Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-6kn8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T02:59:08.155Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

S-Metolachlor Compared with Metolachlor on Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) and Peanut (Arachis hypogaea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

W. James Grichar ,
Robert G. Lemon ,
Kevin D. Brewer  and
Brad W. Minton
W. James Grichar
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Yoakum, TX 77995
Robert G. Lemon
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Extension Service, College Station, TX 77843
Kevin D. Brewer
Affiliation:
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Yoakum, TX 77995
Brad W. Minton
Affiliation:
Novartis Crop Protection, Inc., Cypress, TX 77429
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

S-metolachlor was compared with metolachlor at four field locations in Texas during the 1996 and 1997 growing seasons in terms of yellow nutsedge control, peanut injury, and peanut yield. S-metolachlor caused peanut injury comparable to metolachlor when either herbicide was applied preplant incorporated or preemergence. Yellow nutsedge control was similar and peanut yields were comparable with the two herbicides. At one location where yellow nutsedge failed to develop, the untreated check produced one of the highest yields.

Keywords

MetolachlorS-metolachloryellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L. #3 CYPESpeanut, Arachis hypogaea L. ‘Florunner’, ‘AT-120’, ‘GK-7’Groundnutherbicide efficacypeanut stuntingPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedPRE, preemergence

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2001 , pp. 107 - 111
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. 1998. Crop Protection Chemicals Reference. 14th ed. New York: Chemical Pharmaceutical Publishing and J. Wiley. pp. 1623–1636.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1999. Crop Protection Chemicals Reference. 15th ed. New York: Chemical Pharmaceutical Publishing and J. Wiley. pp. 139–141, 212-220.Google Scholar
Berti, A. and Zanin, G. 1997. GESTINF: a decision model for postemergence weed management in soybean (Glycine max L.). Crop Prot. 16: 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswell, T. E., Merkle, M. G., Grichar, W. J., Newman, J. S., and Norton, K. 1981. Research on Nutsedge Weed Control in Peanuts. College Station, TX: Peanut Research and Educational Review for the Texas Peanut Producers Board. 130 p.Google Scholar
Cardina, J. and Swann, C. W. 1988. Metolachlor effects on peanut growth and development. Peanut Sci. 15: 57–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colvin, D. L. and Brecke, B. J. 1993. Cadre rate and time of application for peanut (Arachis hypogaea) weed control. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 46:30.Google Scholar
DeFelice, M. S., Brown, W. B., Aldrich, R. J., Sims, B. D., Judy, D. T., and Guethle, D. R. 1989. Weed control in soybeans (Glycine max) with below label rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 37: 365–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowler, C. C. 1998. Weed survey—southern states. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 51: 299–313.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. C., Marti, L. R., Kvien, C. S., Skipper, H. D., Gooden, D. T., and Zublena, J. P. 1987. Accelerated degradation potential of selected herbicides in the southeastern United States. Weed Technol. 1: 350–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gooden, D. T. and Wixson, M. B. 1992. Influence of Pursuit and Cadre on nutsedge development. Proc. Am. Peanut Educ. Soc. 24:47.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J. 1995. Comparison of postemergence herbicides for common bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 9: 825–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J. and Boswell, T. E. 1989. Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) control with postemergence herbicides in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Technol. 3: 267–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J. and Nester, P. R. 1997. Nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with AC 263,222 and imazethapyr. Weed Technol. 11: 714–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Boswell, T. E., and Merkle, M. G. 1981. Control of Yellow Nutsedge with Selected Herbicides. College Station, TX: Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bull. 3858. 2 p.Google Scholar
Grichar, W. J., Colburn, A. E., and Baumann, P. A. 1996. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) control in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) as influenced by method of metolachlor application. Weed Technol. 10: 278–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, E. W. 1965. Preemergence activity of three thiocarbamate herbicides in relation to depth of placement in the soil. Weeds 13: 255–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. W., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The Worlds’ Worst Weeds. Distribution and Biology. Honolulu: University Press, Hawaii. 609 p.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 1997. Population dynamics of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) in cropping systems in the southeastern coastal plain. Weed Sci. 45: 166–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muyonga, K. C., DeFelice, M. S., and Sims, B. D. 1996. Weed control with reduced rates of four soil applied soybean herbicides. Weed Sci. 44: 148–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connell, P. J., Harms, C. T., and Allen, J.R.F. 1998. Metolachlor, S-metolachlor and their role within sustainable weed-management. Crop Prot. 17: 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, M. G., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and Crowley, R. H. 1980. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) competition with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 28: 327–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prostko, E. P. and Meade, J. A. 1993. Reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in conventional soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 7: 365–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, L. E., DeFelice, M. S., and Sims, B. D. 1990. Integrating reduced rates of postemergence herbicides and cultivation for broadleaf weed control in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 38: 541–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walls, F. R. Jr., Muzyk, K. R., Wiley, G., and Taylor, F. 1990. Imazethapyr methods of application for control of nutsedge species (Cyperus spp.) in peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 43:09.Google Scholar
Wehtje, G., Wilcut, J. W., Hicks, T. V., and McGuire, J. 1988. Relative tolerance of peanuts to alachlor and metolachlor. Peanut Sci. 15: 53–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W. 1991. Efficacy and economics of common bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) control in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Peanut Sci. 18: 106–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., York, A. C., Grichar, W. J., and Wehtje, G. R. 1995. The biology and management of weeds in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). In Pattee, H. E. and Stalker, H. T., eds. Advances in Peanut Science. Stillwater, OK: American Peanut Research and Education Society. pp. 207–244.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. E. 1988. Carbamothiates. In Kerney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D., eds. Herbicides: Chemistry, Degradation, and Mode of Action. Vol. 3. New York: Marcel-Dekker. pp. 245–300.Google Scholar