DOCSLIB.ORG

WO 2014/132141 A2 4 September 2014 (04.09.2014) P O P C T

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
WO 2014/132141 A2 4 September 2014 (04.09.2014) P O P C T (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date WO 2014/132141 A2 4 September 2014 (04.09.2014) P O P C T (51) International Patent Classification: Not classified KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LT, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, MG, MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, NO, NZ, (21) International Application Number: OM, PA, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, QA, RO, RS, RU, RW, SA, PCT/IB20 14/00 1106 SC, SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, (22) International Filing Date: TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, 3 1 January 2014 (3 1.01 .2014) ZW. (25) Filing Language: English (84) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every kind of regional protection available): ARIPO (BW, GH, (26) Publication Language: English GM, KE, LR, LS, MW, MZ, NA, RW, SD, SL, SZ, TZ, (30) Priority Data: UG, ZM, ZW), Eurasian (AM, AZ, BY, KG, KZ, RU, TJ, 61/759,099 31 January 2013 (3 1.01.2013) US TM), European (AL, AT, BE, BG, CH, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HR, HU, IE, IS, IT, LT, LU, LV, (71) Applicants: BASF SE [DE/DE]; Carl-Bosch-Strasse 38, MC, MK, MT, NL, NO, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SI, SK, SM, 67056 Ludwigshafen am Rhein (DE). UNIVERSITY OF TR), OAPI (BF, BJ, CF, CG, CI, CM, GA, GN, GQ, GW, GUELPH [CA/CA]; Business Development Office, 130 KM, ML, MR, NE, SN, TD, TG). Research Lane, Unit 4, Guelph, Ontario, NIG 5G3 (CA). Declarations under Rule 4.17 : (72) Inventors: HALL, J., Christopher; 31 Lambert Crescent, — as to applicant's entitlement to applyfor and be granted a Guelph, ON NIG 2R4 (CA). JUGULAM, Mithila; 2301 patent (Rule 4.1 7(H)) Hillview Drive, Manhattan, KS 66502 (US). MANKIN, Scots, Llewellyn; 4800 Deerwood Drive, Raleigh, NC — as to the applicant's entitlement to claim the priority of the 27612 (US). WESTON, Brigette, J.; Roemerweg 103a, earlier application (Rule 4.1 7(in)) 67434 Neustadt (DE). Published: (74) Agents: SIEGERT, G. Dr. et al; Hoffmann . Eitle, Patent — without international search report and to be republished und Rechtsanwalte, Arabellastrasse 4, 81925 Munchen upon receipt of that report (Rule 48.2(g)) (DE). — with (an) indication^) in relation to deposited biological (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every material furnished under Rule 13bis separately from the kind of national protection available): AE, AG, AL, AM, description (Rules 13bis.4(d)(i) and 48.2(a)(viii)) AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BN, BR, BW, BY, BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, — with sequence listingpart of description (Rule 5.2(a)) DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IR, IS, JP, KE, KG, KN, KP, KR, < (54) Title: AUXINIC HERBICIDE-TOLERANT PLANTS (57) Abstract: Described herein are auxmic herbicide-tolerant plants, auximc herbicide-tolerance characteristics, and nucleic acids and polypeptides conferring said auximc herbicide-tolerance characteristics. Also described are methods for controlling the growth of weeds by applying an auximc herbicide to which the auximc herbicide -tolerant plants described herein are tolerant. AUXINIC HERBICIDE-TOLERANT PLANTS RELATED APPLICATIONS This application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. U.S. 61/759,099, that was filed on January 31, 2013, and is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. TECHNICAL FIELD This application relates to the field of agriculture, particularly to auxinic herbicide- tolerant plants. BACKGROUND Auxinic herbicide tolerance has been reported as occurring in weeds, such as Kochia and Charlock, but not in Brassica crop plants, such as domesticated B. napus, B. rapa, or B.juncea. See, e.g., Nandula and Mathey (2002); Jugulam et al. (2005). Attempts have been made to provide an auxinic herbicide tolerance trait for use in Brassica crop plants, but to date these have not been demonstrated to provide a commercial level of herbicide tolerance in such plants; moreover, these attempts have involved transgenic insertion of exogenous auxinic herbicide tolerance trait genes. See, e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 8,071,847 and 8,603,755. The herbicide tolerance of the mustard weed