Glufosinate Application Timing and Rate Affect Peanut Yield

Prostko, Eric P.; Webster, Theodore M.; Marshall, Michael W.; León, Ramón G.; Grey, Timothy L.; Ferrell, Jason A.; Dotray, Peter A.; Jordan, David L.; Grichar, W. James; Brecke, Barry J.

doi:10.3146/ps13-4.1

Cited by 9 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lassiter et al (2007) reported that peanut exposed to 280 g ae ha À1 of glyphosate decreased pod yield by approximately 20% at several locations. Prostko et al 2013 showed that glufosinate at 82 g ai ha À1 caused similar yield reduction at multiple sites. In both studies, yield loss surpassed 50% when herbicide rate was above 560 g ha À1 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In the southeastern United States, peanut production occurs in close proximity to or in rotation with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] (Lassiter et al 2007;Prostko et al 2013). New cotton and soybean transgenic varieties with traits conferring resistance to the synthetic auxin herbicides 2,4-D and dicamba (2,4-DR and DR, respectively) have been developed (Behrens et al 2007;Johnson et al 2010;Wright et al 2010) and are expected to be quickly adopted by growers who will use these traits to control glyphosate-resistant (GR) weed species (Craigmyle et al 2013;Robinson et al 2012;Spaunhorst and Bradley 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of Exposure to 2,4-D and Dicamba on Peanut Injury and Yield

León¹,

Ferrell²,

Brecke³

2014

Weed technol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential widespread adoption of cotton and soybean varieties with 2,4-D and dicamba resistance traits in the southeastern US will increase the risk of accidental exposure of peanut to these herbicides because of drift or application errors. When such accidents occur, growers must decide between continuing the crop and terminating it. In order to make this decision, growers need to estimate the potential yield reduction caused by 2,4-D or dicamba. Dose-response studies were conducted under field conditions in Citra and Jay, FL in 2012 and 2013 to determine peanut injury and yield reduction after exposure to 70, 140, 280, 560, and 1120 g ae ha−1of 2,4-D or to 35, 70, 140, 280, and 560 g ae ha−1of dicamba at 21 and 42 d after planting (DAP). Only herbicide by rate interactions were significant (P < 0.04). Dicamba caused 2 to 5 times higher peanut injury and 0.5 to 2 times higher yield reductions than 2,4-D. Injury ranged from 0 to 35% when peanut plants were treated with 2,4-D and from 20 to 78% with dicamba. The maximum yield reduction was 41% with 1,120 g ha−1of 2,4-D and 65% with 560 g ha−1of dicamba. Linear regression indicated that the intercept for yield reduction was 12% for 2,4-D and 23% for dicamba, and there was a 2.5% and 7.7% increase in yield reduction per additional 100 g ha−1, respectively. Although high variability was observed for the different variables, there was a positive correlation between injury and peanut yield reduction (P < 0.0001) with Pearson's Rho values ranging from 0.45 to 0.59 for 2,4-D and from 0.27 to 0.55 for dicamba, suggesting that growers can use injury data to make rough projections of yield reduction and decide if they continue their crop, especially when injury is evident.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 94%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Exposure to 2,4-D and Dicamba on Peanut Injury and Yield

León¹,

Ferrell²,

Brecke³

2014

Weed technol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peanut is regularly grown near cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] across the southeast (Lassiter et al, 2007;Prostko et al, 2011;Prostko et al, 2013). A large percentage of cotton and soybean cultivars have herbicide resistance technology to assist in weed management, and the increased use of glyphosate and glufosinate herbicides throughout the growing season increased the occurrence of accidental injury to peanut crops (Grey and Prostko, 2010;Johnson et al, 2012a;Lassiter et al, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D) on Peanut when Applied During Vegetative Growth Stages

