds as related to structural differences. Weeds 9:592–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Nalewaja, J. and Collins, D. M. 1969. Herbicide evaluation for weed control in sunflowers. Res. Rep. No. Centr. Weed Contr. Conf. 26:80.Google Scholar
5. Robinson, R. G., Nelson, W. W., Thompson, R. L., and Thompson, J. R. 1964. Herbicides and mixtures for annual weed control in grain sorghum. Weeds 12:77–79.Google Scholar
6. Santelmann, P. W. and Meade, J. A. 1961. Variation in morphological characteristics and dalapon susceptibility within the species Setaria lutescens and S. faberii . Weeds 9:406–410.Google Scholar
7. Schreiber, M. M., Bula, R. J., Bergeson, G. H., and Jantz, O. L. 1969. Weed and nematode control in experimental field plots by soil fumigation. Down to Earth 24 (4):30–31.Google Scholar
8. Schreiber, M. M. and Oliver, L. R. 1971. Two new varieties of Setaria viridis . Weed Sci. 19:424–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar