DOCSLIB.ORG

Amaranthus Palmeri) in 2,4-D , Glufosinate-, and Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Amaranthus Palmeri) in 2,4-D , Glufosinate-, and Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean Weed Technology Management of glyphosate-resistant Palmer – www.cambridge.org/wet amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in 2,4-D , glufosinate-, and glyphosate-resistant soybean 1 2 3 4 Research Article Chandrima Shyam , Parminder S. Chahal , Amit J. Jhala and Mithila Jugulam 1 2 Cite this article: Shyam C, Chahal PS, Jhala AJ, Graduate Student, Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA; Postdoctoral Research 3 Jugulam M (2021) Management of glyphosate- Associate, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA; Associate resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus Professor, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA and palmeri) in 2,4-D–, glufosinate-, and 4Professor, Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA glyphosate-resistant soybean. Weed Technol. 35:136–143. doi: 10.1017/wet.2020.91 Abstract Received: 7 May 2020 Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth is a problematic, annual broadleaf weed in Revised: 7 July 2020 soybean production fields in Nebraska and many other states in the United States. Soybean Accepted: 29 July 2020 TM First published online: 18 August 2020 resistant to 2,4-D, glyphosate, and glufosinate (Enlist E3 ) has been developed and was first grown commercially in 2019. The objectives of this research were to evaluate the effect of herbicide Associate Editor: programs applied PRE, PRE followed by (fb) late-POST (LPOST), and early-POST (EPOST) fb Kevin Bradley, University of Missouri LPOST on GR Palmer amaranth control, density, and biomass reduction, soybean injury, and ’ Nomenclature: yield. Field experiments were conducted near Carleton, NE, in 2018, and 2019 in a grower sfield 2,4-D chlorimuron-ethyl; cloransulam-methyl; infested with GR Palmer amaranth in 2,4-D–, glyphosate-, and glufosinate-resistant soybean. flumioxazin; glufosinate; glyphosate; Sulfentrazone þ cloransulam-methyl, imazethapyr þ saflufenacil þ pyroxasulfone, and chlor- imazethapyr; metribuzin; pyroxasulfone; imuron ethyl þ flumioxazin þ metribuzin applied PRE provided 84% to 97% control of GR saflufenacil; sulfentrazone; Palmer amaranth; Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson; soybean; Palmer amaranth compared with the nontreated control 14 d after PRE. Averaged across Glycine max (L.) Merr. herbicide programs, PRE fb 2,4-D and/or glufosinate, and sequential application of 2,4-D or glufosinate applied EPOST fb LPOST resulted in 92% and 88% control of GR Palmer amaranth, Keywords: respectively, compared with 62% control with PRE-only programs 14 d after LPOST. Biomass reduction; density reduction; early- Reductions in Palmer amaranth biomass followed the same trend; however, Palmer amaranth POST followed by late-POST; PRE followed by late-POST; soybean yield density was reduced 98% in EPOST fb LPOST programs compared with 91% reduction in PRE fb LPOST and 76% reduction in PRE-only programs. PRE fb LPOST and EPOST fb LPOST Author for correspondence: programs resulted in an average soybean yield of 4,478 and 4,706 kg ha−1, respectively, com- Mithila Jugulam, Professor, Department of pared with 3,043 kg ha−1 in PRE-only programs. Herbicide programs evaluated in this study Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66502. Email: [email protected] resulted in no soybean injury. The results of this research illustrate that herbicide programs are or Amit J. Jhala, Associate Professor, available for the management of GR Palmer amaranth in 2,4-D–, glyphosate-, and glufosinate- Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, resistant soybean. University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68583-0915. Email: [email protected] Introduction Commercialization of herbicide-resistant (HR) crop technology in the late 1990s led to a turning point in the history of weed management (Reddy and Nandula 2012). Glyphosate-resistant (GR) soybean and corn (Zea mays L.) were rapidly adopted by growers in the United States because of its ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and broad-spectrum weed control (Green and Owen 2011). Currently, HR soybean constitutes 94% of the total soybean planted in the United States (USDA 2019). HR soybean including a single trait such as glyphosate resistance or glufosinate resistance, or multiple HR traits such as glyphosate and dicamba