Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T16:17:29.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interaction of Glyphosate and Diquat in Ready-To-Use Weed Control Products

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Glenn Wehtje ,
James E. Altland  and
Charles H. Gilliam
Glenn Wehtje*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Department of Horticulture, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36849
James E. Altland
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Department of Horticulture, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36849
Charles H. Gilliam
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Department of Horticulture, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36849
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wehtjgr@auburn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glyphosate-based, ready-to-use weed control products frequently contain diquat (typically, 0.04 by weight relative to glyphosate) under the supposition that the diquat, “makes glyphosate work faster.” However, in light of the known modes of actions of glyphosate and diquat, we hypothesize that diquat may be antagonistic to glyphosate activity. Greenhouse experiments using longstalked phyllanthus were conducted to test this hypothesis. Glyphosate was applied at a series of rates, ranging from 0.11 to 1.12 kg ae/ha, either alone or tank-mixed with either 0, 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 diquat. Onset of visual injury was more pronounced with the glyphosate + diquat tank mixtures compared with glyphosate alone. However, long-term control, as expressed by regrowth suppression, was greater with glyphosate alone. Regression analysis indicated that, at marginally effective glyphosate rates, the amount of glyphosate must be increased by approximately 60% to compensate for the diquat-based antagonism. Absorption and translocation studies using 14C-glyphosate revealed that the antagonism of diquat toward glyphosate can be attributed to reduced translocation of absorbed glyphosate.

Keywords

Diquatglyphosatelongstalked phyllanthus, Phyllanthus tenellus Roxb PYLTELinear regressionnonlinear regressionsynergism and antagonism
Type
Weed Management — Other Crops/Areas
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 472 - 476
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

Black, C. C. Jr and Meyers, L. 1966. Some biochemical aspects of the mechanism of herbicide activity. Weeds. 14:331–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Reddy, K. N. 2004. Pelargonic acid and rainfall effects on glyphosate activity in trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans). Weed Technol. 18:66–72.Google Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds. 15:20–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funderburk, H. H. and Lawrence, J. M. 1964. Mode of action of and metabolism of diquat and paraquat. Weeds. 12:259–264.Google Scholar
Hatzios, K. K. and Penner, D. 1985. Interaction of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1:1–63.Google Scholar
Jaworski, E. G. 1972. The mode of action of N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine: inhibition of aromatic amino acid biosynthesis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 20:1195–1198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littell, R. C., Freund, R. J., and Spector, P. C. 1991. SAS Systems for Linear Models. 3rd ed. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Norris, J. L., Shaw, D. R., and Snipes, C. E. 2001. Weed control from herbicide combinations with three formulations of glyphosate. Weed Technol. 15:552–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose–response relationships. Weed Technol. 9:218–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senseman, S. A., editor. 2007a. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 155–157.Google Scholar
Senseman, S. A., editor. 2007b. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 231–234.Google Scholar
Steinfrücker, H. C. and Amrhein, P. 1980. The herbicide glyphosate is a potent inhibitor of 5-enolpyruvylshikimic acid-3-phosphate synthase. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 94:1207–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar