Weed Control in Dicamba-Resistant Soybeans

Johnson, William G.; Young, Bryan G.; Matthews, Joseph L.; Marquardt, Paul T.; Slack, Charles H.; Bradley, Kevin W.; York, Alan C.; Culpepper, Stanley; Hager, Aaron G.; Al‐Khatib, Kassim; Steckel, Larry; Moechnig, Mike; Loux, Mark M.; Bernards, Mark L.; Smeda, Reid J.

doi:10.1094/cm-2010-0920-01-rs

Cited by 52 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In dicamba-tolerant soybean, up to 100% control of GR giant ragweed 8 WAA has been reported from dicamba PP application [19]. On the contrary, reference [20] reported poor control (30%) of GR giant ragweed with dicamba applied PP in dicamba-tolerant soybeans, however, control increased to over 80% when accompanied by a dicamba POST application. Moreover, reference [12] reported that either single or sequential dicamba applications, when timed to appropriately match the biology of the weed species, can be used as an effective integrated weed management tool for the control of GR giant ragweed.…”

Section: Preplant Tank-mixesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In dicamba-tolerant soybean, up to 100% control of GR giant ragweed has been reported for dicamba applied POST [19] and for sequential early-and late-POST dicamba applications [20]. Up to 90% control of GR giant ragweed has been reported for glufosinate under greenhouse conditions [21]; however, any obstructing vegetation that may be present under field conditions has the potential to decrease control as glufosinate is a contact herbicide and lacks in-plant mobility.…”

Section: Postemergence Tank-mixesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Preplant and Postemergence Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Corn

Belfry¹,

Sikkema²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) giant ragweed has recently been identified in southwestern Ontario and has the potential to be a significant problem for regional corn producers. Eight field trials [four with preplant (PP) and four with postemergence (POST) herbicides] were conducted from 2013 to 2014 on various Ontario farms infested with GR giant ragweed to determine the efficacy of PP and POST tank-mixes in corn. Glyphosate tank-mixed with atrazine, dicamba, dicamba/atrazine, mesotrione plus atrazine, flumetsulam, isoxaflutole plus atrazine, saflufenacil/dimethenamid-P, Smetolachlor/atrazine and rimsulfuron applied PP provided up to 54%, 95%, 93%, 95%, 40%, 89%, 91%, 50% and 93% control of GR giant ragweed and reduced dry weight 69%, 100%, 99%, 100%, 30%, 92%, 98%, 66% and 99%, respectively. POST application of glyphosate alone and tankmixed with 2,4-D ester, atrazine, dicamba, dicamba/diflufenzopyr, dicamba/atrazine, bromoxynil plus atrazine, prosulfuron plus dicamba, mesotrione plus atrazine, topramezone plus atrazine, tembotrione/thiencarbazone-methyl and glufosinate provided up to 31%, 84%, 39%, 94%, 89%, 86%, 83%, 78%, 72%, 43%, 63% and 58% GR giant ragweed and reduced dry weight 55%, 99%, 72%, 99%, 99%, 98%, 96%, 96%, 93%, 89%, 91% and 95%, respectively. In general, PP control of GR giant ragweed was greater than POST applied herbicides evaluated. Based on these results, glyphosate tank-mixes containing dicamba or mesotrione plus atrazine applied PP, and dicamba applied POST will provide the most consistent control of GR giant ragweed in corn.

show abstract

Section: Preplant Tank-mixesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Postemergence Tank-mixesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preplant and Postemergence Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Corn

Belfry¹,

Sikkema²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(A. trifida L.), and horseweed [Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist] (Byker et al 2013;Johnson et al 2010;Spaunhorst and Bradley 2013;Spaunhorst et al 2014;Vink et al 2012). For example, according to Nebraska (93%) and Wisconsin (66%) growers, weed management significantly improved with adoption of dicamba products in soybean (Werle et al 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Off-target movement assessment of dicamba in North America

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Six experiments were conducted in 2018 on field sites located in Arkansas, Indiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Ontario, and Wisconsin to evaluate the off-target movement (OTM) of dicamba under field-scale conditions. The highest estimated percentages of dicamba injury in non–dicamba-resistant (DR) soybean were 55%, 44%, 39%, 67%, 15%, and 44% injury for noncovered areas and 55%, 5%, 13%, 42%, 0%, and 41% injury for covered areas during dicamba application in Arkansas, Indiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Ontario, and Wisconsin, respectively. The level of injury generally decreased as the downwind distance increased under covered and noncovered areas at all sites. There was an estimated 10% injury in non-DR soybean at 113, 8, 11, 8, and 8 m; and estimated 1% injury at 293, 28, 71, 15, and 19 m from the edge of treated fields downwind when plants were not covered during dicamba application in Arkansas, Indiana, Michigan, Ontario, and Wisconsin, respectively. Assessment of filter-paper collectors placed from 4 to 137 m downwind from the edge of the sprayed area suggested the dicamba deposition reduced exponentially with distance. The greatest injury to non-DR soybean from dicamba OTM occurred at Nebraska and Arkansas (as far as 250 m). Non-DR soybean injury was greatest adjacent to the dicamba sprayed area, but injury decreased with no injury beyond 20 m downwind or in any other direction from the dicamba sprayed area in Indiana, Michigan, Ontario, and Wisconsin. The presence of soybean injury under covered and noncovered areas during the spray period for primary drift suggests that secondary movement of dicamba was evident at five sites. Additional research is needed to determine the exact forms of secondary movement of dicamba under different environmental conditions.

show abstract

“…Palmer amaranth control in 2013 in the Dicamba PRE only treatment was 60% at 2 WAP2, whereas, it was only 27% in 2012 at the same rating period. Johnson et al [21] also observed that a PRE only application of dicamba provided < 60% control of Palmer amaranth and morningglory spp. In contrast, the flumioxazin PRE only treatment provided substantially better Palmer amaranth control (>99%) ( Table 4).…”

Section: Palmer Amaranth Controlmentioning

confidence: 97%

Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) and Pitted Morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa L.) Control in Dicamba Tolerant Soybean (Glycine max L.)

Joseph¹,

Marshall²,

Sanders³

2017

AJPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory are difficult to manage weeds present in South Carolina soybean production fields. Glyphosate and ALS-resistant Palmer amaranth biotypes have spread rapidly throughout South Carolina making the control of these weeds more difficult. Recently, soybean varieties with tolerance to dicamba have been introduced along with several new ultra-low volatility formulations of dicamba to help with the problem. Field experiments were conducted near Blackville, SC in 2012 and 2013 to evaluate dicamba herbicide programs for broadleaf weed management in dicamba tolerant soybean. At 2 weeks after POST1 (2 WAP1), Palmer amaranth control ranged from 93% to 100% across the PRE followed by POST treatments in 2012 and 2013. By 2 weeks after POST2 (2 WAP2), control was 95% or better. Treatments containing two or three herbicide applications (PRE, POST1 and POST2) offered good to excellent (92% -100%) pitted morningglory control. No differences in weed control were observed among treatments with 3 application times compared to those applied twice. In general, all treatments with a PRE followed by at least one POST application provided good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory. Overall, a PRE (either dicamba or flumioxazin) followed by a dicamba or a non-dicamba containing POST treatment provided good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory when applied at the correct growth stage.

show abstract

Weed Control in Dicamba-Resistant Soybeans

Cited by 52 publications

References 6 publications

Preplant and Postemergence Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Corn

Preplant and Postemergence Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Corn

Off-target movement assessment of dicamba in North America

Palmer Amaranth (<i>Amaranthus palmeri</i> S. Wats.) and Pitted Morningglory (<i>Ipomoea lacunosa</i> L.) Control in Dicamba Tolerant Soybean (<i>Glycine max</i> L.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Weed Control in Dicamba-Resistant Soybeans

Cited by 52 publications

References 6 publications

Preplant and Postemergence Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Corn

Preplant and Postemergence Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Corn

Off-target movement assessment of dicamba in North America

Palmer Amaranth (&lt;i&gt;Amaranthus palmeri&lt;/i&gt; S. Wats.) and Pitted Morningglory (&lt;i&gt;Ipomoea lacunosa&lt;/i&gt; L.) Control in Dicamba Tolerant Soybean (&lt;i&gt;Glycine max&lt;/i&gt; L.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Palmer Amaranth (<i>Amaranthus palmeri</i> S. Wats.) and Pitted Morningglory (<i>Ipomoea lacunosa</i> L.) Control in Dicamba Tolerant Soybean (<i>Glycine max</i> L.)