Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T17:18:23.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selective Action of Trifluralin for Control of Green Foxtail in Wheat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

A. Rahman  and
R. Ashford
A. Rahman
Affiliation:
Crop Science Department, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
R. Ashford
Affiliation:
Crop Science Department, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The selective action of α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine (trifluralin) for the control of green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv.) in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) was studied. Seedlings of both species, especially in the early stage of growth, were particularly susceptible to herbicide applied in the region of the coleoptile node. Selective control with trifluralin was possible, however, because of the morphological differences between the seedlings of the two species. Thus, the sensitive coleoptilar node area of green foxtail was located at a depth of less than 1 cm from the soil surface regardless of planting depth. The coleoptile node of wheat remained closely associated with the caryopsis. When a protective band of untreated soil was used to separate the caryopses from a 5-cm band of surface soil containing 1.12 ppmw of trifluralin, the shoot growth of wheat was normal. Much lower rates of trifluralin effectively controlled green foxtail, as surface or subsurface placement of a 1.3-cm layer of soil containing 1.12 ppmw of chemical above the foxtail caryopses completely inhibited shoot development. In addition to the differences in morphological development between the two species, the fact that green foxtail was considerably more susceptible to trifluralin than wheat was considered as an important factor contributing to the selective control.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 18 , Issue 6 , November 1970 , pp. 754 - 759
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., Richards, A. B., and Whitworth, J. W. 1967. Trifluralin effects on cotton seedlings. Weeds 15:224–227.Google Scholar
2. Baker, J. B. 1960. An explanation for the selective control of barnyardgrass in rice with CIPC. Weeds 8:39–47.Google Scholar
3. Dawson, J. H. 1963. Development of barnyardgrass seedlings and their response to EPTC. Weeds 11:60–67.Google Scholar
4. Friesen, H. A., Banting, J. D., and Walker, D. R. 1962. The effect of placement and concentration of 2,3-DCDT on the selective control of wild oats in wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 42:91–104.Google Scholar
5. Hacskaylo, J. and Amato, V. A. 1968. Effect of trifluralin on roots of corn and cotton. Weed Sci. 16:513–515.Google Scholar
6. Hamilton, K. C. and Arle, H. F. 1963. Preplant applications of herbicides in cotton. Res. Prog. Rep. West. Weed Contr. Conf. p. 49–50.Google Scholar
7. Knake, E. L., Appleby, A. P., and Furtick, W. R. 1967. Soil incorporation and site of uptake of preemergence herbicides. Weeds 15:228–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Menges, R. M. and Hubbard, J. L. 1970. Phytotoxicity of bensulide and trifluralin in several soils. Weed Sci. 18:244–247.Google Scholar
9. Negi, N. S., Funderburk, H. H. Jr., Schultz, D. P., and Davis, D. E. 1968. Effect of trifluralin and nitralin on mitochondrial activities. Weed Sci. 16:83–85.Google Scholar
10. Pieczarka, S. J., Wright, W. L., and Alder, E. F., 1962. Trifluralin for preemergent weed control in agronomic crops. Proc. North East. Weed Contr. Conf. 16:356–361.Google Scholar
11. Prendeville, G. N., Oliver, L. R., and Schreiber, M. M. 1968. Species differences in site of shoot uptake and tolerance to EPTC. Weed Sci. 16:538–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Rahman, A. and Ashford, R. 1969. Control of green foxtail in wheat with trifluralin. Res. Rep. Can. Weed Comm. (West. Sect.). p. 120–121.Google Scholar
13. Schultz, D. P., Funderburk, H. H. Jr., and Negi, N. S. 1968. Effect of trifluralin on growth, morphology and nucleic acid synthesis. Plant Physiol. 43:265–273.Google Scholar
14. Shahied, S. I. and Giddens, J. 1970. Effect of cysteine on the action of trifluralin on lateral roots of cotton and corn. Agron. J. 62:306–307.Google Scholar
15. Standifer, L. C. Jr., Sloane, L. W., and Wright, M. E. 1965. The effects of repeated trifluralin applications on growth of cotton plants. Proc. So. Weed Conf. 18:92–93.Google Scholar
16. Standifer, L. C. Jr. and Thomas, C. H. 1965. Response of johnsongrass to soil-incorporated trifluralin. Weeds 13:302–306.Google Scholar
17. Talbert, R. E. 1965. Effects of trifluralin on soybean root development. Proc. So. Weed Conf. 18:652.Google Scholar
18. Wright, W. L. and Warren, G. F. 1965. Photochemical decomposition of trifluralin. Weeds 13:329–331.Google Scholar