Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-7nlkj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T03:15:56.386Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of No-Tillage Planters on Tolerance of Soybeans to Linuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

A. D. Worsham
A. D. Worsham*
Affiliation:
Crop Sci. Dep., Weed Sci. Center, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27607
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] planted conventionally or no-tillage tolerated approximately four times the recommended preemergence rates of linuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1-methoxy-1-methylurea] depending on the type planter used. Least injury to high rates of linuron was with a planter that placed seed slightly below the level of the surface of the field with a slightly rounded ridge of soil over the row. A planter leaving the seed under a slight furrow resulted in intermediate crop injury and a planter which deposited seed under a furrow 5 to 10 cm deep resulted in greatest crop injury. There was no consistent trend in the tolerance to linuron of soybeans planted conventionally or planted without tillage in small grain stubble with the straw removed. Row profile and its relation to seed placement was important in the tolerance of soybeans to linuron.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , July 1974 , pp. 340 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 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. Andrews, H., Boyce, E.K., Skold, L.N., and Roper, J.R. 1969. Stand establishment and growth of corn on chemically killed sod as influenced by type of sod planter and speed of operation. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 22:190–194.Google Scholar
2. Dubey, H.D. and Freeman, J.F. 1965. Leaching of linuron and diphenamid in soils. Weeds 13:360–362.Google Scholar
3. Hardcastle, W.S. 1973. Weed control in conventional, non-tilled, and stale bed plantings of soybeans. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 26:88.Google Scholar
4. Herron, J.W., Thompson, L. Jr., and Slack, C.H. 1973. Evaluation of herbicides used in double-cropped soybeans. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 26:65.Google Scholar
5. Hill, G.D., Evans, A.W., and Varner, R.W. 1962. Selective weed control in crops with a new substituted urea herbicide. Proc. S. Weed Conf. 15:49–59.Google Scholar
6. McWhorter, C.G., Wooten, O.B., and Holstun, J.T. 1955. A study of seedbed smoothing devices for preemergence weed control in cotton. Proc. S. Weed Conf. 8:42–56.Google Scholar
7. Monaco, T.J. and Miller, C.H. 1972. Herbicide activity in close-spaced, pickling cucumbers. Weed Sci. 20:545–548.Google Scholar
8. Mullins, J.A., McCutchen, Tom, and Jeffery, L.S. 1973. Weed control in soybeans planted in small grain stubble. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 26:179.Google Scholar
9. Rieder, G., Buchholtz, K.P., and Kust, C.A. 1970. Uptake of herbicides by soybean seed. Weed Sci. 18:101–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Spatcher, D.L. 1971. Influence of linuron on minimum tillage of soybeans. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:172–175.Google Scholar
11. Trichell, D.W., Morton, H.L., and Merkle, M.G. 1968. Loss of herbicides in runoff water. Weed Sci. 16:447–449.Google Scholar
12. Worsham, A.D. 1970. No-tillage soybeans in mowed and combined wheat stubble. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:87.Google Scholar