Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T18:34:22.567Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Influencing Activity of Acetanilide Herbicides on Processing Peas (Pisum sativum) and Annual Weeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

G. L. Jordan  and
R. G. Harvey
G. L. Jordan
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Wisc., Madison, WI 53706
R. G. Harvey
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. of Wisc., Madison, WI 53706
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A charcoal barrier was used to determine the importance of root, shoot, and seed exposure on the activity of nine acetanilide herbicides to peas (Pisum sativum L.) grown in a greenhouse. Greater reduction of plant weight occurred from root exposure than from shoot exposure. For all herbicides, the average reduction in shoot and root weight from shoot exposure was 7 and 20%, respectively; and root exposure reduced shoot and root weight 15 and 40%, respectively. The average reduction in shoot and root weight from exposing all plant parts to herbicides was 47 and 69%, respectively. Seed exposure had no influence on plant weight. This response indicates that pea roots are the primary site of activity for many acetanilide herbicides, and provides support to previous findings that showed rainfall was necessary to leach acetanilide herbicides down to the root zone of processing peas for maximum reduction of shelled pea yield. Field studies, conducted over a 2-yr period, were designed to evaluate annual weed control and pea injury from preemergence and early postemergence applications of seven acetanilide herbicides. Shelled pea yield was not reduced by any treatment. All treatments provided good to excellent grass control and fair to good broadleaf weed control.

Keywords

Site of uptakeleachingmobilityadsorption
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 28 , Issue 5 , September 1980 , pp. 589 - 593
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. Anderson, W. P. 1977. Herbicides. Pages 201–298 in Weed Science: Principles. West Publishing Company, St. Paul. Google Scholar
2. Armstrong, T. F., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1973. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of alachlor by yellow nutsedge. Weed Sci. 21:357–360.Google Scholar
3. Chandler, J. M., Basler, E., and Santelmann, P. W. 1974. Uptake and translocation of alachlor in soybean and wheat. Weed Sci. 22: 253–258.Google Scholar
4. Eshel, Y. 1969. Phytotoxicity, leachability, and site of uptake of 2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide. Weed Sci. 17:441–444.Google Scholar
5. Gerber, H. R., Muller, G., and Ebner, L. 1974. CGA 24705, a new grasskiller herbicide. Proc. Br. Weed Control Conf. 12:787–794.Google Scholar
6. Gray, R. A. and Weierich, A. J. 1969. Importance of root, shoot, and seed exposure on the herbicidal activity of EPTC. Weed Sci. 17:223–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Jordan, G. L. and Harvey, R. G. 1978. Response of processing peas (Pisum sativum) and annual weeds to acetanilide herbicides. Weed Sci. 26:313–317.Google Scholar
8. Knake, E. L. and Wax, L. M. 1968. The importance of the shoot of giant foxtail for uptake of preemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 16:393–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Narsaiah, D. B. and Harvey, R. G. 1977. Alachlor placement in the soil as related to phytotoxicity to maize (Zea mays L.) seedlings. Weed Res. 17:163–168.Google Scholar
10. Parker, C. 1966. The importance of shoot entry in the action of herbicides applied to the soil. Weeds 14:117–121.Google Scholar