Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T14:43:32.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metolachlor Efficacy as Influenced by Three Acetolactate Synthase-Inhibiting Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Karen M. Novosel ,
Karen A. Renner ,
James J. Kells  and
Eric Spandl
Karen M. Novosel*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Ml 48824
Karen A. Renner
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Ml 48824
James J. Kells
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Ml 48824
Eric Spandl
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Ml 48824
*
Corresponding author e-mail: karen_novosel@fmc.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In preliminary field trials, a reduction in grass control was observed when flumetsulam or MON 12037 with and without the safener MON 13900 was applied with metolachlor compared to metolachlor alone. Greenhouse studies were initiated to study potential interactions between acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides and metolachlor. Metolachlor at 0.14, 0.28, and 0.56 kg ai/ha was applied alone and in combination with flumetsulam at 0.0073 and 0.015 kg ai/ha and MON 12037 with safener at 0.011 and 0.021 kg ai/ha. Flumetsulam and MON 12037 with safener alone provided 13 to 23% visible barnyardgrass control and metolachlor at 0.14 kg/ha provided 82% control. Combining flumetsulam and MON 12037 with metolachlor did not increase herbicide activity beyond that observed from metolachlor alone, regardless of the parameter evaluated. Combinations of 0.14 kg/ha of metolachlor with 0.011 and 0.021 kg/ha of MON 12037 with safener or 0.015 kg/ha of flumetsulam resulted in antagonism of barnyardgrass according to Colby's multiplicative interactive model. Visible control and plant dry weight were also antagonized when 0.28 kg/ha of metolachlor was applied with 0.021 kg/ha of MON 12037 with safener. Field studies were conducted in corn and soybean to evaluate giant foxtail control from metolachlor alone and in tank mixtures with flumetsulam, chlorimuron and MON 12037 with and without safener. Although isolated incidences of antagonism were noted, there was no consistent effect on grass control when these ALS-inhibiting herbicides were applied in combination with metolachlor in 3 years of field trials.

Keywords

Chlorimuron, 2-[[[[(4-chloro-6-methoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidflumetsulam, N-(2,6-difluorophenyl)-5-methyl[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidine-2-sulfonamideMON 13900 (proposed, furilazole), 3-dichloro acetyl-5-(2-furanyl)-2,2-dimethyl-oxazolidine)MON 12037 (proposed, halosulfuron), methyl-5-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)-amino]carbonylaminosulfonyl]-3-chloro-1-methylpyrazole-1-methyl-1-H-pyrazole-4-carboxy-latemetolachlor, 2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl) acetamidebarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli L. #3 ECHCRgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi L. # SETFAcorn, Zea mays L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.Antagonismbarnyardgrassgiant foxtailinteractionsALS, acetolactate synthaseDAR days after planting
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 248 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Ahrens, W. H., ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 352 p.Google Scholar
Akobundu, I. O., Duke, W. B., Sweet, R. D., and Minotti, P. L. 1975. Basis for synergism of atrazine and alachlor combinations on Japanese millet. Weed Sci. 23:43–48.Google Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds 15:20–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmund, R. M. Jr. and York, A. C. 1987. Factors affecting postemergence control of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) with imazaquin and DPX-F6025: spray volume, growth stage, and soil-applied alachlor and vernolate. Weed Sci. 35:216–223.Google Scholar
Hamill, A. S. and Penner, D. 1973. Interaction of alachlor and carbofuran, Weed Sci. 21:330–335.Google Scholar
Kells, J. J., Renner, K. A., Powell, G., et al. 1992. Annual Research Report, Michigan State University. East Lansing MI: Michigan State University. 222 p.Google Scholar
Lueschen, W. E. and Getting, J. K. 1995. Broadleaf weed control in corn with soil applied and postemergence herbicides at Lamberton, MN in 1995. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. Annu. Res. Rep. 52:220–221.Google Scholar
Maxwell, D. J. and Simmons, F. W. 1993. Evaluation of imazethapyr and other herbicides for preemergence and postemergence weed control in imazethapyr resistant corn, Urbana, IL, 1993. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. Annu. Res. Rep. 50:202–203.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. E. and Regehr, D. L. 1995. Weed control in soybeans, Manhattan, Kansas. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. Annu. Res. Rep. 52:343.Google Scholar
Renner, K. A., Kells, J. J., Powell, G., et al. 1996. Annu. Res. Rep., Michigan State University. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. 272 p.Google Scholar
Wax, L. M., Hart, S. E., and Maxwell, D. J. 1995. Weed control systems for no-till soybeans. Urbana, IL, 1995. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. Annu. Res. Rep. 52:408–409.Google Scholar
Winkle, M. E., Leavitt, J.R.C., and Burnside, O. C. 1981. Effects of weed density on herbicide absorption and bioactivity. Weed Sci. 29:405–409.Google Scholar
York, A. C. and Slife, F. W. 1981. Interaction of buthidazole and acetanilide herbicides. Weed Sci. 29:461–468.Google Scholar