Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T16:54:18.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adjuvants Influenced Saflufenacil Efficacy on Fall-Emerging Weeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Stevan Z. Knezevic ,
Avishek Datta ,
Jon Scott  and
Leo D. Charvat
Stevan Z. Knezevic*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728
Avishek Datta
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728
Jon Scott
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728
Leo D. Charvat
Affiliation:
BASF Corporation, 6211 Saddle Creek Trail, Lincoln, NE 68523-9227
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: sknezevic2@unl.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Saflufenacil is a new herbicide being developed for preplant burndown and PRE broadleaf weed control in field crops, including corn, soybean, sorghum, and wheat. Field experiments were conducted in 2006 and 2007 at Concord, in northeast Nebraska, with the objective to describe dose–response curves of saflufenacil applied with several adjuvants for broadleaf weed control. Dose–response curves based on log-logistic model were used to determine the effective dose that provides 90% weed control (ED90) values for six broadleaf weeds (field bindweed, prickly lettuce, henbit, shepherd's-purse, dandelion, and field pennycress). Addition of adjuvants greatly improved efficacy of saflufenacil. For example, the ED90 values for field bindweed control at 28 d after treatment were 71, 20, 11, and 7 g/ha for saflufenacil applied alone, or with nonionic surfactant (NIS), crop oil concentrate (COC), or methylated seed oil (MSO), respectively. MSO was the adjuvant that provided the greatest enhancement of saflufenacil across all species tested. COC was the second-best adjuvant and provided control similar to MSO on many weed species. NIS provided the least enhancement of saflufenacil. These results are very similar to the proposed label dose of saflufenacil for burndown weed control, which will range from 25 to 100 g/ha with MSO or COC. We believe that such a dose would provide excellent burndown control of most broadleaf weed species that emerge in the fall in Nebraska.

Keywords

Saflufenacildandelion, Taraxacum officinale Weberfield bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis L.field pennycress, Thlaspi arvense L.henbit, Lamium amplexicaule L.prickly lettuce, Lactuca serriola L.shepherd's-purse, Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medikcorn, Zea mays L.sorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moenchsoybean, Glycine max L.wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Saflufenaciladjuvantsdose–response curveED90experimental herbicidefall weed controlpostemergence
Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , September 2009 , pp. 340 - 345
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

Anonymous 2008. Kixor® herbicide worldwide technical brochure. BASF Publication No. GL-69288. Research Triangle Park, NC: BASF Corporation. 18.Google Scholar
Armel, G. R., Wilson, H. P., Richardson, R. J., and Hines, T. E. 2003. Mesotrione, alachlor, and atrazine for weed control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 17:284–290.Google Scholar
Corrigan, K. A. and Harvey, R. G. 2000. Glyphosate with and without residual herbicides in no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 14:569–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlke, B. J., Hayden, T. A., Leif, J. W., and Medlin, C. R. 2001. Fall application of imazaquin, plus glyphosate (premix) for winter annual weed control in soybeans. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 56:93. [Abstract.].Google Scholar
Gonzini, L. C., Hart, S. E., and Wax, L. M. 1999. Herbicide combinations for weed management in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 13:354–360.Google Scholar
Hart, S. E., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 1992. Influence of adjuvants on the efficacy, absorption, and spray retention of primisulfuron. Weed Technol 6:592–598.Google Scholar
Hart, S. E. and Wax, L. M. 1996. Dicamba antagonizes grass weed control with imazethapyr by reducing foliar absorption. Weed Technol 10:828–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasty, R. F., Sprague, C. L., and Hager, A. G. 2004. Weed control with fall and early-preplant herbicide applications in no-till soybean. Weed Technol 18:887–892.Google Scholar
Heap, I. M. 2008. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/summary/MOASummary.asp. Accessed: August 29, 2008.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, P. J. S., Eberlein, C. V., and Tonks, D. J. 2004. Broadleaf weed control and potato crop safety with postemergence rimsulfuron, metribuzin, and adjuvant combinations. Weed Technol 18:750–756.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Vidrine, P. R., Griffin, J. L., and Reynolds, D. B. 1996. Influence of adjuvants on efficacy of clethodim. Weed Technol 10:738–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z. 2006. Weeds species on the increase in eastern Nebraska. Pages 122–131. in. Proceedings of the 2006 Crop Protection Clinics. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z. 2007. Herbicide tolerant crops: 10 years later. Maydica 52:245–250.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z. and Klein, R. N. 2005. Glyphosate rates and selectivity for control of problem weeds in Roundup-Ready soybean. North Central Weed Sci. Soc. Abstr 60:44. [CD-ROM Computer File.].Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Sikkema, P. H., Tardif, F., Hamill, A. S., Chandler, K., and Swanton, C. J. 1998. Biologically effective dose and selectivity of RPA 201772 (isoxaflutole) for preemergence weed control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 12:670–676.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Streibig, J. C., and Ritz, C. 2007. Utilizing R software package for dose–response studies: the concept and data analysis. Weed Technol 21:840–848.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Young, B. G., and Matthews, J. L. 2003. Winter annual weed control with fall-applied corn (Zea mays) herbicides. Weed Technol 17:516–520.Google Scholar
Lee, A. T. and Witt, W. W. 2001. Persistence and efficacy of fall-applied simazine and atrazine. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 56:50. [Abstract.].Google Scholar
Liebl, R. A., Walter, H., Bowe, S. J., Holt, T. J., and Westberg, D. E. 2008. BAS 800H: a new herbicide for preplant burndown and preemergence dicot weed control. Weed Sci. Soc. Am 48:120. [Abstract.].Google Scholar
Nalewaja, J. D. 1986. Seed oils with herbicides. Meded. Fac. Landbouwwet. Rijksuniv. Gent 51/2a:301–310.Google Scholar
Sanyal, D., Bhowmik, P. C., and Reddy, K. N. 2006. Influence of leaf surface micromorphology, wax content, and surfactant on primisulfuron droplet spread on barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) and green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Sci 54:627–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS 1999. SAS User's Guide. Version 8.1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google 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.Google Scholar
Venkatesh, R., Harrison, S. K., and Riedel, R. M. 2000. Weed hosts of soybean cyst nematode (Heterodera glycines) in Ohio. Weed Technol 14:156–160.Google Scholar
Wanamarta, G. and Penner, D. 1989. Foliar penetration of herbicides. Rev. Weed Sci 4:215–231.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G., Miller, S. D., Kniss, A. R., Westra, P., and Stahlman, P. W. 2006. Risk of weed spectrum shifts and herbicide resistance in irrigated Roundup-Ready cropping systems—a western Nebraska perspective after 8 years. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. Abstr 60:138. [CD-ROM Computer File.].Google Scholar
Young, B. G. and Hart, S. E. 1998. Optimizing foliar activity of isoxaflutole on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) with various adjuvants. Weed Sci 46:397–402.Google Scholar
Zawierucha, J. E. and Penner, D. 2001. Adjuvant efficacy with quinclorac in canola (Brassica napus) and turf grass. Weed Technol 15:220–223.Google Scholar