Isoxaflutole and metribuzin interactions in isoxaflutole-resistant soybean

Smith, Andrea; Soltani, Nader; Kaastra, Allan C.; Hooker, David C.; Robinson, Darren E.; Sikkema, Peter H.

doi:10.1017/wsc.2019.25

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Likewise, metribuzin at 0.21, 0.31, or 0.42 kg ha −1 was reported to provide at least 80% control of Amaranthus spp. when there was sufficient rainfall for herbicide activation (Smith et al 2019). When used with alfalfa, flumetsulam at 0.03 kg ha −1 provided effective control of annual broadleaf weeds (burning nettle [Urtica urens L.], spiny cocklebur [Xanthium spinosum L.], and common lambsquarters; Arregui et al 2001) while metribuzin at 0.56 or 0.84 kg ha −1 provided at least 95% control of shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris L.…”

Section: Weed Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

PRE- and POST-applied herbicide options for alfalfa interseeded with corn silage

Osterholz¹,

Dias²,

Grabber

et al. 2020

Weed Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Establishment of alfalfa by interseeding into corn planted for silage can enhance crop productivity but weed management is a challenge to adoption. Although a glyphosate-based herbicide program could be a simple and effective approach, concerns about herbicide resistance and limitations in available alfalfa varieties exist. Field experiments were conducted to compare the efficacy and selectivity of preemergence (PRE), postemergence (POST) and PRE followed by POST herbicide programs to a glyphosate only strategy when interseeding alfalfa into corn. Experiment 1 compared PRE applications of acetochlor, mesotrione, S-metalochlor, metribuzin, and flumetsulam, and found both rates of acetochlor and metribuzin, and S-metalochlor at 1.1 kg ha-1 were the most effective and selective PRE herbicides 4 weeks after treatment (WAT), but each resulted in greater overall weed cover than glyphosate by 8 WAT. Experiment 2 evaluated POST applications at early and late timings of bentazon, bromoxynil, 2,4-DB, and mesotrione. Several POST herbicides exhibited similar effectiveness and selectivity as glyphosate including early applications of bromoxynil (0.14 kg ha-1) and 2,4-DB (0.84 or 1.68 kg ha-1), as well as late applications of bromoxynil (0.42 kg ha-1), 2,4-DB (0.84 kg ha-1) and mesotrione (0.05 or 0.11 kg ha-1). A third experiment compared applications of acetochlor PRE, bromoxynil POST, and the combination of acetochlor PRE with bromoxynil POST. All treatments were effective and safe for use in this interseeded system, although interseeded alfalfa provided 65-70% weed suppression in corn planted for silage without any herbicide. Herbicide treatments had no observable impacts on corn and alfalfa yields so weed management was likely of limited economic importance. However, weed competitiveness can vary based on several different factors including weed species, density, and site-specific factors, and so further investigations under different environments and conditions are needed.

show abstract

Section: Weed Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

PRE- and POST-applied herbicide options for alfalfa interseeded with corn silage

Osterholz¹,

Dias²,

Grabber

et al. 2020

Weed Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Grain sorghum was not injured by pyrasulfotole þ bromoxynil applied alone or with synthetic auxin; however, the mixing of carfentrazone, a PPO inhibitor, increased phytotoxicity (Besançon et al 2016). Isoxaflutole þ metribuzin applied PRE on isoxaflutole-resistant soybean injured the crop in environments with the most rainfall, and injury was often synergistic (Smith et al 2019b). Sugarcane displayed transient injury symptoms when topramezone was mixed with ametryn or metribuzin compared with topramezone applied alone (Negrisoli et al 2020).…”

Section: Weed Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…], and fall panicum ( Panicum dichotomiflorum Michx. ; Ditschun et al 2016; Smith et al 2019b). In contrast, control of a population of HPPD-inhibitor-resistant and PS II-inhibitor-resistant Palmer amaranth with mesotrione or topramezone applied PRE with atrazine was additive (Chahal and Jhala 2018a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to the application rate of the HPPD inhibitor, synergistic weed control was observed more frequently with triketone herbicides (mesotrione and tembotrione) compared to pyrazolone herbicides (topramezone and tolpyralate; Kohrt and Sprague 2017). Adverse environmental conditions (e.g., inadequate rainfall) influence plant response to a mixture of HPPD and PS II inhibitors applied PRE (Smith et al 2019b) and POST (Woodyard et al 2009b). Moreover, the time of POST herbicide application can influence the plant response to HPPD and PS II inhibitors (O'Brien et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibiting herbicides: past, present, and future

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibiting herbicides are primarily used for weed control in corn, barley, oat, rice, sorghum, sugarcane, and wheat production fields in the United States. The objectives of this review were to summarize (1) the history of HPPD-inhibitor and their use in the United States, (2) HPPD-inhibitor resistant weeds, their mechanism of resistance, and management, (3) interaction of HPPD-inhibitor with other herbicides, and (4) the future of HPPD-inhibitor-resistant crops. As of 2022, three broadleaf weeds (Palmer amaranth, waterhemp, and wild radish) have evolved resistance to the HPPD-inhibitor. The predominance of metabolic resistance to HPPD-inhibitor was found in aforementioned three weed species. Management of HPPD-inhibitor-resistant weeds can be accomplished using alternate herbicides such as glyphosate, glufosinate, 2,4-D, or dicamba; however, metabolic resistance poses a serious challenge, as the weeds may be cross-resistant to other herbicide sites of action, leading to limited herbicide options. The HPPD-inhibitor is commonly applied with photosystem II (PS II)-inhibitor to increase efficacy and weed control spectrum. The synergism with HPPD-inhibitor arises from depletion of plastoquinones, which allows increased binding of PS II-inhibitor to the D1 protein. New HPPD-inhibitor from azole carboxamides class is in development and expected to be available in the near future. The HPPD-inhibitor-resistant crops have been developed through overexpression of a resistant bacterial HPPD enzyme in plants and the overexpression of transgenes for HPPD and a microbial gene that enhances the production of HPPD substrate. Isoxaflutole-resistant soybean is commercially available, and it is expected that soybean resistant to other HPPD-inhibitor such as mesotrione, stacked with resistance to other herbicides, will be available in the near future.

show abstract

“…These systems allow postemergence applications of dicamba for in-season control of GR weeds (Kumar et al 2020b;Yadav et al 2020). Similarly, crops with resistance to glyphosate and glufosinate, glufosinate and hydroxyphenolpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibitors, and glyphosate, 2,4-D, and glufosinate have recently been commercialized (Shyam et al 2021;Smith et al 2019). In the CGP and SGP regions, these newly available row crop cultivars (corn, cotton, or soybean) are mainly grown in 3-yr rotations (winter wheat-summer crop-fallow).…”

Section: Hr Crops and Their Role In Resistance Management In The Us Gpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Western United States and Canada perspective: are herbicide-resistant crops the solution to herbicide-resistant weeds?

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbicide-resistant (HR) crops are widely grown throughout the United States (U.S.) and Canada. These crop-trait technologies can enhance weed management and therefore can be an important component of integrated weed management (IWM) programs. Concomitantly, evolution of HR weed populations has become ubiquitous in agricultural areas where HR crops are grown. Nevertheless, crop cultivars with new or combined (stacked) HR traits are continuing to be developed and commercialized. This review, based on a symposium held at the Western Society of Weed Science annual meeting in 2021, examines the impact of HR crops on HR weed management in the U.S. Great Plains, U.S. Pacific Northwest, and the Canadian Prairies over the past 25 years, and their past and future contributions to IWM. We also provide an industry perspective on the future of HR crop development and their role in resistance management. Expanded options for HR traits in both major and minor crops are expected. With proper stewardship, HR crops can reduce herbicide-use intensity and help reduce selection pressure on weed populations. However, their proper deployment in cropping systems must be carefully planned by considering a diverse crop rotation sequence with multiple HR and non-HR crops and maximizing crop competition to effectively manage HR weed populations. Based on past experiences in the cultivation of HR crops and associated herbicide use in the western U.S. and Canada, they have been important determinants of both the selection and management of HR weeds.

show abstract

Isoxaflutole and metribuzin interactions in isoxaflutole-resistant soybean

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

PRE- and POST-applied herbicide options for alfalfa interseeded with corn silage

PRE- and POST-applied herbicide options for alfalfa interseeded with corn silage

4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibiting herbicides: past, present, and future

Western United States and Canada perspective: are herbicide-resistant crops the solution to herbicide-resistant weeds?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About