Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:36:29.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Interaction of Glyphosate and 2,4-DB for the Control of Selected Morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) Species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Glenn Wehtje
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soils, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36849
Robert H. Walker
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soils, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36849

Abstract

Interaction of glyphosate and 2,4-DB was evaluated in greenhouse and laboratory studies with respect to control of four species of annual morningglory. The greenhouse study included smallflower, pitted, palmleaf, and ivyleaf morningglory at three growth stages: seedling, juvenile, and vining. A series of glyphosate rates (0.28 to 1.26 kg ae/ha) and 2,4-DB (0.022 and 0.045 kg ae/ha) were applied alone, and in all possible two-way tank mixtures. Morningglory response to both glyphosate and 2,4-DB applied alone was species- and growth stage-dependent. All combinations were either additive or synergistic for control of pitted, palmleaf, and ivyleaf morningglory. Response of smallflower morningglory ranged from antagonistic to synergistic. Absorption and translocation of 14C-2,4-DB was independent of the addition of glyphosate in all four species. By contrast, absorption of foliar-applied 14C-glyphosate and translocation of 14C from treated leaves to other plant parts were enhanced by the addition of 2,4-DB in all species except palmleaf morningglory. In palmleaf morningglory, 14C-glyphosate absorption and translocation were independent of the addition of 2,4-DB. Absorption and translocation data were in agreement with greenhouse studies.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Colby, S. R., 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:2022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delanney, X., Bauman, T. T., Beighley, D. H., et al. 1995. Yield evaluation of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line after treatment with glyphosate. Crop Sci. 35:14611467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatzios, K. K., and Penner, D. 1985. Interactions of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1:163.Google Scholar
Hawf, L. R., and Behrens, R. 1974. Selectivity factors in response of plants to 2,4-DB. Weed Sci. 22:245249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ketchersid, M. L., Boswell, T. E., and Merkle, M. G. 1978. Effect of 2,4-DB on yield and pod development of peanuts. Peanut Sci. 5:3539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., and O'Sullivan, P. A. 1982. The antagonistic action of 2,4-D and bromoxynil on glyphosate phytotoxicity to barley. Weed Sci. 30:3034.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, P. A., and O'Donovan, J. T. 1980a. Interactions between glyphosate and various herbicides for broadleaved weed control. Weed Res. 20: 255260.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, P. A., and O'Donovan, J. T. 1980b. Influence of various herbicides and Tween 20 on the effectiveness of glyphosate. Can. J. Plant Sci. 60:939945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padgette, S. R., Kolacz, K. H., Delanney, X., et al. 1995. Development, identification and characterization of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line. Crop Sci. 35:14511461.Google Scholar
Wathana, S., Corbin, F. T., and Waldrep, T. W. 1972. Absorption and translocation of 2,4-DB in soybean and cocklebur. Weed Sci. 20:120123.Google Scholar
Wehtje, G., Wilcut, J. W., and McGuire, J. A. 1992. Paraquat behavior as influenced by 2,4-DB in peanut and selected weeds. Peanut Sci. 19:5155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyrill, J. B. III, and Burnside, O. C. 1976. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of 2,4-D and glyphosate in common milkweed and hemp dogbane. Weed Sci. 24:557566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar