Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T01:33:51.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pyroxsulam Compared with Competitive Standards for Efficacy in Winter Wheat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Patrick W. Geier,
Phillip W. Stahlman,
Dallas E. Peterson and
Mark M. Claassen
Patrick W. Geier*
Affiliation:
Kansas State University Agricultural Research Center, Hays, KS 67601
Phillip W. Stahlman
Affiliation:
Kansas State University Agricultural Research Center, Hays, KS 67601
Dallas E. Peterson
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
Mark M. Claassen
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: pgeier@ksu.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies at six locations over 3 yr in Kansas compared pyroxsulam at two application timings to competitive standards for winter annual weed control in winter wheat. Pyroxsulam applied fall-POST (FP) controlled downy brome 84 to 99% and was similar to or greater than sulfosulfuron, propoxycarbazone, or propoxycarbazone plus mesosulfuron. Downy brome control was lower when application timing was delayed until spring (SP), such that no herbicide provided more than 90% downy brome control. Cheat control was 97% or more with almost all herbicides applied FP, and greater than 90% in most locations when herbicides were applied SP. Sulfosulfuron was the exception with only 30 to 81% cheat control. All FP-applied herbicides, except sulfosulfuron at Manhattan, KS, controlled blue mustard 95% or more. Pyroxsulam and propoxycarbazone plus mesosulfuron FP completely controlled henbit at Hesston, KS, in 2009, but no herbicide treatment provided more than 60% control when applied SP. Averaged over application timings, pyroxsulam provided the greatest henbit control (76 and 78%) at Manhattan and Hays, respectively, in 2009, and FP treatments were 33 and 28 percentage points more effective than SP treatments at those locations. Averaged over application timing, wheat yields did not differ between herbicide treatments in five of six locations. Averaged over herbicide treatment, FP-treated wheat yielded more grain than SP-treated wheat at three of the six locations.

En seis localidades de Kansas, se realizaron estudios de campo durante tres años comparando pyroxsulam en dos diferentes tiempos de aplicación en estándares competitivos para el control de maleza anual de invierno, en cultivo de trigo invernal (Triticum aestivum). El pyroxsulam aplicado en post emergencia en otoño (FP) controló Bromus tectorum 84 a 99% y obtuvo resultados similares o mayores que sulfosulfurón, propoxycarbazone o propoxycarbazone más mesosulfurón. El control de B. tectorum fue menor cuando las etapas de aplicación se retrasaron hasta la primavera (SP), de tal manera, que ningún herbicida proporcionó más de 90% de control de esta maleza. El control de B. secalinus fue de 97% o más con todos los herbicidas aplicados FP y por encima del 90% en la mayoría de las localidades cuando los herbicidas se aplicaron SP. El sulfosulfurón fue la excepción, con solamente del 30 al 81% de control de B. secalinus. Todos los herbicidas que se aplicaron FP, con excepción de sulfosulfurón en Manhattan, controlaron Chorispora tenella 95% o más. Pyroxsulam y propoxycarbazone más mesosulfurón FP controlaron totalmente Lamium amplexicaule en 2009 en Hesston, pero ningún tratamiento de herbicida proporcionó más del 60% de control cuando se aplicó SP. Promediando sobre tiempos de aplicación, pyroxsulam proporcionó el mayor control de L. amplexicaule (76 y 78%, respectivamente) en Manhattan y Hays en 2009, y los tratamientos FP fueron 33 y 28 puntos porcentuales más efectivos que los tratamientos SP en esas localidades. Promediado a través de tiempos de aplicación, los rendimientos de trigo invernal no fueron diferentes entre tratamientos de herbicida, en cinco de las seis localidades. Promediado a través de tratamientos de herbicida, el trigo tratado FP proporcionó mayor rendimiento de grano que el que fue tratado SP, en tres de las seis localidades.

Keywords

Mesosulfuronpropoxycarbazonepyroxsulamsulfosulfuronblue mustard, Chorispora tenella (Pallas) DC. COBTEcheat, Bromus secalinus L. BROSEdowny brome, Bromus tectorum L. BROTEhenbit, Lamium amplexicaule L. LAMAMcommon wheat, Triticum aestivum L.DE-742GF-1274herbicidetreatment stage

Information

Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , September 2011, pp. 316 - 321
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Anonymous, . 2007. PowerFlex® herbicide product label. Dow AgroSciences Publication No. D02-364-003. Indianapolis, IN Dow AgroSciences, LLC. 7 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous, . 2009. Maverick® herbicide product label. Monsanto Company Publication No. 71007H3-18. St. Louis, MO Monsanto Company. 5 p.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E. and Hamman, W. H. 1998. Control of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with MON 37500. Weed Technol. 12:421–425.Google Scholar
Finn, G. A., Weimer, M. R., Oemichen, B. M., Yoshida, H. A., and Cummings, D. C. 2008. Effect of timing and adjuvants on weed control with pyroxsulam in winter wheat. Page 143 in Proceedings of the 63rd North Central Weed Science Society Annual Meeting. Indianapolis, IN NCWSS.Google Scholar
Geier, P. W. and Stahlman, P. W. 2001. Grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and sunflower (Helianthus annuus) response to MKH 6561 and MON 37500 residues in soil. Weed Technol. 15:767–770.Google Scholar
Geier, P. W., Stahlman, P. W., Northam, F. E., Miller, S. D., and Hageman, N. R. 1998. MON 37500 rate and timing affects downy brome (Bromus tectorum) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 46:366–373.Google Scholar
Geier, P. W., Stahlman, P. W., Peterson, D. E., and Miller, S. D. 2002. Application timing affects BAY MKH 6561 and MON 37500 efficacy and crop response in wheat. Weed Technol. 16:800–806.Google Scholar
Hanson, L. K. and Howatt, K. A. 2007. Pyroxsulam efficacy to wild oat influenced by application timing or adjuvants. Page 89 in Proceedings of the 62nd North Central Weed Science Society Annual Meeting. St Lois, MO NCWSS.Google Scholar
Lyon, D. J., Miller, S. D., and Seifert-Higgins, S. 2003. MON 37500 soil residues affect rotational crops in the High Plains. Weed Technol. 17:792–798.Google Scholar
[NASS USDA] National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2007. Quick Stats. http://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/results/E16D0153-AB9D-3684-9B1B-2BDB363CE268. Accessed: March 15, 2011.Google Scholar
Olson, B. L. S., Al-Khatib, K., Stahlman, P. W., and Isakson, P. J. 2000. MON 37500 efficacy as affected by rate, adjuvant, and carriers. Weed Technol. 14:750–754.Google Scholar
Peeper, T. F., Stone, A. E., and Kelley, J. P. 2009. Efficacy of propoxycarbazone-sodium for cheat (Bromus secalinus) control in winter wheat and carryover on double-cropped grain sorghum. Weed Technol. 23:202–205.Google Scholar
Stougaard, R. N., Mallory-Smith, C. A., and Mickelson, J. A. 2004. Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) response to imazamox rate and application timing in herbicide-resistant winter wheat. Weed Technol. 18:1043–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[NASS USDA] National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2007. Agricultural Chemical Usage—2006 Field Crops Summary. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/AgriChemUsFC//2000s/2007/AgriChemUsFC-05-16-2007_revision.pdf. Accessed: March 15, 2011.Google Scholar