Responses of a Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population Resistant to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides to Foliar-Applied Herbicides

Field and greenhouse experiments were conducted to characterize the response of a waterhemp population from McLean County, IL to foliar-applied 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) –inhibiting herbicides and determine the population's sensitivity to herbicides from other site-of-action gr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Weed technology 2016-03, Vol.30 (1), p.106-115
Hauptverfasser: Hausman, Nicholas E, Tranel, Patrick J, Riechers, Dean E, Hager, Aaron G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 115
container_issue 1
container_start_page 106
container_title Weed technology
container_volume 30
creator Hausman, Nicholas E
Tranel, Patrick J
Riechers, Dean E
Hager, Aaron G
description Field and greenhouse experiments were conducted to characterize the response of a waterhemp population from McLean County, IL to foliar-applied 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) –inhibiting herbicides and determine the population's sensitivity to herbicides from other site-of-action groups. In the field, 10 to 15–cm-tall waterhemp treated with mesotrione at 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione at 92 g ai ha−1, or topromezone at 18 g ai ha−1 had significantly greater biomass (≥ 10%) 14 d after treatment (DAT) than waterhemp harvested the day of herbicide application, indicating growth had occurred following herbicide application. Waterhemp growth stage at the time of herbicide application influenced control. Mesotrione applied at 105 g ha−1 alone or combined with atrazine at 560 g ai ha−1 provided significantly greater waterhemp control (≥ 66%) when applied to small waterhemp plants (2 to 5 cm tall) compared with applications made to plants 5 to 10 or 10 to 15 cm tall. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, or acifluorfen provided greater waterhemp control (≥ 68%) 7 and 14 DAT than mesotrione, dicamba, or 2,4-D. Control of this population with atrazine, chlorimuron, and imazethapyr did not exceed 12%. Results of a greenhouse experiment with waterhemp plants grown from field-collected seed were similar to field data, and confirm the McLean County population was poorly controlled with HPPD, photosystem II, and acetolactate synthase inhibitors. Nomenclature: Acifluorfen; atrazine; chlorimuron; dicamba; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; imazethapyr; lactofen; mesotrione; tembotrione; topramezone; 2,4-D; waterhemp, Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer var. rudis (Sauer) Costea and Tardif AMATU. Experimentos de campo e invernadero fueron realizados para caracterizar la respuesta de una población de Amaranthus tuberculatus proveniente del condado McLean en Illinois, a la aplicación foliar de herbicidas inhibidores de 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) y determinar la sensibilidad de la población a herbicidas de grupos con otros sitios de acción. En el campo, plantas de A. tuberculatus de 10 a 15 cm de altura, tratadas con mesotrione a 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione a 92 g ai ha−1, o topramezone a 18 g ai ha−1, tuvieron una biomasa significativamente mayor (≥10%) 14 d después del tratamiento (DAT) que A. tuberculatus cosechado el día de la aplicación del herbicida, indicando que hubo crecimiento después de la aplicación del herbicida. El estadio de desa
doi_str_mv 10.1614/WT-D-15-00098.1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1766808746</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24855983</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24855983</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b370t-604b23e67fc5cce1fa7b4ea02d6bad6b3953db9a7e182ae9528a3c9ed76711b33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEFrGzEQhUVIIE6ac08FQS7tQclodyXtHk3c1IFATXBwb0Lana1lnNVG0h56zS-PXJfSWw_DDLzvvYFHyEcON1zy6nazZgvGBQOApr7hJ2TGhQBWqApOyQzqBhiU6sc5uYhxB8BlUcCMvD1hHP0QMVLfU0M3JmHY4stIP89fTDBD2k6RpsliaKe9SVP8Qld-PJzODzS7XUyZosnT5Wq1YA_D1lmX3PCTLjFY17ouZ2f13u-dCWw-jnuH3T_iB3LWm33Eqz_7kjzff13fLdnj928Pd_NHZksFiUmobFGiVH0r2hZ5b5St0EDRSWvylI0oO9sYhbwuDDaiqE3ZNtgpqTi3ZXlJro-5Y_CvE8akd34KQ36puZKyhlpVMlO3R6oNPsaAvR6Dy0380hz0oWi9WeuF5kL_Llrz7Ph0dOxi8uEvXlS1EE19-MuOunXeD_jfvHfluor3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1766808746</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Responses of a Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population Resistant to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides to Foliar-Applied Herbicides</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Hausman, Nicholas E ; Tranel, Patrick J ; Riechers, Dean E ; Hager, Aaron G</creator><creatorcontrib>Hausman, Nicholas E ; Tranel, Patrick J ; Riechers, Dean E ; Hager, Aaron G</creatorcontrib><description>Field and greenhouse experiments were conducted to characterize the response of a waterhemp population from McLean County, IL to foliar-applied 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) –inhibiting herbicides and determine the population's sensitivity to herbicides from other site-of-action groups. In the field, 10 to 15–cm-tall waterhemp treated with mesotrione at 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione at 92 g ai ha−1, or topromezone at 18 g ai ha−1 had significantly greater biomass (≥ 10%) 14 d after treatment (DAT) than waterhemp harvested the day of herbicide application, indicating growth had occurred following herbicide application. Waterhemp growth stage at the time of herbicide application influenced control. Mesotrione applied at 105 g ha−1 alone or combined with atrazine at 560 g ai ha−1 provided significantly greater waterhemp control (≥ 66%) when applied to small waterhemp plants (2 to 5 cm tall) compared with applications made to plants 5 to 10 or 10 to 15 cm tall. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, or acifluorfen provided greater waterhemp control (≥ 68%) 7 and 14 DAT than mesotrione, dicamba, or 2,4-D. Control of this population with atrazine, chlorimuron, and imazethapyr did not exceed 12%. Results of a greenhouse experiment with waterhemp plants grown from field-collected seed were similar to field data, and confirm the McLean County population was poorly controlled with HPPD, photosystem II, and acetolactate synthase inhibitors. Nomenclature: Acifluorfen; atrazine; chlorimuron; dicamba; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; imazethapyr; lactofen; mesotrione; tembotrione; topramezone; 2,4-D; waterhemp, Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer var. rudis (Sauer) Costea and Tardif AMATU. Experimentos de campo e invernadero fueron realizados para caracterizar la respuesta de una población de Amaranthus tuberculatus proveniente del condado McLean en Illinois, a la aplicación foliar de herbicidas inhibidores de 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) y determinar la sensibilidad de la población a herbicidas de grupos con otros sitios de acción. En el campo, plantas de A. tuberculatus de 10 a 15 cm de altura, tratadas con mesotrione a 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione a 92 g ai ha−1, o topramezone a 18 g ai ha−1, tuvieron una biomasa significativamente mayor (≥10%) 14 d después del tratamiento (DAT) que A. tuberculatus cosechado el día de la aplicación del herbicida, indicando que hubo crecimiento después de la aplicación del herbicida. El estadio de desarrollo de A. tuberculatus al momento de la aplicación del herbicida influyó en el control. Mesotrione aplicado solo a 105 g ha−1 o combinado con atrazine a 560 g ai ha−1 brindó un control significativamente mayor (≥66%) cuando se aplicó a plantas pequeñas de A. tuberculatus (2 a 5 cm de altura), al compararse con aplicaciones hechas a plantas de 5 a 10 ó 10 a 15 cm de altura. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, o acifluorfen brindaron mayor control de A. tuberculatus (≥68%) 7 y 14 DAT que mesotrione, dicamba, o 2,4-D. El control de esta población con atrazine, chlorimuron, e imazethapyr no excedió 12%. Los resultados de un experimento de invernadero con plantas de A. tuberculatus provenientes de semillas colectadas en campo, fueron similares a los datos de campo, y confirman que la población del condado McLean fue pobremente controlada con herbicidas inhibidores de HPPD, fotosistema II, y acetolactate synthase.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-037X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2740</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1614/WT-D-15-00098.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Lawrence: The Weed Science Society of America</publisher><subject>Atrazine ; Auxins ; Biomass ; Biomass production ; Experiments ; Greenhouses ; Herbicide resistance ; Herbicide resistant weeds ; Herbicides ; Industrial plants ; Plant growth ; Population ; Seeds ; Soybeans ; waterhemp management ; WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS</subject><ispartof>Weed technology, 2016-03, Vol.30 (1), p.106-115</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2016 Weed Science Society of America</rights><rights>Copyright Allen Press Publishing Services Jan-Mar 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b370t-604b23e67fc5cce1fa7b4ea02d6bad6b3953db9a7e182ae9528a3c9ed76711b33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b370t-604b23e67fc5cce1fa7b4ea02d6bad6b3953db9a7e182ae9528a3c9ed76711b33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24855983$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24855983$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27924,27925,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hausman, Nicholas E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tranel, Patrick J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riechers, Dean E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hager, Aaron G</creatorcontrib><title>Responses of a Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population Resistant to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides to Foliar-Applied Herbicides</title><title>Weed technology</title><description>Field and greenhouse experiments were conducted to characterize the response of a waterhemp population from McLean County, IL to foliar-applied 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) –inhibiting herbicides and determine the population's sensitivity to herbicides from other site-of-action groups. In the field, 10 to 15–cm-tall waterhemp treated with mesotrione at 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione at 92 g ai ha−1, or topromezone at 18 g ai ha−1 had significantly greater biomass (≥ 10%) 14 d after treatment (DAT) than waterhemp harvested the day of herbicide application, indicating growth had occurred following herbicide application. Waterhemp growth stage at the time of herbicide application influenced control. Mesotrione applied at 105 g ha−1 alone or combined with atrazine at 560 g ai ha−1 provided significantly greater waterhemp control (≥ 66%) when applied to small waterhemp plants (2 to 5 cm tall) compared with applications made to plants 5 to 10 or 10 to 15 cm tall. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, or acifluorfen provided greater waterhemp control (≥ 68%) 7 and 14 DAT than mesotrione, dicamba, or 2,4-D. Control of this population with atrazine, chlorimuron, and imazethapyr did not exceed 12%. Results of a greenhouse experiment with waterhemp plants grown from field-collected seed were similar to field data, and confirm the McLean County population was poorly controlled with HPPD, photosystem II, and acetolactate synthase inhibitors. Nomenclature: Acifluorfen; atrazine; chlorimuron; dicamba; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; imazethapyr; lactofen; mesotrione; tembotrione; topramezone; 2,4-D; waterhemp, Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer var. rudis (Sauer) Costea and Tardif AMATU. Experimentos de campo e invernadero fueron realizados para caracterizar la respuesta de una población de Amaranthus tuberculatus proveniente del condado McLean en Illinois, a la aplicación foliar de herbicidas inhibidores de 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) y determinar la sensibilidad de la población a herbicidas de grupos con otros sitios de acción. En el campo, plantas de A. tuberculatus de 10 a 15 cm de altura, tratadas con mesotrione a 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione a 92 g ai ha−1, o topramezone a 18 g ai ha−1, tuvieron una biomasa significativamente mayor (≥10%) 14 d después del tratamiento (DAT) que A. tuberculatus cosechado el día de la aplicación del herbicida, indicando que hubo crecimiento después de la aplicación del herbicida. El estadio de desarrollo de A. tuberculatus al momento de la aplicación del herbicida influyó en el control. Mesotrione aplicado solo a 105 g ha−1 o combinado con atrazine a 560 g ai ha−1 brindó un control significativamente mayor (≥66%) cuando se aplicó a plantas pequeñas de A. tuberculatus (2 a 5 cm de altura), al compararse con aplicaciones hechas a plantas de 5 a 10 ó 10 a 15 cm de altura. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, o acifluorfen brindaron mayor control de A. tuberculatus (≥68%) 7 y 14 DAT que mesotrione, dicamba, o 2,4-D. El control de esta población con atrazine, chlorimuron, e imazethapyr no excedió 12%. Los resultados de un experimento de invernadero con plantas de A. tuberculatus provenientes de semillas colectadas en campo, fueron similares a los datos de campo, y confirman que la población del condado McLean fue pobremente controlada con herbicidas inhibidores de HPPD, fotosistema II, y acetolactate synthase.</description><subject>Atrazine</subject><subject>Auxins</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Biomass production</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Greenhouses</subject><subject>Herbicide resistance</subject><subject>Herbicide resistant weeds</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>Industrial plants</subject><subject>Plant growth</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Seeds</subject><subject>Soybeans</subject><subject>waterhemp management</subject><subject>WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS</subject><issn>0890-037X</issn><issn>1550-2740</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEFrGzEQhUVIIE6ac08FQS7tQclodyXtHk3c1IFATXBwb0Lana1lnNVG0h56zS-PXJfSWw_DDLzvvYFHyEcON1zy6nazZgvGBQOApr7hJ2TGhQBWqApOyQzqBhiU6sc5uYhxB8BlUcCMvD1hHP0QMVLfU0M3JmHY4stIP89fTDBD2k6RpsliaKe9SVP8Qld-PJzODzS7XUyZosnT5Wq1YA_D1lmX3PCTLjFY17ouZ2f13u-dCWw-jnuH3T_iB3LWm33Eqz_7kjzff13fLdnj928Pd_NHZksFiUmobFGiVH0r2hZ5b5St0EDRSWvylI0oO9sYhbwuDDaiqE3ZNtgpqTi3ZXlJro-5Y_CvE8akd34KQ36puZKyhlpVMlO3R6oNPsaAvR6Dy0380hz0oWi9WeuF5kL_Llrz7Ph0dOxi8uEvXlS1EE19-MuOunXeD_jfvHfluor3</recordid><startdate>20160301</startdate><enddate>20160301</enddate><creator>Hausman, Nicholas E</creator><creator>Tranel, Patrick J</creator><creator>Riechers, Dean E</creator><creator>Hager, Aaron G</creator><general>The Weed Science Society of America</general><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160301</creationdate><title>Responses of a Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population Resistant to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides to Foliar-Applied Herbicides</title><author>Hausman, Nicholas E ; Tranel, Patrick J ; Riechers, Dean E ; Hager, Aaron G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b370t-604b23e67fc5cce1fa7b4ea02d6bad6b3953db9a7e182ae9528a3c9ed76711b33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Atrazine</topic><topic>Auxins</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Biomass production</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Greenhouses</topic><topic>Herbicide resistance</topic><topic>Herbicide resistant weeds</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>Industrial plants</topic><topic>Plant growth</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Seeds</topic><topic>Soybeans</topic><topic>waterhemp management</topic><topic>WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hausman, Nicholas E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tranel, Patrick J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riechers, Dean E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hager, Aaron G</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hausman, Nicholas E</au><au>Tranel, Patrick J</au><au>Riechers, Dean E</au><au>Hager, Aaron G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Responses of a Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population Resistant to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides to Foliar-Applied Herbicides</atitle><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle><date>2016-03-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>106</spage><epage>115</epage><pages>106-115</pages><issn>0890-037X</issn><eissn>1550-2740</eissn><abstract>Field and greenhouse experiments were conducted to characterize the response of a waterhemp population from McLean County, IL to foliar-applied 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) –inhibiting herbicides and determine the population's sensitivity to herbicides from other site-of-action groups. In the field, 10 to 15–cm-tall waterhemp treated with mesotrione at 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione at 92 g ai ha−1, or topromezone at 18 g ai ha−1 had significantly greater biomass (≥ 10%) 14 d after treatment (DAT) than waterhemp harvested the day of herbicide application, indicating growth had occurred following herbicide application. Waterhemp growth stage at the time of herbicide application influenced control. Mesotrione applied at 105 g ha−1 alone or combined with atrazine at 560 g ai ha−1 provided significantly greater waterhemp control (≥ 66%) when applied to small waterhemp plants (2 to 5 cm tall) compared with applications made to plants 5 to 10 or 10 to 15 cm tall. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, or acifluorfen provided greater waterhemp control (≥ 68%) 7 and 14 DAT than mesotrione, dicamba, or 2,4-D. Control of this population with atrazine, chlorimuron, and imazethapyr did not exceed 12%. Results of a greenhouse experiment with waterhemp plants grown from field-collected seed were similar to field data, and confirm the McLean County population was poorly controlled with HPPD, photosystem II, and acetolactate synthase inhibitors. Nomenclature: Acifluorfen; atrazine; chlorimuron; dicamba; fomesafen; glufosinate; glyphosate; imazethapyr; lactofen; mesotrione; tembotrione; topramezone; 2,4-D; waterhemp, Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer var. rudis (Sauer) Costea and Tardif AMATU. Experimentos de campo e invernadero fueron realizados para caracterizar la respuesta de una población de Amaranthus tuberculatus proveniente del condado McLean en Illinois, a la aplicación foliar de herbicidas inhibidores de 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) y determinar la sensibilidad de la población a herbicidas de grupos con otros sitios de acción. En el campo, plantas de A. tuberculatus de 10 a 15 cm de altura, tratadas con mesotrione a 105 g ai ha−1, tembotrione a 92 g ai ha−1, o topramezone a 18 g ai ha−1, tuvieron una biomasa significativamente mayor (≥10%) 14 d después del tratamiento (DAT) que A. tuberculatus cosechado el día de la aplicación del herbicida, indicando que hubo crecimiento después de la aplicación del herbicida. El estadio de desarrollo de A. tuberculatus al momento de la aplicación del herbicida influyó en el control. Mesotrione aplicado solo a 105 g ha−1 o combinado con atrazine a 560 g ai ha−1 brindó un control significativamente mayor (≥66%) cuando se aplicó a plantas pequeñas de A. tuberculatus (2 a 5 cm de altura), al compararse con aplicaciones hechas a plantas de 5 a 10 ó 10 a 15 cm de altura. Glyphosate, glufosinate, fomesafen, lactofen, o acifluorfen brindaron mayor control de A. tuberculatus (≥68%) 7 y 14 DAT que mesotrione, dicamba, o 2,4-D. El control de esta población con atrazine, chlorimuron, e imazethapyr no excedió 12%. Los resultados de un experimento de invernadero con plantas de A. tuberculatus provenientes de semillas colectadas en campo, fueron similares a los datos de campo, y confirman que la población del condado McLean fue pobremente controlada con herbicidas inhibidores de HPPD, fotosistema II, y acetolactate synthase.</abstract><cop>Lawrence</cop><pub>The Weed Science Society of America</pub><doi>10.1614/WT-D-15-00098.1</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0890-037X
ispartof Weed technology, 2016-03, Vol.30 (1), p.106-115
issn 0890-037X
1550-2740
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1766808746
source JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Atrazine
Auxins
Biomass
Biomass production
Experiments
Greenhouses
Herbicide resistance
Herbicide resistant weeds
Herbicides
Industrial plants
Plant growth
Population
Seeds
Soybeans
waterhemp management
WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS
title Responses of a Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population Resistant to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides to Foliar-Applied Herbicides
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T03%3A00%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Responses%20of%20a%20Waterhemp%20(Amaranthus%20tuberculatus)%20Population%20Resistant%20to%20HPPD-Inhibiting%20Herbicides%20to%20Foliar-Applied%20Herbicides&rft.jtitle=Weed%20technology&rft.au=Hausman,%20Nicholas%20E&rft.date=2016-03-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=106&rft.epage=115&rft.pages=106-115&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft_id=info:doi/10.1614/WT-D-15-00098.1&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E24855983%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1766808746&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24855983&rfr_iscdi=true