Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T00:54:26.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transplanted Onion Response to Previously Applied Residual Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Timothy L. Grey,
Andrew MacRae and
A. Stanley Culpepper
Timothy L. Grey*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, The University of Georgia, 115 Coastal Way, P.O. Box 748, Tifton, GA 31794
Andrew MacRae
Affiliation:
Horticulture Department, University of Florida, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Wimauma, FL 33598
A. Stanley Culpepper
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, The University of Georgia, 115 Coastal Way, P.O. Box 748, Tifton, GA 31794
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: tgrey@uga.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field trials were conducted in 2003/2004 and 2005/2006 at Reidsville, Georgia, to evaluate the effects of previously applied residual herbicides on onion growth and bulb production. Before transplanting onion, preplant applications of imazapic at 18 and 36 g ai/ha, diclosulam at 7 and 14 g ai/ha, pyrithiobac at 27 and 54 g ai/ha, trifloxysulfuron at 6.6 and 13.2 g ai/ha, diuron at 224 and 448 g ai/ha, and cloransulam at 22 g ai/ha were made. An untreated control was included for comparison. Trifloxysulfuron at 13.2 g/ha, diclosulam at 14 g/ha, pyrithiobac at 54 g/ha, and cloransulam at 22 g/ha injured onion 26, 73, 86, and 86% in 2003/2004, respectively, and 13 to 44% injury in 2005/2006. These same herbicides also reduced yield. Imazapic and diuron injured transplanted onion 6% during both seasons but did not reduce yield. This research suggests imazapic and diuron restrictions could possibly be reduced. However, the onion rotational restrictions for diclosulam, pyrithiobac, trifloxysulfuron, and cloransulam are accurate.

Keywords

Cloransulam, 3-chloro-2-[[(5-ethoxy-7-fluoro[1,2,4]triazolo[1,5-c]pyrimidin-2yl)sulfonyl]amino]benzoic aciddiclosulamimazapictrifloxysulfurononion, Allium cepa L.Crop injuryherbicide persistencemultiple croppingonionsimulated carryoversoil-applied herbicides

Information

Type
Weed Management — Other Crops/Areas
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , September 2008, pp. 477 - 480
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

Alister, C. and Kogan, M. 2004. Efficacy of imidazolinone herbicides applied to imidazolinone-resistant maize and their carryover effect on rotational crops. Crop Prot. 24:375–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 2006a. Staple herbicide. E. I. EPA Reg. No. 352-576. Wilmington, DE: DuPont de Nemours and Company. Pages 11.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2006b. Direx herbicide. EPA Reg. No. 1812-257. Valdosta, GA: Griffin LLC. Pages 20.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2006c. Envoke herbicide. EPA Reg. No. 100-1132. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta Crop Protection. Pages 17.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2006d. Cadre herbicide. EPA Reg. No. 241-364. Research Triangle Park, NC: BASF Corp. Pages 16.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2006e. Strongarm herbicide. EPA Reg. No. 62719-288. Indianapolis, IN: Dow AgroSciences LLC. Pages 8.Google Scholar
Anonymous Firstrate herbicide. EPA Reg. No. 62719-275. Indianapolis, IN: Dow AgroSciences LLC. 2006f. 9.Google Scholar
Barnes, C. J., Goetz, A. J., and Lavy, T. L. 1989. Effects of imazaquin residues on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 37:820–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhalla, P., Hackett, N., Hart, R., and Lignowski, E. 1991. Imazaquin herbicide. Pages 239–245. in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., editors. The Imidazolinone Herbicides. Boca Raton, FL CRC Press.Google Scholar
Capinera, J. L. 2005. Relationships between insect pests and weeds: an evolutionary perspective. Weed Sci. 53:891–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauhan, L. K. S. and Gupta, S. K. 2005. Combined cytogenetic and ultrastructural effects of substituted urea herbicides and synthetic pyrethroid insecticide on the root meristem cells of Allium cepa . Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 82:27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. 2007. Onion Weed Control. Georgia Pest Control Handbook. Athens, GA Cooperative Extension Services, University of Georgia College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences. 2007. http://www.ent.uga.edu/pmh/. Accessed: August 30.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and Brown, S. M. 2007. Cotton Weed Control. Georgia Pest Control Handbook. Athens, GA Cooperative Extension Services, University of Georgia College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences. 2007. http://www.ent.uga.edu/pmh/. Accessed: August 30.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., Grey, T. L., Vencill, W. K., Kichler, J. M., Webster, T. M., Brown, S. M., York, A. C., Davis, J. W., and Hanna, W. W. 2007. Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Sci. 54:620–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghosheh, H. Z. 2004. Single herbicide treatments for control of broadleaved weeds in onion (Allium cepa). Crop Prot. 23:539–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetz, A. J., Lavy, T. L., and Gbur, E. E. Jr. 1990. Degradation and field persistence of imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:421–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grey, T. L., Dotray, P. A., and Grichar, W. J. 2007. Soil and residual herbicide affect on peanut (Arachis hypogaea) seedling development. Peanut Sci. 34:65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grey, T. L., Prostko, E. P., Bednarz, C. W., and Davis, J. W. 2005. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to simulated imazapic residues. Weed Technol. 19:1045–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grey, T. L. and Raymer, P. L. 2002. Sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) and red morningglory (Ipomoea coccinea) control for glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max) with narrow rows and postemergence herbicide mixtures. Weed Technol. 16:669–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[NASS] National Agricultural Statistics Service 2006. Published Estimates Database. National Agricultural Statistics Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, DC NASS-USDA. http://www.nass.usda.gov/index.asp. Accessed: June 6, 2007.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Smith, J. P., and Meister, C. 2007. Tolerance of direct-seeded green onions to herbicides applied before or after crop emergence. Weed Technol. 21:119–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pusino, A., Petretto, S., and Gessa, C. 1997. Adsorption and desorption of imazapyr by soil. J. Agric. Food Chem. 45:1012–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prostko, E. P. 2007a. Peanut Weed Control. Georgia Pest Control Handbook. Athens, GA Cooperative Extension Services, University of Georgia College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences. Online: http://www.ent.uga.edu/pmh/. Accessed: August 30, 2007.Google Scholar
Prostko, E. P. 2007b. Soybean Weed Control. Georgia Pest Control Handbook. Athens, GA Cooperative Extension Services, University of Georgia College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences. http://www.ent.uga.edu/pmh/. Accessed: August 30, 2007.Google Scholar
Qasem, J. R. 2005. Chemical control of weeds in onion (Allium cepa). J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 80:721–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar