Loading…
An Alternative to Multiple Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase Inhibitor Applications in No-Till Cotton
Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth is a widespread problem in southeastern cotton production areas. Herbicide programs to control this weed in no-till cotton commonly include flumioxazin applied with preplant burndown herbicides approximately 3 wk before planting followed by fomesafen applied...
Saved in:
Published in: | Weed technology 2014-01, Vol.28 (1), p.58-71 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53 |
container_end_page | 71 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 58 |
container_title | Weed technology |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Cahoon, Charles W York, Alan C Jordan, David L Everman, Wesley J Seagroves, Richard W |
description | Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth is a widespread problem in southeastern cotton production areas. Herbicide programs to control this weed in no-till cotton commonly include flumioxazin applied with preplant burndown herbicides approximately 3 wk before planting followed by fomesafen applied PRE and then glufosinate or glyphosate applied POST. Flumioxazin and fomesafen are both protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors. Multiple yearly applications of PPO inhibitors in cotton, along with widespread use of PPO inhibitors in rotational crops, raise concerns over possible selection for PPO resistance in Palmer amaranth. An experiment was conducted to determine the potential to substitute diuron for one of the PPO inhibitors in no-till cotton. Palmer amaranth control by diuron and fomesafen applied PRE varied by location, but fomesafen was generally more effective. Control by both herbicides was inadequate when timely rainfall was not received for activation. Palmer amaranth control was more consistent when programs included a preplant residual herbicide. Applied preplant, flumioxazin was more effective than diuron. Programs with diuron preplant followed by fomesafen PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen only if fomesafen was activated in a timely manner. Programs with flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE at all locations, regardless of timely activation of the PRE herbicide. As opposed to flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE, which exposes Palmer amaranth to two PPO-inhibiting herbicides, one could reduce selection pressure by using flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE without sacrificing Palmer amaranth control or cotton yield. Nomenclature: Diuron; flumioxazin; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) es un problema ampliamente diseminado en las áreas de producción de algodón en el sureste de Estados Unidos. Los programas de herbicidas para el control de esta maleza en algodón bajo labranza cero incluyen flumioxazin aplicado con herbicidas para quema total en pre-siembra, aproximadamente 3 semanas antes de la siembra seguido de fomesafen aplicado PRE y después glufosinate o glyphosate aplicados POST. Flumioxazin y fomesafen son ambos inhibidores de protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO). Aplicaciones anuales múltiple |
doi_str_mv | 10.1614/WT-D-13-00078.1 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1691282111</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>43701948</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>43701948</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkL1vFDEUxC0EEkegpkJYoqFx8t7a3o_ydOEjUiBIXBQqLHvXl_jk2Bvbh8h_j8MiChqqV8xvZvSGkJcIx9iiOLnaslOGnAFA1x_jI7JCKYE1nYDHZAX9AAx49-0peZbzHgDbpoEV-b4OdO2LTUEX98PSEumngy9u9pZ-SbHEOab55j65EK9toBc_3aSzpWfhxhlXYqLrefZurOYYMnWBfo5s67ynm1hKDM_Jk5322b74c4_I5ft3281Hdn7x4WyzPmeG921hQk7j2FqwgmsA0xgxTdqakYMZJNc9WI4d2B4HKflku25ocTTCmm43DkZLfkTeLrlzincHm4u6dXm03utg4yErbAds-gYRK_rmH3QfD_V9XykJoseuR1Gpk4UaU8w52Z2ak7vV6V4hqIe91dVWnSrk6vfe6iH31eLY57rLX1zwDnAQfdVfL_pOR6Wvk8vq8msDtROaRsgWKsEWwrgYg_1v4y-vcZTH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1504817814</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An Alternative to Multiple Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase Inhibitor Applications in No-Till Cotton</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Cambridge University Press</source><creator>Cahoon, Charles W ; York, Alan C ; Jordan, David L ; Everman, Wesley J ; Seagroves, Richard W</creator><creatorcontrib>Cahoon, Charles W ; York, Alan C ; Jordan, David L ; Everman, Wesley J ; Seagroves, Richard W</creatorcontrib><description>Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth is a widespread problem in southeastern cotton production areas. Herbicide programs to control this weed in no-till cotton commonly include flumioxazin applied with preplant burndown herbicides approximately 3 wk before planting followed by fomesafen applied PRE and then glufosinate or glyphosate applied POST. Flumioxazin and fomesafen are both protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors. Multiple yearly applications of PPO inhibitors in cotton, along with widespread use of PPO inhibitors in rotational crops, raise concerns over possible selection for PPO resistance in Palmer amaranth. An experiment was conducted to determine the potential to substitute diuron for one of the PPO inhibitors in no-till cotton. Palmer amaranth control by diuron and fomesafen applied PRE varied by location, but fomesafen was generally more effective. Control by both herbicides was inadequate when timely rainfall was not received for activation. Palmer amaranth control was more consistent when programs included a preplant residual herbicide. Applied preplant, flumioxazin was more effective than diuron. Programs with diuron preplant followed by fomesafen PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen only if fomesafen was activated in a timely manner. Programs with flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE at all locations, regardless of timely activation of the PRE herbicide. As opposed to flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE, which exposes Palmer amaranth to two PPO-inhibiting herbicides, one could reduce selection pressure by using flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE without sacrificing Palmer amaranth control or cotton yield. Nomenclature: Diuron; flumioxazin; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) es un problema ampliamente diseminado en las áreas de producción de algodón en el sureste de Estados Unidos. Los programas de herbicidas para el control de esta maleza en algodón bajo labranza cero incluyen flumioxazin aplicado con herbicidas para quema total en pre-siembra, aproximadamente 3 semanas antes de la siembra seguido de fomesafen aplicado PRE y después glufosinate o glyphosate aplicados POST. Flumioxazin y fomesafen son ambos inhibidores de protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO). Aplicaciones anuales múltiples de inhibidores PPO en algodón, además del amplio uso de inhibidores PPO en cultivos rotacionales, genera preocupación sobre la posible selección de resistencia a herbicidas inhibidores de PPO en A. palmeri. Se realizó un experimento para determinar el potencial de sustituir diuron por uno de los inhibidores PPO en algodón bajo labranza cero. El control de A. palmeri con diuron y fomesafen aplicados PRE varió según la localidad, pero fomesafen fue generalmente más efectivo. El control brindado por ambos herbicidas fue inadecuado cuando no se recibió lluvia en el momento necesario para su activación. El control de A. palmeri fue más consistente cuando los programas incluyeron un herbicida residual pre-siembra. Al aplicarse pre-siembra, flumioxazin fue más efectivo que diuron. Los programas con diuron pre-siembra seguidos de fomesafen PRE fueron tan efectivos como flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen solamente si fomesafen fue activado en el momento adecuado. Los programas con flumioxazin pre-siembra seguidos de diuron PRE fueron tan efectivos como flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen PRE en todas las localidades, sin importar el momento de activación del herbicida PRE. En contraste a programas con flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen PRE, los cuales exponen a A. palmeri a dos herbicidas inhibidores PPO, uno podría reducir la presión de selección al usar flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de diuron PRE sin sacrificar el control de A. palmeri o el rendimiento del algodón.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-037X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2740</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1614/WT-D-13-00078.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Lawrence: The Weed Science Society of America</publisher><subject>Agricultural practices ; Amaranth ; Amaranthus palmeri ; Cotton ; crop production ; Crop rotation ; Crops ; Diuron ; enzyme inhibitors ; flumioxazin ; fomesafen ; glufosinate ; glyphosate ; Gossypium hirsutum ; Herbicide resistance ; Herbicide resistance management ; herbicide-resistant weeds ; Herbicides ; Inhibitors ; No tillage ; Planting ; PPO-inhibiting herbicides ; protoporphyrinogen oxidase ; Rain ; Seeds ; Tillage ; Weed control ; WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS ; Weeds</subject><ispartof>Weed technology, 2014-01, Vol.28 (1), p.58-71</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2014 Weed Science Society of America</rights><rights>Copyright Allen Press Publishing Services Jan-Mar 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43701948$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43701948$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,58238,58471</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cahoon, Charles W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>York, Alan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jordan, David L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Everman, Wesley J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seagroves, Richard W</creatorcontrib><title>An Alternative to Multiple Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase Inhibitor Applications in No-Till Cotton</title><title>Weed technology</title><description>Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth is a widespread problem in southeastern cotton production areas. Herbicide programs to control this weed in no-till cotton commonly include flumioxazin applied with preplant burndown herbicides approximately 3 wk before planting followed by fomesafen applied PRE and then glufosinate or glyphosate applied POST. Flumioxazin and fomesafen are both protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors. Multiple yearly applications of PPO inhibitors in cotton, along with widespread use of PPO inhibitors in rotational crops, raise concerns over possible selection for PPO resistance in Palmer amaranth. An experiment was conducted to determine the potential to substitute diuron for one of the PPO inhibitors in no-till cotton. Palmer amaranth control by diuron and fomesafen applied PRE varied by location, but fomesafen was generally more effective. Control by both herbicides was inadequate when timely rainfall was not received for activation. Palmer amaranth control was more consistent when programs included a preplant residual herbicide. Applied preplant, flumioxazin was more effective than diuron. Programs with diuron preplant followed by fomesafen PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen only if fomesafen was activated in a timely manner. Programs with flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE at all locations, regardless of timely activation of the PRE herbicide. As opposed to flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE, which exposes Palmer amaranth to two PPO-inhibiting herbicides, one could reduce selection pressure by using flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE without sacrificing Palmer amaranth control or cotton yield. Nomenclature: Diuron; flumioxazin; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) es un problema ampliamente diseminado en las áreas de producción de algodón en el sureste de Estados Unidos. Los programas de herbicidas para el control de esta maleza en algodón bajo labranza cero incluyen flumioxazin aplicado con herbicidas para quema total en pre-siembra, aproximadamente 3 semanas antes de la siembra seguido de fomesafen aplicado PRE y después glufosinate o glyphosate aplicados POST. Flumioxazin y fomesafen son ambos inhibidores de protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO). Aplicaciones anuales múltiples de inhibidores PPO en algodón, además del amplio uso de inhibidores PPO en cultivos rotacionales, genera preocupación sobre la posible selección de resistencia a herbicidas inhibidores de PPO en A. palmeri. Se realizó un experimento para determinar el potencial de sustituir diuron por uno de los inhibidores PPO en algodón bajo labranza cero. El control de A. palmeri con diuron y fomesafen aplicados PRE varió según la localidad, pero fomesafen fue generalmente más efectivo. El control brindado por ambos herbicidas fue inadecuado cuando no se recibió lluvia en el momento necesario para su activación. El control de A. palmeri fue más consistente cuando los programas incluyeron un herbicida residual pre-siembra. Al aplicarse pre-siembra, flumioxazin fue más efectivo que diuron. Los programas con diuron pre-siembra seguidos de fomesafen PRE fueron tan efectivos como flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen solamente si fomesafen fue activado en el momento adecuado. Los programas con flumioxazin pre-siembra seguidos de diuron PRE fueron tan efectivos como flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen PRE en todas las localidades, sin importar el momento de activación del herbicida PRE. En contraste a programas con flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen PRE, los cuales exponen a A. palmeri a dos herbicidas inhibidores PPO, uno podría reducir la presión de selección al usar flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de diuron PRE sin sacrificar el control de A. palmeri o el rendimiento del algodón.</description><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>Amaranth</subject><subject>Amaranthus palmeri</subject><subject>Cotton</subject><subject>crop production</subject><subject>Crop rotation</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>Diuron</subject><subject>enzyme inhibitors</subject><subject>flumioxazin</subject><subject>fomesafen</subject><subject>glufosinate</subject><subject>glyphosate</subject><subject>Gossypium hirsutum</subject><subject>Herbicide resistance</subject><subject>Herbicide resistance management</subject><subject>herbicide-resistant weeds</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>Inhibitors</subject><subject>No tillage</subject><subject>Planting</subject><subject>PPO-inhibiting herbicides</subject><subject>protoporphyrinogen oxidase</subject><subject>Rain</subject><subject>Seeds</subject><subject>Tillage</subject><subject>Weed control</subject><subject>WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS</subject><subject>Weeds</subject><issn>0890-037X</issn><issn>1550-2740</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkL1vFDEUxC0EEkegpkJYoqFx8t7a3o_ydOEjUiBIXBQqLHvXl_jk2Bvbh8h_j8MiChqqV8xvZvSGkJcIx9iiOLnaslOGnAFA1x_jI7JCKYE1nYDHZAX9AAx49-0peZbzHgDbpoEV-b4OdO2LTUEX98PSEumngy9u9pZ-SbHEOab55j65EK9toBc_3aSzpWfhxhlXYqLrefZurOYYMnWBfo5s67ynm1hKDM_Jk5322b74c4_I5ft3281Hdn7x4WyzPmeG921hQk7j2FqwgmsA0xgxTdqakYMZJNc9WI4d2B4HKflku25ocTTCmm43DkZLfkTeLrlzincHm4u6dXm03utg4yErbAds-gYRK_rmH3QfD_V9XykJoseuR1Gpk4UaU8w52Z2ak7vV6V4hqIe91dVWnSrk6vfe6iH31eLY57rLX1zwDnAQfdVfL_pOR6Wvk8vq8msDtROaRsgWKsEWwrgYg_1v4y-vcZTH</recordid><startdate>20140101</startdate><enddate>20140101</enddate><creator>Cahoon, Charles W</creator><creator>York, Alan C</creator><creator>Jordan, David L</creator><creator>Everman, Wesley J</creator><creator>Seagroves, Richard W</creator><general>The Weed Science Society of America</general><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140101</creationdate><title>An Alternative to Multiple Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase Inhibitor Applications in No-Till Cotton</title><author>Cahoon, Charles W ; York, Alan C ; Jordan, David L ; Everman, Wesley J ; Seagroves, Richard W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>Amaranth</topic><topic>Amaranthus palmeri</topic><topic>Cotton</topic><topic>crop production</topic><topic>Crop rotation</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>Diuron</topic><topic>enzyme inhibitors</topic><topic>flumioxazin</topic><topic>fomesafen</topic><topic>glufosinate</topic><topic>glyphosate</topic><topic>Gossypium hirsutum</topic><topic>Herbicide resistance</topic><topic>Herbicide resistance management</topic><topic>herbicide-resistant weeds</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>Inhibitors</topic><topic>No tillage</topic><topic>Planting</topic><topic>PPO-inhibiting herbicides</topic><topic>protoporphyrinogen oxidase</topic><topic>Rain</topic><topic>Seeds</topic><topic>Tillage</topic><topic>Weed control</topic><topic>WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS</topic><topic>Weeds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cahoon, Charles W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>York, Alan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jordan, David L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Everman, Wesley J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seagroves, Richard W</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cahoon, Charles W</au><au>York, Alan C</au><au>Jordan, David L</au><au>Everman, Wesley J</au><au>Seagroves, Richard W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An Alternative to Multiple Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase Inhibitor Applications in No-Till Cotton</atitle><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle><date>2014-01-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>58</spage><epage>71</epage><pages>58-71</pages><issn>0890-037X</issn><eissn>1550-2740</eissn><abstract>Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth is a widespread problem in southeastern cotton production areas. Herbicide programs to control this weed in no-till cotton commonly include flumioxazin applied with preplant burndown herbicides approximately 3 wk before planting followed by fomesafen applied PRE and then glufosinate or glyphosate applied POST. Flumioxazin and fomesafen are both protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors. Multiple yearly applications of PPO inhibitors in cotton, along with widespread use of PPO inhibitors in rotational crops, raise concerns over possible selection for PPO resistance in Palmer amaranth. An experiment was conducted to determine the potential to substitute diuron for one of the PPO inhibitors in no-till cotton. Palmer amaranth control by diuron and fomesafen applied PRE varied by location, but fomesafen was generally more effective. Control by both herbicides was inadequate when timely rainfall was not received for activation. Palmer amaranth control was more consistent when programs included a preplant residual herbicide. Applied preplant, flumioxazin was more effective than diuron. Programs with diuron preplant followed by fomesafen PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen only if fomesafen was activated in a timely manner. Programs with flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE were as effective as flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE at all locations, regardless of timely activation of the PRE herbicide. As opposed to flumioxazin preplant followed by fomesafen PRE, which exposes Palmer amaranth to two PPO-inhibiting herbicides, one could reduce selection pressure by using flumioxazin preplant followed by diuron PRE without sacrificing Palmer amaranth control or cotton yield. Nomenclature: Diuron; flumioxazin; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) es un problema ampliamente diseminado en las áreas de producción de algodón en el sureste de Estados Unidos. Los programas de herbicidas para el control de esta maleza en algodón bajo labranza cero incluyen flumioxazin aplicado con herbicidas para quema total en pre-siembra, aproximadamente 3 semanas antes de la siembra seguido de fomesafen aplicado PRE y después glufosinate o glyphosate aplicados POST. Flumioxazin y fomesafen son ambos inhibidores de protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO). Aplicaciones anuales múltiples de inhibidores PPO en algodón, además del amplio uso de inhibidores PPO en cultivos rotacionales, genera preocupación sobre la posible selección de resistencia a herbicidas inhibidores de PPO en A. palmeri. Se realizó un experimento para determinar el potencial de sustituir diuron por uno de los inhibidores PPO en algodón bajo labranza cero. El control de A. palmeri con diuron y fomesafen aplicados PRE varió según la localidad, pero fomesafen fue generalmente más efectivo. El control brindado por ambos herbicidas fue inadecuado cuando no se recibió lluvia en el momento necesario para su activación. El control de A. palmeri fue más consistente cuando los programas incluyeron un herbicida residual pre-siembra. Al aplicarse pre-siembra, flumioxazin fue más efectivo que diuron. Los programas con diuron pre-siembra seguidos de fomesafen PRE fueron tan efectivos como flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen solamente si fomesafen fue activado en el momento adecuado. Los programas con flumioxazin pre-siembra seguidos de diuron PRE fueron tan efectivos como flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen PRE en todas las localidades, sin importar el momento de activación del herbicida PRE. En contraste a programas con flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de fomesafen PRE, los cuales exponen a A. palmeri a dos herbicidas inhibidores PPO, uno podría reducir la presión de selección al usar flumioxazin pre-siembra seguido de diuron PRE sin sacrificar el control de A. palmeri o el rendimiento del algodón.</abstract><cop>Lawrence</cop><pub>The Weed Science Society of America</pub><doi>10.1614/WT-D-13-00078.1</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0890-037X |
ispartof | Weed technology, 2014-01, Vol.28 (1), p.58-71 |
issn | 0890-037X 1550-2740 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1691282111 |
source | JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Cambridge University Press |
subjects | Agricultural practices Amaranth Amaranthus palmeri Cotton crop production Crop rotation Crops Diuron enzyme inhibitors flumioxazin fomesafen glufosinate glyphosate Gossypium hirsutum Herbicide resistance Herbicide resistance management herbicide-resistant weeds Herbicides Inhibitors No tillage Planting PPO-inhibiting herbicides protoporphyrinogen oxidase Rain Seeds Tillage Weed control WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS Weeds |
title | An Alternative to Multiple Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase Inhibitor Applications in No-Till Cotton |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T01%3A30%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20Alternative%20to%20Multiple%20Protoporphyrinogen%20Oxidase%20Inhibitor%20Applications%20in%20No-Till%20Cotton&rft.jtitle=Weed%20technology&rft.au=Cahoon,%20Charles%20W&rft.date=2014-01-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=58&rft.epage=71&rft.pages=58-71&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft_id=info:doi/10.1614/WT-D-13-00078.1&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E43701948%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b386t-45dcc6e0e43a00b2b4ddaebc30b953a80e3170e819553de77961cb4eb7fc9ba53%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1504817814&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=43701948&rfr_iscdi=true |