Glufosinate-Tolerant Cotton: Tolerance and Weed
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
GLUFOSINATE-TOLERANT COTTON: TOLERANCE AND WEED MANAGEMENT by LESLI KRISTEN BLAIR, B.S. A THESIS IN CROP SCIENCE Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Approved Accepted Deamof the Graduate School December, 1991 ^^•ft:;^ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1i would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to the members that served on 7 '^ '^* my advisory committee for their time, effort, and assistance. I would like to thank Dr. Dotray for his guidance and direction in the preparation of this thesis; Dr. Keeling for his instruction and support in monitoring these experiments; Dr. Gannaway for his knowledge and assistance in the biotechnology and breeding associated with this project; and Dr. Thompson for her friendship and support in making career decisions. Without all of their guidance, I could never have achieved the goals that we set. I wish to thank all of my fellow graduate students in Weed Science for their help in completing this project. I would especially like to thank Alan Helm for his endless help collecting all of the first year data, Ginger Light for her help in clarifying concepts, and LeAnna Lyon for her help with the last year's project. Their support, friendship, and help on this project have been immeasurable. I would like to express my sincerest thanks to AgrEvo and TxCot for their funding of this research. My thanks also go to the people at the USDA-ARS in Lubbock for all of their help before and after I became involved with this research. I also want to express my gratitude to my parents, Jerry and Carol, for their love and support through the duration of this project. Their support throughout my college career has been invaluable. Besides, I am sure that they never imagined when I began this project that they would have to help me gin or ii m-WIM •."-'• IMg harvest my cotton; however, it is support like this for which I am eternally grateful. I would like to thank my sister, Julie, for all of her patience and support. I would also like to thank my grandparents, Willie, Lois, and Barbara, for their support and belief in me when I decided to change directions with my education. I am extremely fortunate to have such a wonderful family. Without all of their love and support this project would have been unthinkable. Last but certainly not least, I would like to thank my fiancee Chris Kerth for all of his advice. His assistance in preparing this thesis, such as proofreading, double checking my statistics and answering my endless questions, was greatly cherished. His constant love and patience throughout this project were priceless and something that I will treasure forever. I consider myself very fortunate for the opportunities that I have had at Texas Tech. I, also, consider myself very fortunate to have so many wonderful people in my life. I only hope that I can continue to do well and to make you proud. Thank you again for everything. Ill ^^pp)^^pi^^.•J iij L* . • <— v^^---^;^f««« TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii ABSTRACT vi LIST OF TABLES vii CHAPTER I. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 1 Cotton History 1 Weed Control in Cotton 3 Need for Transgenic Cotton 10 BXN™ Cotton 11 Roundup Ready^^^ Cotton 13 Liberty Link™ Corn, Soybeans, and Rice 15 Glufosinate-Tolerant Cotton 19 Literature Cited 21 II. HERBICIDE TOLERANCE OF GLUFOSINATE- TOLERANT COTTON (GOSSYPIUM HIRSUTUM) 27 Abstract 27 Nomenclature 27 Keywords 28 Introduction 28 Materials and Methods 30 Results and Discussion 31 Literature Cited 35 iv III. AMARANTHUS PALMERI and PROBOSCIDEA LOUISIANICA CONTROL IN GLUFOSINATE-TOLERANT COTTON {GOSSYPIUM HIRSUTUM) 45 Abstract 45 Nomenclature 45 Keywords 46 Introduction 46 Materials and Methods 50 Results and Discussion 52 Literature Cited 56 ^fftg^ppmm^-r;^ .' ,1 ..'._ ABSTRACT Field studies conducted in 1997 and 1998 examined plant growth and development, yield and fiber quality of glufosinate-tolerant cotton. Regardless of glufosinate application rate, number of applications, or cotton growth stage at application, no visual injury nor adverse effects on cotton development, yield or fiber quality were observed. Amaranthus palmer! and Proboscidea louisianica control in glufosinate-tolerant cotton using preplant incorporated, preemergence and postemergence-topical herbicide applications with and without cultivation was examined also. Amaranthus palmeri and Proboscidea louisianica was controlled at least 90% when trifluralin preplant incorporated followed by prometryn preemergence followed by glufosinate postemergence was applied. These weeds were controlled 0 to 100% following soil applied herbicides alone and 47 to 99% following glufosinate alone. This research indicated that the transformation events for glufosinate-tolerance in Gossypium hirsutum L. cv. 'Coker 312' were successful and the gene expressing glufosinate-tolerance was expressed throughout the growing season. In addition, Amaranthus palmeri and Proboscidea louisianica control was greater when glufosinate was used in combination with soil applied herbicides as opposed to glufosinate applied alone. VI H&^^yWiWa ixjmJLii^kJx: TT^. CHAPTER I REVIEW OF LITERATURE Cotton Historv When and where cotton was first used as a raw material for textiles is unknown. Evidence from both archaeological and historical data shows that the use of cotton {Gossypium spp.) predates recorded history by several centuries (Supak et al. 1992). In excavations at the Mohenjo-dary in the Indu River Valley in northwestern India, cotton fabrics dating to 3000 BC have been discovered. Also, cotton specimens dating to 2500 BC have been found in the New World in Peru (Supak etal. 1992). For more than 200 years, cotton has played an important role In the United States economy (Supak et al. 1992). It has been a major cash crop and a source of foreign exchange, particularly in the southern and western states of the United States. The development of the cotton gin in 1793 by Eli Whitney supported the growth of textile manufacturing which helped spark the industrial revolution for years to come (Supak et al. 1992). Botanically, cotton is a perennial of tropical and semi-tropical origins. Through natural crossing and by selection, agronomically acceptable cotton types have evolved, which can be grown as day-neutral annuals in temperate zones (Supak et al. 1992). Although cotton is grown commercially in areas with as few as 180 frost-free days (Niles and Feaster 1984), the major production regions typically have about 200 days between killing frosts and a minimum average summer temperature of 25"C (Starbird et al. 1987). Over the years, the cotton industry has continually evolved. In 1991, cotton was grown on over 5 million hectares in the United States (Anderson 1996). The genus Gossypium is relatively large, with 39 reported species, and is very diverse (Fryxell 1984). The two primary types of cotton grown in the United States are the short-staple American Upland (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and the long-staple American Pima (Gossypium barbadense L.). These species are currently grown in four major geographical regions of the United States: the Southeast including the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina; the Midsouth including Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Missouri; the Southwest including Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma; and the West including Arizona and California (Anderson 1996). A strong factor contributing to yield improvements has been the development of chemicals that effectively control many weeds, insects and diseases, and helps condition the crop for timely harvest when using mechanical harvesters. Mechanical devices such as cultivators, rotary weeders, flame cultivators and even mechanical choppers were also helpful in eliminating many weeds, but did not provide adequate control of weeds within the cotton drill row (Brown and Ware 1958). Herbicide usage in cotton began to gain some farm acceptance in the 1950's and constituted the primary means of weed control by the 1960's. After all, "Cotton is a very jealous plant and will not struggle with weeds or grass for a division of the fertilizing properties of the soil. It will not ^<«i^^r~ 1^1 J J .. grow unless kept very clean and the full energy of the soil is kept concentrated on it alone" (Lyman 1866, p. 210). Weed Control in Cotton Introduction. Weeds are a major problem in cotton production (Holt and Orcutt 1991). Weed control requires considerable crop managerial skills and represents major expenditures in the production of the crop. At least 12 billion dollars annually are lost due to weeds growing with crops in the United States (Holt and Orcutt 1991). Also, farmers spend about 3.6 billion dollars on chemical weed control and about 2.6 billion dollars on cultural, ecological, and biological methods for achieving weed control each year (Tsaftaris 1996), Thus, weeds cost farmers approximately 18 billion dollars annually on crop losses and weed control. When cotton first emerges, it does not compete well with weeds because it grows slowly during the first few weeks after planting, particulariy during cool weather or under other adverse growing conditions. It is only after the cotton plant has become well established and soil temperature is greater than 24°C that the plant becomes relatively competitive. During the first 9 to 10 weeks after planting, control of weeds is a necessity for the normal development of cotton (Buchanan and Burns 1970). Losses in cotton due to weeds can be severe because of competition for water, nutrients, and sunlight and in some cases allopathic weed-crop interaction may inhibit growth and reduce yields and lint quality (Frans and Chandler 1989). Also, weeds can serve as hosts for ^V^WPII I JUI JU«VWVVSV« J UVJUt. - numerous pests, so weed control can reduce losses due to insects and diseases (Ridgway et al. 1984). Weeds can be defined as those plants that seriously interfere with other plants that humans grow for food, feed, or fiber.