Response of five vegetable crops to isoxaflutole soil residues

Field experiments were conducted in 2001 and 2002 at two sites in Ohio to characterize the effect of isoxaflutole herbicide applied the previous year to field corn on processing tomato, bell pepper, cabbage, snapbean, and cucumber. Isoxaflutole was applied preemergence to field corn in 2001 at 0, 53...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Weed technology 2005-04, Vol.19 (2), p.391-396
Hauptverfasser: Felix, J, Doohan, D.J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 396
container_issue 2
container_start_page 391
container_title Weed technology
container_volume 19
creator Felix, J
Doohan, D.J
description Field experiments were conducted in 2001 and 2002 at two sites in Ohio to characterize the effect of isoxaflutole herbicide applied the previous year to field corn on processing tomato, bell pepper, cabbage, snapbean, and cucumber. Isoxaflutole was applied preemergence to field corn in 2001 at 0, 53, 70, 105, and 210 g ai/ha. There were no rotational crop cultivar by herbicide rate interactions at either site. Generally, there was a higher level of visible injury on crops at the Fremont site. Isoxaflutole residues at either site did not affect processing tomato yield. Bell pepper yield was reduced 33% when rotated into 210 g ai/ha rate plots only at Fremont. Snapbean marketable yield was reduced by isoxaflutole carryover from 70 and 210 g ai/ha rates resulting in 0.39 and 0.0 t/ha at Fremont. Similarly, isoxaflutole soil residues from 105 and 210 g ai/ha resulted in 14 and 24% visible injury on cucumber but did not reduce marketable yield. Site differences in soil characteristics and precipitation in the application year may have contributed to observed differences in crop response.
doi_str_mv 10.1614/WT-04-171R
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1614_WT_04_171R</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3989723</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3989723</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c306t-ff2a69e0a635d0e83c07fee373c3cfc6623bdac1d2ad1ae2055b74011cb61d8d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFj81Lw0AQxRdRsFYvngVz8SJEZ3aTTXIRpNQPKAi1pd7CZjNbUmI37KZF_3u3RPQyA_N-83iPsUuEO5SY3K8WMSQxZjg_YiNMU4h5lsAxG0FeQAwi-zhlZ95vAFByDiP2MCff2a2nyJrINHuK9rSmXlUtRdrZzke9jRpvv5Rpd70NV2-bNnLkm3pH_pydGNV6uvjdY7Z8mi4mL_Hs7fl18jiLtQDZx8ZwJQsCJUVaA-VCQ2aIRCa00EZLyUVVK401VzUq4pCmVciNqCuJdV6LMbsdfEMm7x2ZsnPNp3LfJUJ5aF6uFiUk5aF5gG8GuFNeq9Y4tdWN__-QeYaFgMBdDdzG99b96aLIi4yLIF8PslG2VGsXLJbvHFAAhiF4Ln4A_f5r3w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Response of five vegetable crops to isoxaflutole soil residues</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>BioOne Complete</source><creator>Felix, J ; Doohan, D.J</creator><creatorcontrib>Felix, J ; Doohan, D.J</creatorcontrib><description>Field experiments were conducted in 2001 and 2002 at two sites in Ohio to characterize the effect of isoxaflutole herbicide applied the previous year to field corn on processing tomato, bell pepper, cabbage, snapbean, and cucumber. Isoxaflutole was applied preemergence to field corn in 2001 at 0, 53, 70, 105, and 210 g ai/ha. There were no rotational crop cultivar by herbicide rate interactions at either site. Generally, there was a higher level of visible injury on crops at the Fremont site. Isoxaflutole residues at either site did not affect processing tomato yield. Bell pepper yield was reduced 33% when rotated into 210 g ai/ha rate plots only at Fremont. Snapbean marketable yield was reduced by isoxaflutole carryover from 70 and 210 g ai/ha rates resulting in 0.39 and 0.0 t/ha at Fremont. Similarly, isoxaflutole soil residues from 105 and 210 g ai/ha resulted in 14 and 24% visible injury on cucumber but did not reduce marketable yield. Site differences in soil characteristics and precipitation in the application year may have contributed to observed differences in crop response.