Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T09:31:49.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Several Triazines as Selective Post-emergence Herbicides in Cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John T. Holstun Jr.  and
S. W. Bingham
John T. Holstun Jr.
Affiliation:
Crops Research Division, A.R.S., U.S.D.A., Stoneville, Mississippi
S. W. Bingham
Affiliation:
Crops Research Division, A.R.S., U.S.D.A. and the Mississippi Agr. Exp. Sta., Stoneville
Get access

Extract

The efficiency of cotton production has been materially increased since 1949 through the use of several pre- and post-emergence herbicides. In the high-rainfall areas, combinations of a pre-emergence herbicide such as isopropyl N–(3–chlorophenyl)carbamate (CIPC) or 3–(3,4–dichlorophenyl)–1,1–dimethylurea (diuron) with one of several post-emergence oils have given more dependable control than the use of single herbicides. In the irrigated areas, early-season weeds have been less of a problem and more attention has been given to herbicides for the control of late-appearing grasses and vines. The substituted ureas, 3–(p–chlorophenyl)–1,1–dimethylurea (monuron) and diuron, have been the most successful herbicides for this use.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , April 1960 , pp. 187 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © 1960 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

1. Anonymous. Herbicide Technical Bulletins 55–1, 56–1, 57–1, 58–2 of the Geigy Chemical Corporation. 1955–1958.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. Official 1958 Cotton Pest Control Guides. Published by National Cotton Council of America. 1958.Google Scholar
3. Antognini, J., and Day, H. M. Geigy 444, A new pre-emergence and postemergence herbicide for cotton. Proc. SWC 8:92–98. 1955.Google Scholar
4. Arle, H. F., and Everson, E. H. The control of annual morning glory and summer grasses in cotton with CMU. Proc. SWC 7:101–104. 1954.Google Scholar
5. Arle, H. F. and Hamilton, K. C. Chemical control of annual weeds in cotton. Arizona Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 283. 1957.Google Scholar
6. Bingham, S. W., Easley, Tildon, Edwards, F. E., Harris, V. C., Holstun, J. T. Jr., Normand, W. C., and Wooten, O. B. Jr. Weed control recommendations. Mississippi Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 556. 1958.Google Scholar
7. Birdsell, D. G., Watson, D. P., and Grigsby, B. H. Toxicity and efficiency of selected herbicides on representative ornamental plants. Weeds 6:34–41. 1958.Google Scholar
8. Cooke, A. R. A possible mechanism of action of the urea type herbicides. Weeds 4:397–398. 1956.Google Scholar
9. Crafts, A. S., and Reiber, H. G. Herbicidal properties of oils. Hilgardia 18:77–156. 1948.Google Scholar
10. Everson, E. H., and Arle, H. F. The effect of application of varying rates of CMU at different stages of plant growth and fiber development on the yield and fiber quality of irrigated upland cotton. Weeds 4:148–155. 1956.Google Scholar
11. Flanagan, J. H. Effect of simazin, related triazine compounds, and various other herbicides on native weeds and grasses. Proc. NEWCC 13:232–239. 1959.Google Scholar
12. Gentner, W. A., and Shaw, W. C. An evaluation of several chemicals for their herbicidal properties. 1958 field results. Progress Report CR–6–59. Crops Research Division, A.R.S., U.S.D.A. Google Scholar
13. Harris, V. C. Influence of the growth rate of cotton plants upon their response to directional sprays of CIPC in four solvents. Proc. SWC 8:31–36. 1955.Google Scholar
14. Holstun, J. T. Jr. Post-emergence screening of chemicals and methods for weed control in cotton. Proc. SWC 5:79–87. 1952.Google Scholar
15. Meade, J. A., and Santelmann, P. W. Pre- and post-emergence weed control in field corn. Proc. NEWCC 13:117–121. 1959.Google Scholar
16. Palmer, R. D., and Ennis, W. B. Jr. The effect of age of cotton upon its response to an herbicidal oil applied as a directed spray. Proc. SWC 6:106–115. 1953.Google Scholar
17. Porter, W. K. Jr., Holstun, J. T. Jr., Wooten, O. B. Jr., and Jones, J. K. The comparison and evaluation of chemical and mechanical methods of weed control in cotton. Proc. SWC 4:64–69. 1951.Google Scholar
18. Porter, W. K. Jr., Thomas, C. H., Curtis, L. F., and Melville, D. R. A critical evaluation of the use of pre-emergence herbicides for weed control in cotton, Weeds 5:237–242. 1957.Google Scholar
19. Rea, H. E. Pre- and post-emergence chemical treatment combinations in weeding cotton. Proc. SWC 6:88–89. 1953.Google Scholar
20. Richards, R. F. Simazin and related triazines—A progress report. Proc. SWC 11:86–89. 1958.Google Scholar
21. Schneider, E. O. A discussion of the mode of action, tolerance, and soil type effects of the triazines. Proc. NEWCC 13:416–420. 1959.Google Scholar
22. Smith, N. J. A report on the use of atrazine (Geigy 30027) applied pre- and post-emergence in corn. Proc. NEWCC 13:527–529. 1959.Google Scholar
23. White, G. L. Weed and grass control in cotton. Proc. SWC 5:91–94. 1952.Google Scholar