Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T02:26:32.152Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficacy of Pyrithiobac and Bromoxynil Applied with Low-Volume Spray Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Joyce A. Tredaway,
Michael G. Patterson and
Glen R. Wehtje
Joyce A. Tredaway
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soils and Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849-5412
Michael G. Patterson
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soils and Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849-5412
Glen R. Wehtje
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Soils and Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849-5412
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1994 and 1995 to determine if the sodium salt of pyrithiobac or bromoxynil applied in a low-volume, air-assist spray system controlled entireleaf morningglory, pitted morningglory, and smallflower morningglory as well as treatments applied with a conventional hydraulic fan spraying system, and to determine if herbicide rates could be reduced when using the low-volume spraying system. Pyrithiobac at 0.035 and 0.071 kg ai/ha and bromoxynil at 0.56 and 1.12 kg ai/ha were applied alone and in combination with DSMA at 1.7 kg ai/ha or MSMA at 1.7 kg ai/ha. Spraying systems were calibrated to deliver 26 L/ha and 140 L/ha for the low-volume and conventional systems, respectively. No significant differences in control were noted between low-volume and conventional spray systems when herbicides were applied at the suggested use rates of 0.071 and 1.12 kg ai/ha for pyrithiobac and bromoxynil, respectively. Morningglory control was reduced when pyrithiobac and bromoxynil were applied at one-half the suggested use rate regardless of the spraying systems. Bromoxynil alone generally controlled pitted and entireleaf morningglory better than pyrithiobac alone regardless of rate and application method. However, pyrithiobac generally provided better control of smallflower morningglory than bromoxynil. Adding MSMA or DSMA to bromoxynil and pyrithiobac increased control of both weed species.

Keywords

Bromoxynil, 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrileDSMA, disodium salt of methylarsonic acidMSMA, monosodium salt of methylarsonic acidpyrithiobac, 2-chloro-6-[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)thio]benzoic acidentireleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea var. integriuscula Gray. # IPOHGpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAsmallflower morningglory, Jacquemontia tamnifolia (L.) Griseb. # IAQTAAir-assistspray systemdrifttransgenic cottonDSMAMSMAIPOLAIPOHGIAQTADAT, days after treatmentgpa, gallous per acreLV, low volumePOST, postemerenceULV, ultra low volume

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , December 1997, pp. 725 - 730
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Ahrens, W. H., ed. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. pp. 230–233.Google Scholar
Dotray, P. A., Keeling, J. W., Henniger, C. G., and Abernathy, J. R. 1996. Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and Devil's claw (Proboscidea louisianica) control in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) with pyrithiobac. Weed Sci. 10:7–12.Google Scholar
Fehringer, R. J. and Cavaletto, R. A. 1991. Comparison of Drift from Hooded and Open-boom Agricultural Ground Sprayers. American Society of Abricultural Engineers Technical Paper No. 90–6510. St. Joseph, Ml: American Society of Agricultural Engineers. pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Hanks, J. E. and McWhorter, C. G. 1991. Variables affecting the use of positive displacement pumps to apply herbicides in ultralow volume. Weed Technol. 5:111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, M. A., Hayes, R. M., and Mueller, T. C. 1996. Environment affects cotton and velvetleaf response to pyrithiobac. Weed Sci. 44:241–247.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993a. Factors associated with DPX-PE350 applied postemergence. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 17:1526.Google Scholar
Jordan, T. N., Berry, C. W., and Ritter, D. D. 1993b. The Performance of Selected Postemergence Herbicides with Ultra-low Volume Application Using Different Diluents. Station Bulletin No. 666. West Lafayette, IN: Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University. 13 p.Google Scholar
Keeton, A., Murdock, E. C., Stapleton, G. S., and Toler, J. E. 1994. Response of broadleaf weeds to Staple (DPX-PE350), bromoxynil, and glyphosate. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 18:1705.Google Scholar
Kepner, R. A., Bainer, R., and Barger, E. L. 1978. Principles of Farm Machinery. 3rd ed. Westport, CT: Avi. pp. 301–303.Google Scholar
Legg, B. J. and Miller, P.C.H. 1990. Drift assessment using measurements and mathematical models. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Technical Paper No. 90–1593. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural Engineers. pp. 1–1.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G., Barrentine, W. L., and Hanks, J. E. 1992. Postemergence grass control with herbicides applied at ULV in paraffinic oil. Weed Technol. 6:262–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, C. G., Fulghum, F. E., and Barrentine, W. L. 1988. An air-assist spray nozzle for applying herbicides in ultralow volume. Weed Sci. 36:118–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murdock, E. C. 1994. Weed control in bromoxynil-tolerant cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 18:1700.Google Scholar
Patterson, M. G. and Norris, B. E. 1993. Transgenic cotton allows Over-the-top Weed Control. Highlights of Agricultural Research 40:13. Auburn AL: Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. SAS software, SAS Institute, Raleigh, NC.Google Scholar
Smith, M. C., Jordan, D. L., Frans, R. E., and McClelland, M. R. 1993. Influence of application rate and timing on efficacy of bromoxynil. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 17:1519.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E. and Allen, R. L. 1992. Broadleaf weed control in cotton with DPX-PE350. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:26.Google Scholar
Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. a Biometrical Approach. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 173, 187–188.Google Scholar
Vidrine, P. R., Crawford, S. H., and Girlinghouse, J. M. 1993. DPX-PE350 interactions in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46:26.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Eastin, E. F., and Richburg, J. S. III. 1993. Buctril systems and efficacy for transgenic cotton in Georgia. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 17:1524.Google Scholar
Williford, J. R. and Fulgham, F. E. 1989. The Teemizer—a new air-atomizing spray system. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Technical Paper No. 89–1522. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural Engineers. pp. 1–5.Google Scholar