reported by Jugulam et al. (2005) has, despite intense efforts, eluded discovery and thus has not been successfully transferred into crop plants. See, e.g., Jugulam et al. (2005); Jasienuik et al. (1995). It would be useful to obtain crop plants that possess auxinic herbicide tolerance. Yet, lacking definitive information as to which gene, gene product, or mechanism of action may be involved in such tolerance in the above-described weeds, it has not been possible to leverage this discovery in mustard weed to a useful application in crop plants. Thus, there remains a need for Brassica crop plants exhibiting a commercial level of tolerance to auxinic herbicide(s), and for such auxinic herbicide tolerant Brassica crop plants that are non-transgenic, as well as for plant parts, seeds, and products thereof. BRIEF SUMMARY One embodiment described herein is an auxinic herbicide tolerant crop plant having a commercial level of tolerance to an auxinic herbicide. Another aspect described herein is a non- transgenic auxinic herbicide tolerant crop plant having a commercial level of tolerance to an auxinic herbicide. Another embodiment described herein is an auxinic herbicide tolerant plant or plant part thereof having the auxinic herbicide-tolerance characteristic of any of Sinapis arvensis lines DT- 0 1 SA2-R or DT-01 BC8SA2-R, a representative sample of seed of each line having been deposited with American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) under Patent Deposit Designation Numbers PTA-1 1213 and PTA-1 1214, respectively, with the proviso that the plant is a monocot or dicot species other than Sinapis arvensis. In one aspect, the auxinic herbicide tolerance trait is referred to as "DART." Lines DT-01 SA2-R and DT-01 BC8SA2-R also are known as "SaParR" and "SaBC8R," respectively. Another embodiment described herein is a nucleic acid comprising: (a) a chimeric polynucleotide comprising both Sinapis arvensis nucleotide sequence and Brassica nucleotide sequence, wherein said polynucleotide encodes the DART trait of any of lines DT-01 Cyc2 BNS4, DT-01 BC3Bn#13, DT-01 BC4Bn#13-l, DT-01 BC5Bn#13-l-18, DT-01 SA2-R, or DT- 0 1 BC8SA2-R, a representative sample of seed of each line having been deposited with American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) under Patent Deposit Designation Numbers PTA- 120132, PTA-1 121 1, PTA-12050, PTA-1 1212, PTA-1 1213, and PTA-1 1214, respectively; or (b) a mutagenized or recombinant polynucleotide encoding the DART trait of any of lines DT-01 Cyc2 BNS4, DT-01 BC3Bn#13, DT-01 BC4Bn#13-l, DT-01 BC5Bn#13-l-18, DT-01 SA2-R, or DT-01 BC8SA2-R, a representative sample of seed of each line having been deposited with ATCC under Patent Deposit Designation Numbers PTA-120132, PTA-1 121 1, PTA-12050, PTA- 11212, PTA-1 1213, and PTA-1 1214, respectively. In one aspect, the DART trait is encoded by the Sinapis arvensis polynucleotide. In another aspect, the nucleic acid encodes a functional DART trait, said nucleic acid comprising (a) a nucleotide sequences according to any one of SEQ ID NOs:8, 12, 16, 18, 22, 26, 30, 34, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 62, 66, 76, or 80; or (b) a nucleotide sequence encoding a polypeptide comprising an amino acid sequence according to any one of SEQ ID NOs:9, 13, 17, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 57, 63, 67, 77, or 81, respectively; or a mature form thereof. In some aspects, a nucleotide sequence encoding the amino acid sequence is at least 90% homologous to any one of SEQ ID NOs:8, 12, 16, 18, 22, 26, 30, 34, 36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 62, 66, 76, or 80, or a synonymous codon substituted variant thereof. In other aspects, the encoded amino acid sequence is 70%> homologous to any one of SEQ ID NOs:9, 13, 17, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 57, 63, 67, 77, or 81, or a mature form thereof. In another aspect, the polynucleotide is isolated. In another aspect, the nucleic acid is operably linked to a promoter operable in plant cells capable of expressing the polypeptide encoded by the nucleic acid, the expression of the polypeptide conferring to the plant or cell tolerance to an auxinic herbicide. Another embodiment described herein is an auxinic herbicide tolerant plant or plant part thereof having the auxinic herbicide-tolerance characteristic of any of Brassica napus lines DT- 0 1 Cyc2 BNS4, DT-01 BC3Bn#13, DT-01 BC4Bn#13-l, or DT-01 BC5Bn#13-l-18, a representative sample of seed of each line having been deposited with American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) under Patent Deposit Designation Numbers PTA-120132, PTA-1 121 1, PTA- 12050, and PTA-1 1212, respectively, with the proviso that the plant is a monocot or dicot species other than Sinapis arvensis; and wherein the auxinic herbicide tolerance is greater than that exhibited by a wild type variety of said plant lacking said auxinic herbicide tolerance. Introgressed Brassica napus lines containing an auxinic herbicide tolerant trait include DT-01 Cyc2 BNS4, DT-01 BC3Bn#13, DT-01 BC4Bn#13-l, and DT-01 BC5Bn#13-l-18.