Rice (<i>Oryza sativa</i>) Weed Control with Soil Applications of Quinclorac

Street, Joe E.; Mueller, Thomas C.

doi:10.1017/s0890037x00037404

Cited by 33 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Application timing did not influence control with quinclorac applied at 560 g ha''. These results are similar to those obtained in earlier research (Street & Mueller, 1993), Fourteen days after treatment, /, wrightii control was excellent with quinclorac applied EP, with no difference among rates (Fig, lc. Table 2), With soil applications, control increased as quinclorac rate increased, 1. wrightii control was 97% or greater at 28 DAT (Table 5) for most rates and application timings.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…In previous research (Street & Mueller 1993), the most inconsistent weed control was obtained with quinclorac applied pre-emergence (PRE) to dry soil; however, only soil application timings were evaluated. The objective of this research was to compare soil application of different rates of quinclorac with post-emergence application for weed control and rice yield.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interaction between timings and doses of quindorac in rice

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Quinclorac (3,7‐dichloro‐8‐quinolinecarboxylic acid) is a new herbicide in United States rice production. Field studies were conducted in 1990 and 1991 in Mississippi to determine the influence of application timings and rates on weed control efficacy and rice yield. Control of Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) Beauv. (barnyard‐grass), Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex A. W. Hill (hemp sesbania) and Ipomoea wrightii Gray (palmleaf morning glory) were greatest with early post‐emergence application. Efficacy of pre‐emergence application depends strongly on soil moisture, with significantly reduced weed control resulting when applied to dry soil. Weed control with pre‐emergence application to moist soil was comparable with early post‐emergence application at higher rates of quinclorac. Pre‐plant and incorporated quinclorac controlled weeds effectively. Control of E. crus‐galli, S. exaltata and I. wrightii ranged from 73 to 99%, 75 to 99%, and 92 to 99% at 28 days after treatment, respectively. Rice yield generally reflected weed control. No rice injury was observed for any treatment. Results indicate that early post‐emergence application of quinclorac is the best time for using reduced rates and field conditions at application should be considered with these rates pre‐emergence.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction between timings and doses of quindorac in rice

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The time course behavior of herbicides in the soil is an important factor affecting the residual phytotoxic activity of pre-emergence herbicides. There is a good relationship between the residual phytotoxic activity of preemergence herbicides and the amount of them in paddy soil, such as flucarbazone-sodium (4,5-dihydro-3methoxy-4-methyl-5-oxo-N- [(2-[trifluoromethoxy] phenyl)sulfonyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1-carboxamide, sodium salt; Eliason et al 2004), pretilachlor (2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-[2-propoxyethyl]acetanilide; Bhagat et al 1999), clomazone (2-[2-chlorobenzyl]-4,4dimethyl-1,2-oxazolidin-3-one; Jordan et al 1998), and quinclorac (3,7-dichloroquinoline-8-carboxylic acid;Street & Mueller 1993).…”

Section: Clomepropmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1999), clomazone (2‐[2‐chlorobenzyl]‐4,4‐dimethyl‐1,2‐oxazolidin‐3‐one; Jordan et al . 1998), and quinclorac (3,7‐dichloroquinoline‐8‐carboxylic acid; Street & Mueller 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Residual activity of clomeprop and its downward movement under laboratory conditions

Murano

Kobayashi

Fujihara

2007

Weed Biology and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between the behavior of clomeprop ([RS]-2-[2,4-dichloro-mtolyloxy]propionanilide) and its residual phytotoxic activity in the soil was investigated in the laboratory with special emphasis on the concentration in the soil water.The phytotoxic activity of clomeprop on radish seedlings (Raphanus sativus L. var. radicula cv. Akamaruhatsukadaikon), as the test plant, became greater with time after application but the inhibition was different between the two soils, which had different properties. The amount of 2-(2,4-dichloro-3-methylphenoxy)propionic acid (DMPA), a hydrolyzed and active metabolite of clomeprop, in the soil water and total soil increased with time, corresponding to the decrease in the amount of clomeprop under non-water leakage conditions. The residual phytotoxic activity of clomeprop in the soil was more highly correlated with the concentration of DMPA in the soil water than with the amount of DMPA in the total soil. In addition, a leaching column test was conducted with clomeprop and DMPA.The DMPA easily moved downward and the concentration in the soil water in the upper layer decreased with time after application. It is supposed that the downward movement of DMPA was one of the factors influencing the lasting effect of clomeprop in the field.

show abstract

“…), crabgrass (Digitaria spp. ), and some broadleaf weeds (Wuerzer and Berghaus, 1985;Neal, 1990;Street and Mueller, 1993). Although quinclorac is highly selective between susceptible and tolerant species, neither the mechanism of action nor the basis of selectivity are fully understood.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

3,7-Dichloroquinolinecarboxylic Acid Inhibits Cell-Wall Biosynthesis in Maize Roots

Koo¹,

Neal²,

DiTomaso³

1996

Plant Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mode of action of the herbicide 3,7-dichloroquinolinecar-boxylic acid (quinclorac) was examined by measuring incorporation of [14C]glucose, [14C]acetate, [3H]thymidine, and [3H]uridine into maize (Zea mays) root cell walls, fatty acids, DNA, and RNA, respectively. Among the precursors examined, 10 [mu]M quinclorac inhibited [14C]glucose incorporation into the cell wall within 3 h. Fatty acid and DNA biosynthesis were subsequently inhibited, whereas RNA biosynthesis was unaffected. In contrast to the cellulose synthesis inhibitor 2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile, quinclorac strongly inhibited cellulose and a hemicellulose fraction presumed to be glucuronoarabinoxylan. However, the synthesis of (1–>3),(1–>4)-β-D-glucans was only slightly inhibited. The degree of inhibition was time- and dose-dependent. By 4 h after treatment, the concentration that inhibited [14C]glucose incorporation into the cell wall, cellulose, and the sensitive hemicellulose fraction by 50% was about 15, 5, and 20 [mu]M, respectively. Concomitant with an inhibition of [14C]glucose incorporation into the cell wall, quinclorac treatment led to a marked accumulation of radioactivity in the cytosol. The increased radioactivity was found mostly in glucose and fructose. However, total levels of glucose, fructose, and uridine diphosphate-glucose were not changed greatly by quinclorac. These data suggest that quinclorac acts primarily as a cell-wall biosynthesis inhibitor in a susceptible grass by a mechanism that is different from that of 2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile.

show abstract

Rice (Oryza sativa) Weed Control with Soil Applications of Quinclorac

Cited by 33 publications

References 6 publications

Interaction between timings and doses of quindorac in rice

Interaction between timings and doses of quindorac in rice

Residual activity of clomeprop and its downward movement under laboratory conditions

3,7-Dichloroquinolinecarboxylic Acid Inhibits Cell-Wall Biosynthesis in Maize Roots

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About