Identity-Preserved Soybean Tolerance to Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase-Inhibiting Herbicides

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted from 2011 to 2013 near Ridgetown and Exeter, Ontario, Canada to evaluate the tolerance of seven identity-preserved (IP) soybean cultivars to protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)-inhibiting herbicides flumioxazin, saflufenacil/dimethenamid-P, and sulfentrazone applied PRE; fomesafen applied POST; as well as PRE followed by (fb) POST application. Ridgetown sites demonstrated excellent tolerance (< 10% injury) to PRE treatments, whereas PRE sulfentrazone caused up to 36% injury at 1 and 2 wk after application (WAA) at Exeter. Of the PRE fb POST treatments evaluated, those containing saflufenacil/dimethenamid-P and sulfentrazone were most injurious to soybean, with cultivar being a further determinant of injury. At Exeter 1 WAA, cultivars ‘S03W4’ and ‘S23T5’ showed 23 to 27 and 45 to 46% injury for saflufenacil/dimethenamid-P and sulfentrazone when followed by POST fomesafen, respectively. Sulfentrazone application (PRE alone or fb fomesafen) consequently reduced S03W4 yield up to 38% and S23T5 up to 25%, whereas saflufenacil/dimethenamid-P fb fomesafen reduced S03W4 by 18%. In general, PRE fb POST caused more injury than PRE treatments; however, injury diminished over time and no significant reduction to soybean yield could be attributed to adding POST fomesafen. On the basis of this study, the injury from PPO herbicides applied PRE is active ingredient, cultivar, and environment specific. Although PPO herbicides have the potential to cause unacceptable crop injury in some IP soybean cultivars, selecting a tolerant cultivar will minimize yield losses.

Selectivity of pre-and post-emergence herbicides to very-early maturing soybean cultivars

“…diclosulam, and S-metolachlor are pre-emergence herbicides frequently applied to soybean crops. They are described as selective for soybean crops, however, sulfentrazone can affect the growth and yield of some cultivars (Taylor-Lovell et al, 2001;Belfry et al, 2016), especially when combined with post-emergence herbicides.…”

Investigations of the Potential Interactions Between Pre-emergence Residual Herbicides, Variety, and Seed Treatments in Soybean

“…The use of PRE-residual herbicides is recommended and driven largely by herbicide-resistant Amaranthus species. Even though PRE-residual herbicides like flumioxazin and sulfentrazone are capable of causing early-season soybean injury (Belfry et al 2016;Hulting et al 2001;Niekamp and Johnson 2001;Reiling et al 2006;Swantek et al 1998), the results of this research indicate that this injury does not necessarily translate into yield loss. Additionally, no deleterious interactions were observed between these herbicides and several common soybean seed treatments.…”

“…Studies have shown that soybean cultivars respond differently to sulfentrazone applied PRE to soybean and that it can lead to significant yield reductions (Belfry et al 2016; Reiling et al 2006; Swantek et al 1998). Belfry et al (2016) reported yield losses of 32% in one cultivar of soybean and only 5% in another when 840 g ha –1 of sulfentrazone was applied PRE. Swantek et al (1998) also showed that different soybean cultivars react differently to sulfentrazone, and that yield can be reduced by as much as 28% when 560 g ha –1 of sulfentrazone is applied PRE.

Figure 2Main effects of varieties (A), seed treatments (B), and herbicides (C) on soybean yield in 2016 and 2017.

…”

“…For both varieties and seed treatments, the sulfentrazone-containing treatments at the 2 × rate resulted in the highest yield losses ( Figure 2C). Studies have shown that soybean cultivars respond differently to sulfentrazone applied PRE to soybean and that it can lead to significant yield reductions (Belfry et al 2016;Reiling et al 2006;Swantek et al 1998). Belfry et al (2016) reported yield losses of 32% in one cultivar of soybean and only 5% in another when 840 g ha -1 of sulfentrazone was applied PRE.…”

Response of Edamame Soybean Variety AVS 4002 to Herbicides

“…This was similar to the level of foliar necrosis on dry bean recorded by Wilson (2005), and what is commonly observed on grain soybean. In grain soybean, the injury from foliar application of fomesafen was 11 to 24% at 1 wk after treatment (WAT), which subsided to 1 to 5% at 4 WAT (Belfry et al, 2016). Several other legumes are more sensitive to fomesafen.…”