Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T13:03:11.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Method for Determining the Biological Effect of Herbicide Mixtures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. C. Streibig
J. C. Streibig*
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Husbandry and Plant Breeding, Royal Veterinary & Agric. Univ., 2630 Taastrup, Denmark
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments were conducted in growth chambers by growing oats (Avena sativa L. ‘Ansi’) in water culture and soil with admixed TCA (trichloroacetic acid), pyrazon [5-amino-4-chloro-2-phenyl-3-(2H)-pyridazinone], and two mixtures (pyrazon: less TCA; 1:25 and 1:50). The sigmoid log-dose relationship for dry-matter yield was fitted with a four-parameter logistic equation. Generally, the mixtures appeared to be less active than would be expected under an additive dose model. Around GR50 the departure of joint action of the mixtures from the reference model was almost similar in the two growth media. At higher dose levels the mixtures approached the reference model, and the bioactivity of one mixture (1:25) in the water culture experiment even showed a higher activity than would be expected from the reference model.

Keywords

Bioassaylogistic curve fittingherbicide mixturesantagonismlogit

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , July 1981, pp. 469 - 473
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Barr, A. J., Goodnight, J. H., Sall, J. P., Blair, W. H., and Chilko, D. M. 1979. SAS User's Guide 1979 edition. SAS Institute, Raleigh, NC. 494 pp.Google Scholar
2. Draper, N. R. and Smith, H. 1966. Applied Regression Analysis. J. Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. 407 pp.Google Scholar
3. Finney, D. J. 1979. Bioassay and the practice of statistical inference. Int. Stat. Rev. 47:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Gowing, D. P. 1959. A method of comparing herbicides and assessing herbicide mixtures at the screening level. Weeds 7: 66–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Gressel, J. 1979. Genetic herbicide resistance: Projections on appearance in weeds and breeding for it in crops. Pages 85–109 in Scott, T. K., ed. Plant Regulation and World Agriculture. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
6. Hewlett, P. S. 1969. Measurement of the potencies of drug mixtures. Biometrics 25:477–487.Google Scholar
7. Hewlett, P. S. and Plackett, R. L. 1959. A unified theory for quantal responses to mixtures of drugs: Non-interactive action. Biometrics 15:591–610.Google Scholar
8. Morse, P. M. 1978. Some comments on the assessment of joint action in herbicide mixtures. Weed Sci. 26:58–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. O'Sullivan, P. A. and Vanden Born, W. H. 1980. Interaction between benzoylprop ethyl, flamprop methyl or flamprop isoprbpyl and herbicides used for broadleaved weed control. Weed Res. 20:53–57.Google Scholar
10. Putnam, A. R. and Penner, D. 1974. Pesticide interactions in higher plants. Residue Rev. 50:73–110.Google Scholar
11. Samford, M. R. 1952. Studies in the principles of phytotoxicity. II. Experimental designs and techniques of statistical analysis for the assessment of toxicity. J. Exp. Bot. 3:28–46.Google Scholar
12. Streibig, J. C. 1980. Models for curve-fitting herbicide dose response data. Acta Agric. Scand. 30:59–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Streibig, J. C. 1980. En model til måling af herbicidkombinationers biologiske effekt. 21:a Svenska Ögraskonferensen. Uppsala: H1–H5.Google Scholar
14. Streibig, J. C. 1980. Phytotoxicity and adsorption of TCA and chloridazon in nine Danish soils. Acta Agric. Scand. 30:364–368.Google Scholar