Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T22:10:24.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Insecticides Modify Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Response to Clomazone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Alan C. York,
David L. Jordan and
Robert E. Frans
Alan C. York
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
David L. Jordan
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ark., Fayetteville, AR 72703
Robert E. Frans
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Ark., Fayetteville, AR 72703
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted to determine if aldicarb, disulfoton, or phorate applied in-furrow at 0.84 or 1.12 kg ai ha–1 affected cotton response to clomazone applied PPI or PRE at rates ranging from 0 to 1.12 kg ai ha–1. Disulfoton and phorate greatly reduced clomazone-induced chlorosis, stunting, and death of cotton seedlings. Compared with no insecticide or with dimethoate applied POST, aldicarb did not affect cotton response to clomazone. A clomazone rate by insecticide interaction was not observed for cotton yield. Clomazone reduced cotton yield at one of five locations. Insecticides affected yield at three locations, where highest yields were from cotton treated with aldicarb. In a separate experiment with 0.56, 1.12, and 2.24 kg ha–1 of phorate applied in-furrow and 1.12 kg ha–1 of clomazone applied PPI, phorate at all rates protected cotton from clomazone phytotoxicity.

Keywords

Aldicarb, 2-methyl-2-(methylthio)propionaldehyde O-(methylcarbamoyl)oximeclomazone, 2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinonedimethoate, O,O-dimethyl S-[N-(methylcarbamoyl)methyl]phosphorodithioatedisulfoton, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl]phosphorodithioatephorate, O,O-diethyl S-(ethylthio)-methyl phosphorodithioatecotton, Gossypium hirsutum (L.) ‘Coker 304’ and ‘DPL 50’Interactioninjurystandyieldfiber qualityaldicarbdimethoatedisulfotonphorate

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , December 1991, pp. 729 - 735
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Applewhite, C. D. 1986. Control of difficult soybean weeds using Command and tank-mixes. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:81.Google Scholar
2. Applewhite, C. D., Edwards, D. R., and Mitchell, H. R. 1989. Potential uses of clomazone for cotton weed control. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:95.Google Scholar
3. Applewhite, C. D., and Mitchell, H. R. 1990. Safening effects of organophosphate insecticides on clomazone applications to cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:83.Google Scholar
4. Applewhite, C. D., Tymonko, J., and Hatfield, L. D. 1988. Application timing, weed control and crop tolerance of Command on cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:83.Google Scholar
5. Arle, H. F. 1968. Trifluralin-systemic insecticide interaction on seedling cotton. Weed Sci. 16:430–432.Google Scholar
6. Bacheler, J. S. 1990. Management of cotton insects. p. 67–81 in 1990 Cotton Information. Publ. No. AG-417. N. C. Agric. Ext. Serv. Google Scholar
7. Barrett, M. 1989. Protection of corn (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) from imazethapyr toxicity with antidotes. Weed Sci. 37:296–301.Google Scholar
8. Byrd, J. D. Jr., and York, A. C. 1988. Interactions of carbaryl and dimethoate with sethoxydim. Weed Technol. 2:433–436.Google Scholar
9. Edwards, D. R., and Hatfield, L. D. 1988. Command 4EC herbicide for cotton weed control. p. 382–383 in Brown, J. M., ed. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod.-Res. Conf., New Orleans, LA. Jan. 3–8, 1988. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
10. Elmore, C. D. 1989. Weed survey–southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:408–420.Google Scholar
11. Eisner, J. E., Smith, C. W., and Owen, D. F. 1979. Uniform stage descriptions in upland cotton. Crop Sci. 19:361–363.Google Scholar
12. Griffin, J. L. 1986. Wild poinsettia control in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:475.Google Scholar
13. Hatzios, K. K., and Penner, D. 1985. Interactions of herbicides with other agrochemicals in higher plants. Rev. Weed Sci. 1:1–63.Google Scholar
14. Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., McClelland, M. R., and Johnson, W. G. 1990. Integration of clomazone into weed management systems for cotton. p. 348 in Brown, J. M., ed. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod-Res. Conf., Las Vegas, NV. Jan. 9–14, 1990. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
15. Palmquist, D. L., and Hopper, D. M. 1986. FMC-57020 – 1985 EUP/TT results. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 39:522.Google Scholar
16. Porter, W. C. 1990. Clomazone for weed control in sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas). Weed Technol. 4:648–651.Google Scholar
17. Vidrine, P. R., and Crawford, S. H. 1991. Controlling problem weeds with Command in Louisiana Cotton. p. 960 in Brown, J. M., ed. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod.-Res. Conf., San Antonio, TX. Jan. 8–12, 1991. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
18. Westberg, D. E., Oliver, L. R., and Frans, R. E. 1989. Weed control with clomazone alone and with other herbicides. Weed Technol. 3:678–685.Google Scholar
19. York, A. C., Corbin, F. T., and Guthrie, D. S. 1990. Command-insecticide interactions on cotton. p. 348 in Brown, J. M., ed. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod.-Res. Conf., Las Vegas, NV. Jan. 9–14, 1990. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
20. York, A. C., Corbin, F. T., Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1991. Interaction of clomazone and in-furrow insecticides on cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:82.Google Scholar