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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Weed technology 2005-04, Vol.19 (2), p.391-396 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
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&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 |