Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T02:54:27.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Postemergence Weed Control in Pea (Pisum sativum) with Imazamox

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert E. Blackshaw
Robert E. Blackshaw*
Affiliation:
Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, P.O. Box 3000. Lethbridge, AB, Canada T1J 4B1; blackshaw@em.agr.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Few postemergence (POST) herbicides are available for broad-spectrum weed control in pea. Field experiments were conducted to determine the suitability of imazamox to provide selective control of grass and broadleaf weeds in pea. Imazamox controlled several grass and broadleaf species, but the rate required to attain 90% control ranged from 7 to 36 g ai/ha depending on the weed species. Imazamox efficacy differed with the adjuvant included in the spray mixture. Merge adjuvant often increased imazamox activity on weeds more than Sun-It II methylated seed oil or a combination of Agral 90 adjuvant plus 28–0–0 liquid fertilizer. Pea exhibited excellent tolerance to imazamox up to the highest rate applied, 40 g/ha. Pea yield comparable to that of the hand-weeded control was attained with 20 to 30 g/ha of imazamox. Imazamox offers growers a POST option for broad-spectrum weed control in pea.

Keywords

Imazamox, 2-(4-isopropyl-4-methyl-5-oxo-2-imidazolin-2-yl)-5-(methoxymethyl)nicotinic acidbarley, Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Galt’canola, Brassica rapa L. ‘Tobin’common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALgreen foxtail, Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. # SETVIpea, Pisum sativa L. ‘Carneval’redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREredstem filaree, Erodium cicutarium (L.) L'Her ex Ait. # EROCIwild oat, Avena fatua L. # AVEFAwheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Katepwa.’Adjuvantsherbicide efficacypea yieldAgral 90MergeSun-It IIAMAREAVEFACHEALEROCISETVI
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 1998 , pp. 64 - 68
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

Anonymous. 1994. AC 299,263 Experimental Herbicide. Princeton, NJ: American Cyanamid. 5 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1997. Crop Protection with Chemicals. Agdex 606–1. Edmonton, AB, Canada: Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. pp. 38–239.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., and O'Donovan, J. T. 1993. Higher crop seed rates can aid weed management. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf. 3:1003–1008.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., Albright, J. W., Anthon, T. M., and Kutil, J. L. 1995. Annual weed control in canning peas study. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:16–17.Google Scholar
Mead, R., and Curnow, R. N. 1983. Statistical Methods in Agriculture and Experimental Biology. New York: Chapman and Hall. 335 p.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R., and Esau, R. 1996. Imidazolinone herbicide effects on following rotational crops in southern Alberta. Weed Technol. 10:100–106.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. A., and Renner, K. A. 1995. Comparing AC 299,263 and imazethapyr combinations in soybean. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 52:264–265.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 6, Volume 2, 4th ed. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 846 p.Google Scholar
Steel, R.G.D., and Tome, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill. 633 p.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A., Friesen, G. H., and Bhati, T. K. 1991. Wild mustard interference in traditional and semi-leafless field peas. Can. J. Plant Sci. 71:473–480.Google Scholar