Herbicide Application Fact Sheet Effective Double Knock Herbicide Applications

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Herbicide Application Fact Sheet Effective Double Knock Herbicide Applications HERBICIDE APPLICATION NATIONAL FACT SHEET OCTOBER 2019 Effective Double Knock herbicide applications By using a Double Knock approach in fallow paddocks, growers have a reliable technique to control difficult weeds while also assisting in the management of herbicide resistance. What is a Double Knock? Always refer to the registered KEY POINTS A Double Knock (sometimes called product label. sequential applications) is where n Double Knock herbicide growers apply two different weed Why use a Double Knock strategies are critical to reducing control tactics to a single flush of application? weed seed banks. weeds to stop any survivors from the Growers have adopted the Double Knock n May delay the selection for first application setting seed. The approach for the following reasons: glyphosate resistance, where tactics do not need to be herbicides. n to achieve very high levels of weed Double Knock applications are Cultivation, heavy grazing or fire could control that are required to stop seed routinely introduced before also be used as a second knock. set and drive down weed seed banks; resistance is present. The most common Double Knock n to delay the onset of herbicide approach is to apply a systemic resistance; however, this will only n Optimal timing between herbicide (for example Groups A, occur if growers implement the applications is dependent upon I or M are frequently used) when strategy well before resistance the herbicides used and the conditions are favourable for has developed in that field; weeds being targeted. maximum translocation, and then n to provide improved levels of control n Where possible, always target follow it with a contact herbicide of difficult-to-control weeds such small weeds to ensure reliable such as the bipyridyls (Group L). as feathertop Rhodes and windmill performance. Table 1 represents some herbicide grass, fleabane and sowthistle; and n n Attention to herbicide application products used for Double Knock to overcome physical or parameters will improve applications. This is not intended to be biological incompatibility of consistency of results. an exhaustive list of available options. certain herbicide mixtures. TABLE 1 Examples of some herbicides suitable for Double Knock applications. Fleabane at an ideal stage to commence a Herbicide group Active ingredient (primary registered brand name) Double Knock herbicide program. A haloxyfop (Verdict®); propaquizafop (Shogun®); quizalofop (Targa®) G* butafenacil (B-Power®); carfentrazone-ethyl (Hammer®); flumioxazin (Valor®); oxyfluorfen (Goal®); saflufenacil (Sharpen®) I 2,4-D (Amicide®); clopyralid (Lontrel®); dicamba (Cadence®); fluroxypyr (Starane®); fluroxypyr + aminopyralid (Hotshot®); halauxifen + fluroxypyr (Pixxaro®); picloram + 2,4-D (Tordon® 75-D); picloram + triclopyr (Grazon® DS); picloram + 2,4-D + aminopyralid (FallowBoss® Tordon®); picloram + triclopyr + aminopyralid (Grazon® Extra) L* paraquat (Gramoxone®); paraquat + diquat (Spray.Seed®) M glyphosate (Roundup®) N* glufosinate (Basta®) PHOTO: BRUCE WILSON Q amitrole (Amitrole T) Q+L* amitrole + paraquat (Alliance®) *Herbicide groups G, L, N and Q+L have Modes of Action that work by rapid contact activity, so they are normally preferred as the second application when used in a Double Knock program. Haloxyfop (PER12941 – QLD only), quizalofop (PER13460 – NSW only). GRDC Level 4 | 4 National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 | PO Box 5367, Kingston ACT 2604 grdc.com.au 1 T +61 2 6166 4500 F +61 2 6166 4599 E [email protected] PHOTO: MARK CONGREVE, ICAN GRAINS ORANA ALLIANCE PHOTO: MAURIE STREET, Do not let fallow weeds get out of control. In addition to robbing the fallow of soil moisture, weeds such Poor control of fleabane, where boom height was too as these large sowthistle have already started to return seed to the seed bank and will be very difficult to low for full spray coverage of a paraquat application. control, even with a Double Knock application. move easily through the plant. They are How to maximise the Most advisers recommend that if rain is performance of Double therefore best targeted at small plants forecast, it is usually preferable to apply Knock applications only, and they must have a high level the second application a day or two To obtain the high levels of weed of coverage to achieve good results. earlier than the ideal timing, rather than control required in a fallow, the first risk the possibility of being kept off the paddock for an extended period of time herbicide application must be able What is the best due to wet conditions. This is especially to achieve a robust level of control application timing? important when using Group L products in its own right. Therefore weeds It is important to plan to Double Knock. as the second knock, as these cannot be targeted by the first knock should To obtain maximum performance applied by air. ideally be small (pre-tillering for when using two different herbicides grass weeds and still in the rosette as a Double Knock, growers Poor control with the second knock is stage for broadleaf weeds) and not will generally apply the second often due to the weeds becoming too suffering from stress (for example, application before the full effect of large or too stressed or not having frost, too hot, too wet, too dry or the first application is evident. enough photosynthetic material to allow damaged by insects or grazing). Robust Poor results are regularly seen bipyridyl herbicides to work effectively. application rates and good coverage where growers only apply the second If climatic conditions have prevented are required to achieve the maximum knock as an afterthought or when they application of the second application performance on difficult-to-kill weeds. have delayed application until the first for an extended period and plants The second application in a Double application is showing signs of recovery. have started to regrow, then the use Knock program is then applied to further increase levels of control, TABLE 2 Suggested minimum spray volumes for bipyridyl (Group L) ensuring their are no survivors. Often herbicide application. the Double Knock approach will use a systemic herbicide for the first Spray quality Recommended water volume application and a fast-acting contact Fine Avoid using due to the risk of spray drift. herbicide for the second application. Medium Spray volume of 50 to 75L/ha will normally give acceptable results. Where a systemic herbicide is used for the first application, it is important to Use water rates at the lower end of the range on small weeds and in allow a few days for the first herbicide situations where coverage is ideal to move throughout the weed before (i.e. low populations with minimal shading). applying the subsequent contact Coarse Spray volume of 75 to 100L/ha will normally give acceptable results. herbicide that will quickly shut down any further possibility of herbicide Use water rates at the lower end of the range on small weeds and in situations where coverage is ideal translocation. Contact products, such (i.e. low populations with minimal shading). as a Group L bipyridyl herbicide, do not 2 grdc.com.au of a non-chemical Double Knock TABLE 3 Suggested intervals for some common Double Knock tactic, such as cultivation or fire, may herbicide combinations. be more successful in achieving the Second Recommended objective of preventing seed set. Weed First application application timing Comments The interval between herbicide Broadleaf weeds applications will affect the efficacy of the Double Knock. The ideal Most broadleaf weeds glyphosate Group L 7 to 21 days. interval depends upon a number (for example, Optimal timing is paraquat) generally 10 to of factors, which include: 14 days n the type of herbicide being used Difficult to control Group I (for Group L 7 to 21 days. If interval is greater for each application (systemic broadleaf weeds such example, (for example, Optimal timing is than 14 days, use or contact herbicides); as fleabane Amicide® paraquat) with or generally 7 to maximum label rates n the species being targeted (Conyza bonariensis) Advance, without saflufenacil 10 days of Group L herbicide (generally shorter intervals for Tordon®, (Sharpen®) grasses than broadleaf weeds); herbicides) with or without n the size and age of the weeds; and glyphosate n temperature and available moisture. As a general rule, the smaller Difficult to control glyphosate 2,4-D 2 to 4 days Recommended to broadleaf weeds split applications the weed, the less time it will take such as sowthistle/ due to biological for the first systemic herbicide milkthistle incompatibility product to translocate throughout (Sonchus oleraceus) between 2,4-D the plant. Employ intervals at and glyphosate. As the shorter end of the range. both products are systemic, the interval needs to be short. Application parameters when using contact glyphosate Group L 7 to 21 days. Only target small (for example, Optimal timing is rosettes herbicides as the second paraquat) with or generally 7 to knock without saflufenacil 10 days Contact herbicides require excellent (Sharpen®) plant coverage to achieve good results as they are not translocated within the Grass weeds plant. Historically growers achieved Most grass weeds glyphosate Group L 4 to 14 days. This strategy may this coverage by using smaller spray including: Annual (for example, Optimal timing not be effective on ryegrass (Lolium paraquat) is generally 5 to glyphosate resistant droplets in the fine to medium range. rigidum), Barnyard 7 days populations. With the increased focus on spray drift grass, (Echinochloa reduction, fine droplets are no longer colona & E. crus-galli) recommended. When using medium Feathertop Rhodes propaquizafop Group L 7 to 14 days. Target small, actively to coarse spray quality for contact grass (Chloris virgata) (Shogun®) (for example, Optimal timing is growing weeds for herbicides applied as the second paraquat) generally 7 to 3 leaf to early tiller. knock, increase the spray volume to 10 days Refer to Shogun® ensure that there are enough spray label.
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]
  • Herbicide Mode of Action Table High Resistance Risk
    Herbicide Mode of Action Table High resistance risk Chemical family Active constituent (first registered trade name) GROUP 1 Inhibition of acetyl co-enzyme A carboxylase (ACC’ase inhibitors) clodinafop (Topik®), cyhalofop (Agixa®*, Barnstorm®), diclofop (Cheetah® Gold* Decision®*, Hoegrass®), Aryloxyphenoxy- fenoxaprop (Cheetah®, Gold*, Wildcat®), fluazifop propionates (FOPs) (Fusilade®), haloxyfop (Verdict®), propaquizafop (Shogun®), quizalofop (Targa®) Cyclohexanediones (DIMs) butroxydim (Factor®*), clethodim (Select®), profoxydim (Aura®), sethoxydim (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*), tralkoxydim (Achieve®) Phenylpyrazoles (DENs) pinoxaden (Axial®) GROUP 2 Inhibition of acetolactate synthase (ALS inhibitors), acetohydroxyacid synthase (AHAS) Imidazolinones (IMIs) imazamox (Intervix®*, Raptor®), imazapic (Bobcat I-Maxx®*, Flame®, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazapyr (Arsenal Xpress®*, Intervix®*, Lightning®*, Midas®* OnDuty®*), imazethapyr (Lightning®*, Spinnaker®) Pyrimidinyl–thio- bispyribac (Nominee®), pyrithiobac (Staple®) benzoates Sulfonylureas (SUs) azimsulfuron (Gulliver®), bensulfuron (Londax®), chlorsulfuron (Glean®), ethoxysulfuron (Hero®), foramsulfuron (Tribute®), halosulfuron (Sempra®), iodosulfuron (Hussar®), mesosulfuron (Atlantis®), metsulfuron (Ally®, Harmony®* M, Stinger®*, Trounce®*, Ultimate Brushweed®* Herbicide), prosulfuron (Casper®*), rimsulfuron (Titus®), sulfometuron (Oust®, Eucmix Pre Plant®*, Trimac Plus®*), sulfosulfuron (Monza®), thifensulfuron (Harmony®* M), triasulfuron (Logran®, Logran® B-Power®*), tribenuron (Express®),
    [Show full text]
  • Aminopyralid Ecological Risk Assessment Final
    Aminopyralid Ecological Risk Assessment Final U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Washington, D.C. December 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United States Department of the Interior (USDOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administers about 247.9 million acres in 17 western states in the continental United States (U.S.) and Alaska. One of the BLM’s highest priorities is to promote ecosystem health, and one of the greatest obstacles to achieving this goal is the rapid expansion of invasive plants (including noxious weeds and other plants not native to an area) across public lands. These invasive plants can dominate and often cause permanent damage to natural plant communities. If not eradicated or controlled, invasive plants will jeopardize the health of public lands and the activities that occur on them. Herbicides are one method employed by the BLM to control these plants. In 2007, the BLM published the Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (17-States PEIS). The Record of Decision (ROD) for the 17-States PEIS allowed the BLM to use 18 herbicide active ingredients available for a full range of vegetation treatments in 17 western states. In the ROD, the BLM also identified a protocol for identifying, evaluating, and using new herbicide active ingredients. Under the protocol, the BLM would not be allowed to use a new herbicide active ingredient until the agency 1) assessed the hazards and risks from using the new herbicide active ingredient, and 2) prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act to assess the impacts of using new herbicide active ingredient on the natural, cultural, and social environment.
    [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]
  • 2017 Weed Control-Pasture and Range-SDSU
    iGrow.org 2017 Weed Control Pasture and Range Paul O. Johnson | SDSU Extension Weed Science Coordinator David Vos | SDSU Ag Research Manager Jill Alms | SDSU Ag Research Manager Leon J. Wrage | SDSU Distinguished Professor Emeritus Department of Agronomy, Horticulture and Plant Science College of Agriculture & Biological Sciences | agronomy Table of Contents Accurate (metsulfuron) . 13 Latigo (dicamba+2,4-D) . 5 Amber (triasulfuron) . 14 Milestone (aminopyralid) . 8 Banvel (dicamba) . 4 Opensight (aminopyralid+metsulfuron) . 9 Brash (dicamba+2,4-D) . 5 Overdrive (dicamba+diflufenzopyr) . 6 Brush-Rhap (dicamba+2,4-D) . 5 Paraquat (paraquat) . 17 Capstone (aminopyralid+triclopyr) . 10 Para-Shot (paraquat) . 17 Chaparral (aminopyralid+metsulfuron) . 9 Parazone (paraquat) . 17 Chisum (metsulfuron+chlorsulfuron) . 13 PastureGard HL (triclopyr+fluroxypyr) . 11 Cimarron Max (metsulfuron+dicamba + 2,4-D) . 13 Plateau (imazapic) . 12, 16 Cimarron Plus (metsulfuron+chlorsulfuron) . 13 QuinStar (quinclorac) . 15 Cimarron Xtra (metsulfuron+chlorsulfuron) . 14 RangeStar (dicamba+2,4-D) . 5 Clarity (dicamba) . 4 Rave (triasulfuron+dicamba) . .15 Clash (dicamba) . 4 Remedy Ultra (triclopyr) . .11 Clean Slate (clopyralid) . 10 Rifle (dicamba) . 4 Comet (fluroxypyr) . 11 Rifle-D(dicamba+2,4-D) . 5 Commando (clopyralid+2,4-D) . 10 Scorch (dicamba+2,4-D+fluroxypyr) . 6 Crossbow, Crossbow L (triclopyr+2,4-D) . 11 Spike (tebuthiuron) . 15 Crossroad (triclopyr+2,4-D) . 11 Spur (clopyralid) . 10 Curtail (clopyralid+2,4-D) . 10 Sterling Blue (dicamba) . 4 Cutback (clopyralid+2,4-D) . 10. Surmount (picloram+fluroxypyr) . 8 Cyclone (paraquat) . 17 Stinger (clopyralid) . 10 Detail (saflufenacil) . 12 Telar (chlorsulfuron) . 14 Detonate (dicamba) . 4 Tie Down (triasulfuron+dicamba) . 15 Devour (paraquat) . 17 Tordon (picloram) . 6 Diablo (dicamba) .
    [Show full text]
  • Aminopyralid Toxicity and Fate for Application to Sensitive Areas of Rights-Of-Way
    Summary of Aminopyralid Toxicity and Fate for Application to Sensitive Areas of Rights-of-Way The following summary addresses use of the herbicide aminopyralid in Sensitive Areas of Rights-of-Way in Massachusetts. The review was jointly conducted by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) Office of Research and Standards (ORS) and the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (DAR) in accordance with the cooperative agreement issued between the two agencies in 1987 and updated in 2011 pursuant to the provisions of Section 4(1)(E) of 333 CMR 11.00 Rights-of-Way Management Regulations. The conclusions summarized in this memo are based upon several sources of information, including a comprehensive review of this herbicide by the USDA Forest Service (Durkin 2007), scientific documents contained in the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) docket of information for aminopyralid to support pesticide registration decisions and the results of literature searches for recent pertinent studies on this chemical. As aminopyralid is a relatively new product, very little primary information was found in the literature that was pertinent to the scope of this review and therefore the review was primarily based on information provided by the secondary summary documents described above. The purpose of this review is to ascertain the suitability of this product for use within sensitive areas of rights-of-way, based upon consideration of available information on the potential toxicity of the active ingredient aminopyralid as well as its fate and transport in the environment. Aminopyralid (2-pyridine carboxylic acid, 4-amino-3,6-dichloro-2-pyridine carboxylic acid) is a pyridine carboxylic acid herbicide manufactured by Dow AgroSciences LLC (DAS) for use in controlling annual and perennial broadleaf weeds.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Herbicide Groups
    List of herbicides Group Scientific name Trade name clodinafop (Topik®), cyhalofop (Barnstorm®), diclofop (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*, Hoegrass®), fenoxaprop (Cheetah® Gold* , Wildcat®), A Aryloxyphenoxypropionates fluazifop (Fusilade®, Fusion®*), haloxyfop (Verdict®), propaquizafop (Shogun®), quizalofop (Targa®) butroxydim (Falcon®, Fusion®*), clethodim (Select®), profoxydim A Cyclohexanediones (Aura®), sethoxydim (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*), tralkoxydim (Achieve®) A Phenylpyrazoles pinoxaden (Axial®) azimsulfuron (Gulliver®), bensulfuron (Londax®), chlorsulfuron (Glean®), ethoxysulfuron (Hero®), foramsulfuron (Tribute®), halosulfuron (Sempra®), iodosulfuron (Hussar®), mesosulfuron (Atlantis®), metsulfuron (Ally®, Harmony®* M, Stinger®*, Trounce®*, B Sulfonylureas Ultimate Brushweed®* Herbicide), prosulfuron (Casper®*), rimsulfuron (Titus®), sulfometuron (Oust®, Eucmix Pre Plant®*), sulfosulfuron (Monza®), thifensulfuron (Harmony®* M), triasulfuron, (Logran®, Logran® B Power®*), tribenuron (Express®), trifloxysulfuron (Envoke®, Krismat®*) florasulam (Paradigm®*, Vortex®*, X-Pand®*), flumetsulam B Triazolopyrimidines (Broadstrike®), metosulam (Eclipse®), pyroxsulam (Crusader®Rexade®*) imazamox (Intervix®*, Raptor®,), imazapic (Bobcat I-Maxx®*, Flame®, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazapyr (Arsenal Xpress®*, Intervix®*, B Imidazolinones Lightning®*, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazethapyr (Lightning®*, Spinnaker®) B Pyrimidinylthiobenzoates bispyribac (Nominee®), pyrithiobac (Staple®) C Amides: propanil (Stam®) C Benzothiadiazinones: bentazone (Basagran®,
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticide Reference Values Comparison Study
    Is Protecting Aquatic Life from Pesticides Sufficient to Ensure Human Health Protection in Sources of Drinking Water? Kelly D. Moran, Ph.D., TDC Environmental, LLC Bonny Starr, P.E., Starr Consulting October 1, 2018 Abstract California water and pesticides regulators have long operated under the informal assumption that programs to protect aquatic life from currently used pesticides will also ensure the safety of surface water drinKing water sources. This paper examines the scientific validity of this assumption for the agricultural pesticides in California’s Central Valley by comparing water quality regulatory values and benchmarks (“reference values”) for human health with those for aquatic life. Because numeric water quality criteria and other numeric regulatory values established for water quality protection exist for only a handful of currently used pesticides, the comparison relies heavily on US EPA pesticides human health and aquatic life benchmarks. For acute endpoints, both human health and aquatic life reference values typically use a one-day exposure time frame, but chronic endpoint exposure periods differ, with aquatic life exposure periods (4 to 60 days) usually shorter than human health exposure periods (annual). The evaluation looKed in detail at 301 agricultural pesticides with human health reference values. Of these 301 pesticides, only 46% had aquatic life reference values that were equal to or lower than the human health reference value. For 54% of these pesticides, either no aquatic life reference value existed or the aquatic life reference value was higher than the human health reference value. In these cases, aquatic life protection actions would not suffice to protect human health.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Weed Control
    2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual The 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual is published by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, N.C. State University, Raleigh, N.C. These recommendations apply only to North Carolina. They may not be appropriate for conditions in other states and may not comply with laws and regulations outside North Carolina. These recommendations are current as of November 2013. Individuals who use agricultural chemicals are responsible for ensuring that the intended use complies with current regulations and conforms to the product label. Be sure to obtain current information about usage regulations and examine a current product label before applying any chemical. For assistance, contact your county Cooperative Extension agent. The use of brand names and any mention or listing of commercial products or services in this document does not imply endorsement by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service nor discrimination against similar products or services not mentioned. VII — CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual VII — CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL Chemical Weed Control in Field Corn ...................................................................................................... 224 Weed Response to Preemergence Herbicides — Corn ........................................................................... 231 Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides — Corn ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Diagnosing Herbicide Injury in Corn1 Pratap Devkota, Sarah Berger, Jason Ferrell, and Peter Dittmar2
    SS-AGR-365 Diagnosing Herbicide Injury in Corn1 Pratap Devkota, Sarah Berger, Jason Ferrell, and Peter Dittmar2 1. Amino Acid Synthesis Inhibitors Sulfonylureas: Chlorimuron (Classic), Halosulfuron*, Metsulfuron, Nicosulfuron* (Accent), Trifloxysulfuron (ALS Inhibitors) (Envoke) Mechanism of Action: The ALS-inhibiting herbicides block the acetolactate synthase (ALS) enzyme. The ALS enzyme is Pyrimidinylthiobenzoic acid: Pyrithiobac (Staple) responsible for the formation of essential amino acids in the plant (isoleucine, leucine, and valine). Without these amino *indicates herbicide labeled for use in corn acids, proteins (complex molecules that control all plant functions) cannot be formed, and the plant slowly dies. Behavior in Plants: These herbicides are absorbed by roots and leaves and move extensively in the plant. Plants may take two weeks to develop symptoms depending on weather conditions (temperature, soil moisture, etc.) and the overall rate of growth. Symptoms: Pre-emergence injury on corn begins with stunted growth and yellowing in the youngest leaves. Leaves take on a lime or light green color, and leaf veins generally turn red. The yellowing is followed by tissue death some days later. Root malformation can also occur, which causes a “bottle-brush”-look because of very short roots. Herbicides with this mode of action: Imidazolinones: Imazapyr (Arsenal), Imazapic (Cadre), Figure 1. Injury from Imazaquin applied pre-emergence. Note the characteristic red veins. Imazethapyr (Pursuit), Imazaquin (Scepter) Credits: Sarah Berger, UF/IFAS 1. This document is SS-AGR-365, one of a series of the Agronomy Department, UF/IFAS Extension. Original publication date January 2013. Reviewed March 2019. Visit the EDIS website at https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu for the currently supported version of this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 Theinternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) Was Established in 1980
    The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 cation Hazard of Pesticides by and Guidelines to Classi The WHO Recommended Classi The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 TheInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) was established in 1980. The overall objectives of the IPCS are to establish the scientific basis for assessment of the risk to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals, through international peer review processes, as a prerequisite for the promotion of chemical safety, and to provide technical assistance in strengthening national capacities for the sound management of chemicals. This publication was developed in the IOMC context. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or stated policies of individual IOMC Participating Organizations. The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) was established in 1995 following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase international coordination in the field of chemical safety. The Participating Organizations are: FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNITAR, WHO, World Bank and OECD. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment. WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification, 2019 edition ISBN 978-92-4-000566-2 (electronic version) ISBN 978-92-4-000567-9 (print version) ISSN 1684-1042 © World Health Organization 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • An Interactive Database to Explore Herbicide Physicochemical Properties
    Electronic Supplementary Material (ESI) for Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015 Supplementary Information An interactive database to explore herbicide physicochemical properties Michael N. Gandy,a Maxime G. Corral,a,b Joshua S. Mylnea,b* and Keith A. Stubbsa* aSchool of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, 6009, Australia. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] bARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Perth 6009, Australia Materials and Methods Compound selection To gather a comprehensive list of herbicides the literature was initially surveyed and all compounds listed in previous reviews1 were incorporated. Compounds were also sourced from the World of Herbicides provided by Herbicide Resistance Action Committee and produced by Syngenta as well as from the EU pesticide database, Department of Horticulture database (University of Kentucky), Urban Integrated Pest Management database (University of Arizona) and Department of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries (Republic of South Africa) and the Pesticide Manual 2. A textual list of the 334 compound names follows: 2,4,5-T; 2,4-D; 2,4-DB; acetochlor; acifluorfen; aclonifen; acrolein; alachlor; allidochlor; alloxydim; ametryne; amicarbazone; amidosulfuron; aminocyclopyrachlor; aminopyralid; amiprophos-methyl; amitrole; anilofos; asulam; atrazine; azafenidin; azimsulfuron; beflubutamid; benazolin; benazolin-ethyl; benfluralin; benfuresate; bensulfuron-
    [Show full text]