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-037X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2740</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1614/WT-04-171R</identifier><identifier>CODEN: WETEE9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America</publisher><subject>Acid soils ; Agricultural soils ; application rate ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cabbages ; Chemical control ; Corn ; Crop rotation ; crop yield ; Cucumbers ; cultivars ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; geographical variation ; herbicide injury ; Herbicides ; isoxaflutole ; Parasitic plants. Weeds ; Peppers ; pesticide residues ; Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection ; plant damage ; precipitation ; soil pollution ; Tillage ; Vegetable crops ; vegetables ; Weeds</subject><ispartof>Weed technology, 2005-04, Vol.19 (2), p.391-396</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2005 The Weed Science Society of America</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c306t-ff2a69e0a635d0e83c07fee373c3cfc6623bdac1d2ad1ae2055b74011cb61d8d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c306t-ff2a69e0a635d0e83c07fee373c3cfc6623bdac1d2ad1ae2055b74011cb61d8d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3989723$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3989723$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=16871930$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Felix, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doohan, D.J</creatorcontrib><title>Response of five vegetable crops to isoxaflutole soil residues</title><title>Weed technology</title><description>Field experiments were conducted in 2001 and 2002 at two sites in Ohio to characterize the effect of isoxaflutole herbicide applied the previous year to field corn on processing tomato, bell pepper, cabbage, snapbean, and cucumber. Isoxaflutole was applied preemergence to field corn in 2001 at 0, 53, 70, 105, and 210 g ai/ha. There were no rotational crop cultivar by herbicide rate interactions at either site. Generally, there was a higher level of visible injury on crops at the Fremont site. Isoxaflutole residues at either site did not affect processing tomato yield. Bell pepper yield was reduced 33% when rotated into 210 g ai/ha rate plots only at Fremont. Snapbean marketable yield was reduced by isoxaflutole carryover from 70 and 210 g ai/ha rates resulting in 0.39 and 0.0 t/ha at Fremont. Similarly, isoxaflutole soil residues from 105 and 210 g ai/ha resulted in 14 and 24% visible injury on cucumber but did not reduce marketable yield. Site differences in soil characteristics and precipitation in the application year may have contributed to observed differences in crop response.</description><subject>Acid soils</subject><subject>Agricultural soils</subject><subject>application rate</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cabbages</subject><subject>Chemical control</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>Crop rotation</subject><subject>crop yield</subject><subject>Cucumbers</subject><subject>cultivars</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>geographical variation</subject><subject>herbicide injury</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>isoxaflutole</subject><subject>Parasitic plants. Weeds</subject><subject>Peppers</subject><subject>pesticide residues</subject><subject>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</subject><subject>plant damage</subject><subject>precipitation</subject><subject>soil pollution</subject><subject>Tillage</subject><subject>Vegetable crops</subject><subject>vegetables</subject><subject>Weeds</subject><issn>0890-037X</issn><issn>1550-2740</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFj81Lw0AQxRdRsFYvngVz8SJEZ3aTTXIRpNQPKAi1pd7CZjNbUmI37KZF_3u3RPQyA_N-83iPsUuEO5SY3K8WMSQxZjg_YiNMU4h5lsAxG0FeQAwi-zhlZ95vAFByDiP2MCff2a2nyJrINHuK9rSmXlUtRdrZzke9jRpvv5Rpd70NV2-bNnLkm3pH_pydGNV6uvjdY7Z8mi4mL_Hs7fl18jiLtQDZx8ZwJQsCJUVaA-VCQ2aIRCa00EZLyUVVK401VzUq4pCmVciNqCuJdV6LMbsdfEMm7x2ZsnPNp3LfJUJ5aF6uFiUk5aF5gG8GuFNeq9Y4tdWN__-QeYaFgMBdDdzG99b96aLIi4yLIF8PslG2VGsXLJbvHFAAhiF4Ln4A_f5r3w</recordid><startdate>20050401</startdate><enddate>20050401</enddate><creator>Felix, J</creator><creator>Doohan, D.J</creator><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050401</creationdate><title>Response of five vegetable crops to isoxaflutole soil residues</title><author>Felix, J ; Doohan, D.J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c306t-ff2a69e0a635d0e83c07fee373c3cfc6623bdac1d2ad1ae2055b74011cb61d8d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Acid soils</topic><topic>Agricultural soils</topic><topic>application rate</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cabbages</topic><topic>Chemical control</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>Crop rotation</topic><topic>crop yield</topic><topic>Cucumbers</topic><topic>cultivars</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>geographical variation</topic><topic>herbicide injury</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>isoxaflutole</topic><topic>Parasitic plants. Weeds</topic><topic>Peppers</topic><topic>pesticide residues</topic><topic>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</topic><topic>plant damage</topic><topic>precipitation</topic><topic>soil pollution</topic><topic>Tillage</topic><topic>Vegetable crops</topic><topic>vegetables</topic><topic>Weeds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Felix, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doohan, D.J</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Felix, J</au><au>Doohan, D.J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Response of five vegetable crops to isoxaflutole soil residues</atitle><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle><date>2005-04-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>391</spage><epage>396</epage><pages>391-396</pages><issn>0890-037X</issn><eissn>1550-2740</eissn><coden>WETEE9</coden><abstract>Field experiments were conducted in 2001 and 2002 at two sites in Ohio to characterize the effect of isoxaflutole herbicide applied the previous year to field corn on processing tomato, bell pepper, cabbage, snapbean, and cucumber. Isoxaflutole was applied preemergence to field corn in 2001 at 0, 53, 70, 105, and 210 g ai/ha. There were no rotational crop cultivar by herbicide rate interactions at either site. Generally, there was a higher level of visible injury on crops at the Fremont site. Isoxaflutole residues at either site did not affect processing tomato yield. Bell pepper yield was reduced 33% when rotated into 210 g ai/ha rate plots only at Fremont. Snapbean marketable yield was reduced by isoxaflutole carryover from 70 and 210 g ai/ha rates resulting in 0.39 and 0.0 t/ha at Fremont. Similarly, isoxaflutole soil residues from 105 and 210 g ai/ha resulted in 14 and 24% visible injury on cucumber but did not reduce marketable yield. Site differences in soil characteristics and precipitation in the application year may have contributed to observed differences in crop response.</abstract><cop>Lawrence, KS</cop><pub>Weed Science Society of America</pub><doi>10.1614/WT-04-171R</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0890-037X
ispartof Weed technology, 2005-04, Vol.19 (2), p.391-396
issn 0890-037X
1550-2740
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1614_WT_04_171R
source Jstor Complete Legacy; BioOne Complete
subjects Acid soils
Agricultural soils
application rate
Biological and medical sciences
Cabbages
Chemical control
Corn
Crop rotation
crop yield
Cucumbers
cultivars
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
geographical variation
herbicide injury
Herbicides
isoxaflutole
Parasitic plants. Weeds
Peppers
pesticide residues
Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection
plant damage
precipitation
soil pollution
Tillage
Vegetable crops
vegetables
Weeds
title Response of five vegetable crops to isoxaflutole soil residues
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T07%3A08%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Response%20of%20five%20vegetable%20crops%20to%20isoxaflutole%20soil%20residues&rft.jtitle=Weed%20technology&rft.au=Felix,%20J&rft.date=2005-04-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=391&rft.epage=396&rft.pages=391-396&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft.coden=WETEE9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1614/WT-04-171R&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E3989723%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=3989723&rfr_iscdi=true