Blanchett¹,

Grey

Prostko³

et al. 2017

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of 2,4-D-resistant cotton and soybean cultivars has created great concern about the potential off-target movement of 2,4-D onto sensitive broadleaf crops. Peanut is often grown in close proximity to cotton and soybean. Therefore, field studies were conducted during 2012 and 2013 at Plains, Ty Ty, and Attapulgus, GA to evaluate peanut response to 2,4-D at 67, 133, 266, 533, and 1066 g ae ha À1 applied at preemergence (PRE), 10, 20, or 30 d after planting (DAP), corresponding to PRE, V2, V3, and V5 peanut growth stages. Nontreated controls (NTC) were included for comparison. Treatment timing by rate interactions were significant (P , 0.0001). As 2,4-D rate increased peanut injury increased. There was variation in yield loss response dependent on peanut growth stage at application timing. Peanut that was treated preemergence and at the V2 growth stage did not have yield loss at any of the 2,4-D evaluated rates (67 to 1066 g ha À1 ) relative to the NTC. When peanut was treated at V3 and V5 growth stages with 2,4-D, injury estimates were 5 to 32% from the 67 to 1066 g ha À1 rates respectively, and peanut canopy diameter was stunted 5 to 35% at the same rates. The resulting peanut yield loss was 23 and 36% from 533 and 1066 g ha À1 of 2,4-D applied at V3 and V5 growth stages; in part due to reproductive growth being initiated during that time-frame and peanut had less time to recuperate before harvest. Linear regression models were used to evaluate peanut injury and peanut yield results. Significant correlations were established for V3 and V5 treatments between injury and yield, injury and canopy diameter, and canopy diameter and yield (P , 0.0001), with correlation coefficients of À 0.48, À 0.76, and 0.51, respectively. Growers and extension agents will be able to use these peanut injury estimates and canopy diameter data to make improved predictions of potential peanut yield loss where off-target movement of 2,4-D or sprayer contamination has occurred.

show abstract

“…Peanut is commonly grown in the proximity of cotton and soybean across the southeast (Lassiter et al, 2007;Prostko et al, 2011;Prostko et al, 2013). Herbicide resistance technology is used in most cotton and soybean cultivars for weed management solutions, and the increased use of glyphosate and glufosinate herbicides throughout the growing season increased the occurrence of accidental injury to sensitive crops like peanut (Grey and Prostko, 2010;Johnson et al, 2012a;Lassiter et al, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Dicamba on Peanut When Applied during Vegetative Growth Stages

Blanchett¹,

Grey

Prostko³

et al. 2015

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of dicamba-resistant cotton and soybean cultivars has created great concern about the potential off-target movement of dicamba onto sensitive species, including broadleaf crops. Peanut is often grown in close proximity to cotton and soybean. Therefore, field studies were conducted during 2012 and 2013 at Plains, Ty Ty, and Attapulgus, GA to evaluate peanut response to rates of dicamba (35, 70, 140, 280, and 560 g ae ha 21 ) applied at preemergence (PRE), 10, 20, or 30 d after planting (DAP) corresponding to PRE, V2, V3, and V5 peanut growth stages, respectively. Nontreated controls were included for comparison. As dicamba rate increased, both peanut injury and peanut yield loss increased. Peanut response to dicamba was fit to log-logistic regression models for injury and linear regression models for yield loss. Peanut injury increased with rate of dicamba, but was variable among the locations. A general trend was that peanut plants became more sensitive to dicamba injury as plants approached reproductive stage, as evidenced through a declining linear relationship between I 50 values (i.e. rate of dicamba that elicits a 50% crop response) and timing of application. PRE applications of dicamba had I 50 values that ranged from 125 to 323 g ha 21 of dicamba, while I 50 values were 44 to 48 g ha 21 of dicamba at the V5 peanut growth stage. There was a linear relationship between peanut yield and dicamba rate, with 560 g ha 21 causing maximum yield losses ranging from 0 to 86% when applied PRE, 24 to 82% when applied at V2 growth stage, 30 to 95% when applied at V3 growth stage, and 45 to 88% when applied at V5 growth stage. Across all treatments and locations, there was also a negative linear relationship between peanut yield and peanut crop injury, with a decline of 8.5% yield for every 10% increase in crop injury. Growers and their consultants/extension agents can use this peanut injury data to predict potential peanut yield loss from sprayer contamination or off-target movement of dicamba.

show abstract

Glufosinate Application Timing and Rate Affect Peanut Yield

Cited by 9 publications

References 18 publications

Impact of Exposure to 2,4-D and Dicamba on Peanut Injury and Yield

Impact of Exposure to 2,4-D and Dicamba on Peanut Injury and Yield

The Effect of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D) on Peanut when Applied During Vegetative Growth Stages

The Effect of Dicamba on Peanut When Applied during Vegetative Growth Stages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About