resistance are grown in the United States. The cultivation and widespread adoption of GR corn and soybean after their com- mercialization reduced the use of residual herbicides because of flexibility in application timing, excellent weed control, and wide margin of crop safety with glyphosate (Green 2012); however, repeated application of glyphosate resulted in the evolution of GR weeds (Heap and Duke 2018). Currently, 48 weed species have been reported to have evolved resistance to glyphosate globally, including 17 species in the United States (Heap 2020). Native to the southwestern United States, Palmer amaranth has been ranked as the most troublesome weed in agronomic cropping systems in the United States in a survey conducted © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge by the Weed Science Society of America (Van Wychen 2019). It is also one of the most eco- University Press on behalf of Weed Science nomically important weeds in agronomic crops in the United States (Beckie 2011; Chahal Society of America. et al. 2018). Palmer amaranth is a prolific seed producer (Keeley et al. 1987) and can survive and produce a high amount of seeds even under moisture-stressed situations (Chahal et al. 2018). It has a high photosynthetic rate, resulting in a fast growth rate and considerable biomass accumulation compared with other Amaranthus species (Ehleringer 1983; Jha and Norsworthy 2009), along with continuous emergence throughout the growing season, leading to season-long crop interference (Jha and Norsworthy 2009). In addition to the aforementioned weedy Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 97.98.140.109, on 29 Jan 2021 at 14:08:55, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/wet.2020.91 Weed Technology 137 characteristics, the evolution of herbicide resistance in Palmer Corteva™ Agriscience and was commercialized in 2019 in the amaranth has made control of this weed especially challenging United States. However, little scientific literature exists pertaining in cotton (Gossypium sp. L.) and soybean. GR Palmer amaranth to the most effective herbicide programs for managing GR Palmer was first reported in Georgia (Culpepper et al. 2006), and since amaranth in this new soybean production system. Therefore, the then, 27 other U.S. states have documented the presence of GR objectives of this research were to investigate and compare the Palmer amaranth (Heap 2020). effect of three preformulated herbicide mixtures applied PRE alone Glyphosate is a systemic, nonselective POST herbicide that tar- or fb a late-POST (LPOST) application of either 2,4-D or glufosi- gets 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) in the nate or both and sequential applications (early-POST [EPOST] fb chloroplast of sensitive plants, causing inhibition of aromatic LPOST) of 2,4-D or glufosinate on Palmer amaranth density, bio- amino acid production (Bentley 1990). Current mechanisms of mass, crop injury, and yield in a multiyear field study in Nebraska. target-site resistance to glyphosate in Palmer amaranth have been due to either mutation in the EPSPS gene, the molecular target of glyphosate (Dominguez-Valenzuela et al. 2017), or overamplifica- Materials and Methods tion and expression of the EPSPS gene (Chahal et al. 2017; Gaines Site Description et al. 2010; Koo et al. 2018). Reduced glyphosate absorption and ’ translocation have also been reported to impart nontarget-site resis- Field experiments were conducted in 2018 and 2019 in a grower s tance to glyphosate in Palmer amaranth (Dominguez-Valenzuela field infested with GR Palmer amaranth in Thayer County, et al. 2017; Nandula et al. 2012). Considering the extent of GR Carleton, NE (40.30°N, 97.67°E) (Chahal et al. 2017). The field Palmer amaranth populations, effective management programs was rain fed without supplementary irrigation. Palmer amaranth in soybean should focus on methods that reduce survival, seed pro- was the predominant weed species at the research site. The soil duction, and transfer of herbicide-resistance alleles. at the experimental site was silt loam with 63% silt, 19% sand, Palmer amaranth interference can cause substantial yield losses 18% clay, 2.63% organic matter, and 4.8 pH. The previous crop in agronomic crops. For example, a Palmer amaranth density of at the site was no-till soybean. The experiment was arranged in 3 plants m−2 caused 60% yield loss in soybean in Arkansas a randomized complete block design with four replications. Individual plots were 3 m wide (four soybean rows spaced (Klingaman and Oliver 1994), and Bensch et al. (2003) reported – 79% soybean yield loss at a density of 8 plants m−2 in Kansas. 0.76 m apart) and 9 m long. Glyphosate-, 2,4-D , and glufosinate- resistant soybean with 2.5 maturity group was no-till planted at a Early emergence (0-1 wk after crop emergence) and establishment −1 of Palmer amaranth reduce soybean yield compared with late rate of 322,000 seeds ha at a depth of 3 cm on May 10, 2018, and emergence (2-8 wk after crop emergence) (Korres et al. 2019). May 6, 2019. Van Acker et al. (1993) reported the critical period of weed control in soybean ranged from the second soybean-node growth stage Herbicide Treatments (V2) to the beginning pod growth stage (R3). However, in a recent Herbicide programs included PRE, PRE fb LPOST, and EPOST fb multilocation and multiyear study conducted in Nebraska, the LPOST applications with a total of 15 treatments, including a non- critical period of weed removal in soybean was delayed from treated control (Table 1). Herbicides were applied using a – – þ V1 V2 to V4 R5 using PRE herbicides such as saflufenacil CO -pressurized backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 200 L ha−1 þ þ 2 imazethapyr pyroxasulfone and saflufenacil imazethapyr at 210 kPa equipped with a 2-m wide spray boom equipped with (Knezevic et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid
    2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid IUPAC (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid name 2,4-D Other hedonal names trinoxol Identifiers CAS [94-75-7] number SMILES OC(COC1=CC=C(Cl)C=C1Cl)=O ChemSpider 1441 ID Properties Molecular C H Cl O formula 8 6 2 3 Molar mass 221.04 g mol−1 Appearance white to yellow powder Melting point 140.5 °C (413.5 K) Boiling 160 °C (0.4 mm Hg) point Solubility in 900 mg/L (25 °C) water Related compounds Related 2,4,5-T, Dichlorprop compounds Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C, 100 kPa) 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is a common systemic herbicide used in the control of broadleaf weeds. It is the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the third most commonly used in North America.[1] 2,4-D is also an important synthetic auxin, often used in laboratories for plant research and as a supplement in plant cell culture media such as MS medium. History 2,4-D was developed during World War II by a British team at Rothamsted Experimental Station, under the leadership of Judah Hirsch Quastel, aiming to increase crop yields for a nation at war.[citation needed] When it was commercially released in 1946, it became the first successful selective herbicide and allowed for greatly enhanced weed control in wheat, maize (corn), rice, and similar cereal grass crop, because it only kills dicots, leaving behind monocots. Mechanism of herbicide action 2,4-D is a synthetic auxin, which is a class of plant growth regulators.
    [Show full text]
  • View Science Comments I
    March 11, 2014 Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road, Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737- 1238 RE: Docket No. APHIS-2013-0042 Comments to USDA APHIS on Dow AgroSciences LLC; Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Determination of Nonregulated Status of Herbicide Resistant Corn and Soybeans Center for Food Safety, Science Comments I By: Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst Introduction These comments submitted by Center for Food Safety are one of two sets of science comments from our organization. Legal comments are also being submitted. The references cited have been uploaded as supporting materials. The filenames for these documents match the citations in the text, and are all incorporated as (e.g. Benbrook 2012). Full citations are included at the end. These comments supplement and incorporate by reference our earlier two rounds of comments on the draft Environmental Assessments for event DAS-68416-4 (Enlist soybeans) and event DAS-40278-9 (Enlist corn), as well as all the references submitted previously. The previous CFS science comments on the draft EAs have been resubmitted as Appendix B, and will be cited in the text as “CFS Science Soy”, “CFS Science Corn I”, and “CFS Science Corn II.” References to the Appendix of the EIS cite the Appendix number followed by a hyphen then the page number (e.g. 4-29). Only references that are new to these draft EIS comments are listed in the References section at the end. Executive Summary The growing unsustainability of U.S. agriculture U.S. agriculture is becoming progressively less sustainable.
    [Show full text]
  • Glufosinate (Ignite): a New Promising Postemergence Herbicide for Citrus
    Glirus Section Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 100:58-61. 1987. GLUFOSINATE (IGNITE): A NEW PROMISING POSTEMERGENCE HERBICIDE FOR CITRUS Megh Singh and D. P. H. Tucker ported that the pattern of plant responses to glufosinate University of Florida, IFAS and glyphosate was distinctly different. Glufosinate has li Citrus Research and Education Center mited translocation to rootstocks and rhizomes, etc. of per 700 Experiment Station Road ennial weeds as compared to glyphosate. Therefore, even Lake Alfred, FL 33850 tual regrowth from these plant parts will occur. Glufosinate may be a useful herbicide for weed control Additional index words. Basta, Buster, Conquest, Finale, in no-tillage systems, for orchards and vineyards, and for HOE-00661, HOE-39866, glufosinate-ammonium. general weed control in rangeland and non-cropland situ ations. Kapusta (6) reported effective control of several weed species using glufosinate in no-till fields. Glufosinate Abstract. Glufosinate [ammonium (3-amino-3-carboxypropyl) at 1.0 to 2.0 kg/ha provided effective control of several methyl phosphinate] is a non-selective postemergence her annual and perennial weeds in vineyards, citrus, and other bicide for the control of a broad spectrum of grasses and fruit orchards as well as in uncultivated areas (3). Lawson broad leaf weed species. It is known worldwide by various names such as Basta, Buster, Conquest, and Finale. Glufosi and Wiseman (9) reported satisfactory runner control in nate controls both annual and perennial weeds. The activity strawberries without the adverse effect on the growth and of glufosinate is somewhat slower than paraquat but dis yield of the crop.
    [Show full text]
  • Interaction of 2,4-D Or Dicamba with Glufosinate for Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed (Ambrosia Trifida L.) in Glufosinate-Resistant Maize (Zea Mays L.)
    fpls-08-01207 July 6, 2017 Time: 18:18 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 10 July 2017 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01207 Interaction of 2,4-D or Dicamba with Glufosinate for Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed (Ambrosia trifida L.) in Glufosinate-Resistant Maize (Zea mays L.) Zahoor A. Ganie and Amit J. Jhala* Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, United States Glyphosate-resistant (GR) giant ragweed is a problematic broadleaf weed in crops including maize and soybean in the Midwestern United States. Commercialization of crops with 2,4-D or dicamba and glufosinate resistance will allow post-emergence (POST) applications of these herbicides. Therefore, information is needed on how Edited by: 2,4-D/dicamba will interact with glufosinate in various rate combinations. The objectives Ilias Travlos, Agricultural University of Athens, of this study were to evaluate the interaction of glufosinate plus 2,4-D and/or dicamba for Greece control of GR giant ragweed, and to determine their effect on GR giant ragweed density, Reviewed by: biomass, maize injury, and yield. Field experiments were conducted in 2013 and 2014 Milena S. Simic, Maize Research Institute Zemun Polje, in a field infested with GR giant ragweed in Nebraska, United States. The treatments − Serbia included POST applications of glufosinate (450 or 590 g ai ha 1), 2,4-D, or dicamba Yosra Menchari, at 280 or 560 g ae ha−1 applied alone and in tank-mixtures in glufosinate-resistant University of Jendouba, Tunisia maize. The results showed that dicamba applied alone resulted in 56 to 62% and *Correspondence: Amit J.
    [Show full text]
  • PPO2 Mutations in Amaranthus Palmeri:Implications on Cross-Resistance
    agriculture Article PPO2 Mutations in Amaranthus palmeri: Implications on Cross-Resistance Pâmela Carvalho-Moore 1,2 , Gulab Rangani 1, James Heiser 3, Douglas Findley 4, Steven J. Bowe 4 and Nilda Roma-Burgos 1,* 1 Department of Crop, Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72704, USA; [email protected] (P.C.-M.); [email protected] (G.R.) 2 Former Cell and Molecular Biology Program, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72704, USA 3 Fisher Delta Research Center, College of Agriculture, University of Missouri, Portageville, MO 63873, USA; [email protected] 4 BASF Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA; douglas.fi[email protected] (D.F.); [email protected] (S.J.B.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: In Arkansas, resistance to protoporphyrinogen IX oxidase (PPO)-inhibiting herbicides in Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. is mainly due to target site mutations. Although A. palmeri PPO-mutations are well investigated, the cross-resistance that each ppo mutant endows to weed populations is not yet well understood. We aimed to evaluate the response of PPO-resistant A. palmeri accessions, harboring the ppo2 mutations DG210 and G399A, to multiple PPO-inhibiting herbicides. Six resistant and one susceptible field accessions were subjected to a dose–response assay with fomesafen, and selected survivors from different fomesafen doses were genotyped to characterize the mutation profile. The level of resistance to fomesafen was determined and a cross-resistance assay was conducted with 1 Citation: Carvalho-Moore, P.; and 2 times the labeled doses of selected PPO herbicides. The accession with higher predicted dose Rangani, G.; Heiser, J.; Findley, D.; to control 50% of the population (ED50) had a higher frequency of DG210-homozygous survivors.
    [Show full text]
  • Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Common Waterhemp (Amaranthus Rudis)In Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean
    Weed Technology 2017 31:32–45 © Weed Science Society of America, 2017 Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Common Waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis)in Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean Amit J. Jhala, Lowell D. Sandell, Debalin Sarangi, Greg R. Kruger, and Steven Z. Knezevic* Glyphosate-resistant (GR) common waterhemp has become a significant problem weed in Nebraska and several Midwestern states. Several populations of GR common waterhemp are also resistant to acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides, making them difficult to control with POST herbicides in GR soybean. Glufosinate-resistant (GFR) soybean is an alternate system for controlling GR common waterhemp, justifying the need for evaluating glufosinate-based herbicide programs. The objectives of this study were to compare POST-only herbicide programs (including one-pass and two-pass POST programs) with PRE followed by (fb) POST herbicide programs for control of GR common waterhemp in GFR soybean and their effect on common waterhemp density, biomass, and soybean yield. Field experiments were conducted in 2013 and 2014 near Fremont, NE in a grower’s field infested with GR common waterhemp. Glufosinate applied early- and late-POST provided 76% control of GR common waterhemp at 14 d after late-POST (DALPOST) compared with 93% control with a PRE fb POST program when averaged across treatments. The PRE application of chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron plus flumioxazin, S-metolachlor plus fomesafen or metribuzin, saflufenacil plus dimethenamid-P fb glufosinate provided ≥95% control of common waterhemp throughout the ≤ −2 ≥ growing season, reduced common waterhemp− density to 2.0 plants m ,caused 94% biomass reduction, and led to 1,984 to 2,210 kg ha 1 soybean yield.
    [Show full text]
  • CFS Science Comments I
    April 27, 2012 Docket No. APHIS–2010–0103 Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD, APHIS Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 Comments to USDA APHIS on Environmental Assessment for the Determination of Nonregulated Status of Herbicide-Tolerant DAS-40278-9 Corn, Zea mays, Event DAS- 40278-9 Center for Food Safety, Science Comments I – By Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst These comments submitted by Center for Food Safety are one of three sets of comments from our organization. Legal comments and a second set of science comments are also being submitted. The references cited have been uploaded as supporting materials. The filenames for these documents match the citations in the text, and are all incorporated as (e.g. Benbrook 2012). Full citations are included at the end of each section. THE IMPACT OF DAS-40278-9 ON CORN HERBICIDE USE Summary of herbicide use Dow’s DAS-402787-9 corn is genetically engineered for resistance to 2,4-D and quizalofop, and if deregulated would be marketed with additional resistance to glyphosate and likely glufosinate – fostering greater use of three to four herbicide classes. APHIS must assess DAS-42078-9 as Dow intends it to be used, as a weed control system. DAS-40278-9 eliminates the risk of crop injury that currently limits 2,4-D use on corn, and is thus reasonably projected to trigger an up to 30-fold increase in the use of this toxic herbicide on corn, equivalent to a four-fold increase in overall agricultural use of 2,4-D, by the end of the decade.
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES
    US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES Note: Pesticide tolerance information is updated in the Code of Federal Regulations on a weekly basis. EPA plans to update these indexes biannually. These indexes are current as of the date indicated in the pdf file. For the latest information on pesticide tolerances, please check the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/40cfrv23_07.html 1 40 CFR Type Family Common name CAS Number PC code 180.163 Acaricide bridged diphenyl Dicofol (1,1-Bis(chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichloroethanol) 115-32-2 10501 180.198 Acaricide phosphonate Trichlorfon 52-68-6 57901 180.259 Acaricide sulfite ester Propargite 2312-35-8 97601 180.446 Acaricide tetrazine Clofentezine 74115-24-5 125501 180.448 Acaricide thiazolidine Hexythiazox 78587-05-0 128849 180.517 Acaricide phenylpyrazole Fipronil 120068-37-3 129121 180.566 Acaricide pyrazole Fenpyroximate 134098-61-6 129131 180.572 Acaricide carbazate Bifenazate 149877-41-8 586 180.593 Acaricide unclassified Etoxazole 153233-91-1 107091 180.599 Acaricide unclassified Acequinocyl 57960-19-7 6329 180.341 Acaricide, fungicide dinitrophenol Dinocap (2, 4-Dinitro-6-octylphenyl crotonate and 2,6-dinitro-4- 39300-45-3 36001 octylphenyl crotonate} 180.111 Acaricide, insecticide organophosphorus Malathion 121-75-5 57701 180.182 Acaricide, insecticide cyclodiene Endosulfan 115-29-7 79401
    [Show full text]
  • A New Addition to the Alien Flora of Tunisia, Amaranthus Spinosus L. (Amaranthaceae S.L.), with Notes on A
    Acta Bot. Croat. 78 (1), 91–94, 2019 CODEN: ABCRA 25 DOI: 10.2478/botcro-2018-0009 ISSN 0365-0588 eISSN 1847-8476 Short communication A new addition to the alien flora of Tunisia, Amaranthus spinosus L. (Amaranthaceae s.l.), with notes on A. diacanthus Raf. Duilio Iamonico1*, Ridha El Mokni2,3 1 University of Rome Sapienza, Department PDTA, Section Environment and Landscape, via Flaminia 72, 00196 Rome, Italy 2 Laboratory of Botany and Plant Ecology, Faculty of Sciences of Bizerta, University of Carthage, Jarzouna-7021, Bizerta, Tunisia 3 Faculty of Pharmacy of Monastir, University of Monastir, BP. N° 207, Avenue Avicenna, Monastir-5000, Tunisia Abstract – Amaranthus spinosus L. (Amaranthaceae s.l.), a species native to the Neotropics, has been found in four localities (Bizerta, Bir Bouregba, Hammamet, and Nabeul) of N. Tunisia. Our discovery represents the first record at national level, and the second one for N. Africa. Morphological characters and ecological data are given. Nomencla- tural notes are provided for the name A. diacanthus, which was regarded by some authors as heterotypic synonym of A. spinosus. A neotype is designated in the present paper based on a specimen preserved at LSU. Keywords: alien species, Amaranthus, neophyte, typification Introduction The genus Amaranthus L. (Amaranthaceae Juss.) com- Amaranthus spinosus, which is recorded in many countries prises about 70 mostly annual, monoecious and dioecious of central and southern parts of the continent, while in the species, of which approximately 40 are native in America north it occurs only in Egypt. As part of an ongoing no- (see e.g., Costea et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Identification, Phylogenetic Analysis and Detection of Herbicide
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Species identifcation, phylogenetic analysis and detection of herbicide‑resistant biotypes of Amaranthus based on ALS and ITS Han Xu1*, Xubin Pan1, Cong Wang1, Yan Chen1, Ke Chen1, Shuifang Zhu1 & Rieks D. van Klinken2 The taxonomically challenging genus Amaranthus (Family Amaranthaceae) includes important agricultural weed species that are being spread globally as grain contaminants. We hypothesized that the ALS gene will help resolve these taxonomic challenges and identify potentially harmful resistant biotypes. We obtained 153 samples representing 26 species from three Amaranthus subgenera and included in that incorporated ITS, ALS (domains C, A and D) and ALS (domains B and E) sequences. Subgen. Albersia was well supported, but subgen. Amaranthus and subgen. Acnida were not. Amaranthus tuberculatus, A. palmeri and A. spinosus all showed diferent genetic structuring. Unique SNPs in ALS ofered reliable diagnostics for most of the sampled Amaranthus species. Resistant ALS alleles were detected in sixteen A. tuberculatus samples (55.2%), eight A. palmeri (27.6%) and one A. arenicola (100%). These involved Ala122Asn, Pro197Ser/Thr/Ile, Trp574Leu, and Ser653Thr/Asn/Lys substitutions, with Ala122Asn, Pro197Thr/Ile and Ser653Lys being reported in Amaranthus for the frst time. Moreover, diferent resistant mutations were present in diferent A. tuberculatus populations. In conclusion, the ALS gene is important for species identifcation, investigating population genetic diversity and understanding resistant evolution within the genus Amaranthus. Amaranthus (Family Amaranthaceae) is a cosmopolitan genus with at least 70 species, including ancient culti- vated plants such as the grains Amaranthus cruentus, A. caudatus and A. hypochondriacus, the leafy vegetable and ornamental A.
    [Show full text]
  • Palmer Amaranth Amaranthus Palmeri Reviewer Affiliation/Organization Date (Mm/Dd/Yyyy) Roger Becker University of Minnesota 8/08/2014
    MN NWAC Risk Common Name Latin Name Assessment Worksheet (04-2011) Palmer Amaranth Amaranthus palmeri Reviewer Affiliation/Organization Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Roger Becker University of Minnesota 8/08/2014 Box Question Answer Outcome 1 Is the plant species or genotype non-native to Yes, non-native in Minnesota. Is native to the southern Yes. Go to box 3. Minnesota? U.S. and Mexico; native to North America. 2 Does the plant species pose significant human or livestock concerns or has the potential to significantly harm agricultural production? A. Does the plant have toxic qualities that pose a significant risk to livestock, wildlife, or people? B. Does the plant cause significant financial losses associated with decreased yields, reduced quality, or increased production costs? 3 Is the plant species, or a related species, Yes. Palmer amaranth is a severe problem in summer Yes. Go to Box 6. documented as being a problem elsewhere? climates similar to Minnesota. (see Hager 2013; Hartzler 2014a; and Legleiter and Johnson 2013). It has not been documented as a problem in states with winter climates similar to Minnesota, but it is anticipated it will do very well since it is an annual with a seedbank and seedlings that have performed well in states with freezing winter temperatures, and portions of the growing season in Minnesota are similar to locations further south where Palmer amaranth is a severe problem. 4 Is the plant species’ life history & Growth Yes, documented in disparate articles, but oddly no Blue text is provided as requirements understood? classic biology of Palmer amaranth review article additional information could be found.
    [Show full text]