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Ecological Risk Assessment for Saflufenacil
    TEXT SEARCHABLE DCOUMENT 2011 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION PC Code: 118203 DP Barcode: 380638 and 381293 Thursday, April 07, 2011 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Ecological Risk Assessment for Saflufenacil Section 3 New Chemical Uses as a harvest aid on dry edible beans, dry peas, soybean, oilseeds "sunflower subgroup 20B", oilseeds "cotton subgroup 20C", and oilseeds canola "subgroup 20A". TO: Kathryn Montague, M.S., Product Manager 23 Herbicide Branch Registration Division (RD) (7505P) FROM: ~ Mohammed Ruhman, Ph.D., Agronomist 2 :4- . ""=- ........ 04!tJt! (I neith Sappington, Senior Biologist/Science Adviso~.... Vd- Environmental Risk Branch V O'f/ .../ II Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) THROUGH: Mah Shamim, Ph.D., Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch VI Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) This ecological risk assessment for saflufenacil new uses is relying on the attached previous assessment (Attachment 1). As shown in the usage summary (Table 1), the single and seasonal rate, for all the crops range from 0.045 to 0.089 lbs a.i/A are within the range application rates used in exposure modeling for the 2009 Section 3 New Chemical Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment (DP Barcode 349855). Therefore, risk findings determined for the 2009 assessment may be used in the assessment for this submittal. Specifically, the 2009 assessment found no chronic risks to avian and mammalian species at an agricultural use rate 0 0.134 lb a.i.lA. Acute risks were not determined for birds and mammals since saflufenacil was not acutely toxic at the highest doses tested.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of Imazapic/Imazapyr and Other Herbicides in Mixtures for The
    Efficacy of imazapic/imazapyr and other herbicides in mixtures for the control of Digitaria insularis prior to soybean sowing Efectividad de imazapic/imazapyr y otros herbicidas en mezclas para el control de Digitaria insularis en pre-siembra de soya Alfredo Junior Paiola Albrecht1, Leandro Paiola Albrecht1, André Felipe Moreira Silva²*, Romulo Augusto Ramos³, Everson Pedro Zeny³, Juliano Bortoluzzi Lorenzetti4, Maikon Tiago Yamada Danilussi4, and Arthur Arrobas Martins Barroso4 ABSTRACT RESUMEN Herbicide mixtures, use of multiple sites of action, and other Las mezclas entre herbicidas, el uso de múltiples sitios de acción weed management practices are necessary to avoid cases of y otras prácticas de manejo de malezas son necesarias para biotype resistance. The aim of this study was to evaluate the evitar otros casos de resistencia de biotipos. El objetivo de este efficiency of imazapic/imazapyr and other herbicides in mix- estudio fue evaluar la eficiencia de imazapic/imazapyr y otros tures to control Digitaria insularis at burndown before soybean herbicidas en mezclas para controlar Digitaria insularis en la sowing. This field research was conducted in Umuarama, State desecación antes de la siembra de soya. Esta investigación de of Parana (PR), Brazil, in the 2018/19 soybean season. The ex- campo se realizó en Umuarama, Estado de Paraná (PR), Brasil, periment was conducted in a randomized block experimental en la cosecha de soya de 2018/19. El experimento se realizó en design with four replicates and 11 treatments composed of the un diseño experimental de bloques al azar, con cuatro repe- application of glyphosate, clethodim, haloxyfop, imazapic/ ticiones y 11 tratamientos, compuestos por la aplicación de imazapyr, glufosinate, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), glifosato, cletodim, haloxifop, imazapic/imazapir, glufosinato, dicamba, triclopyr, and saflufenacil, in mixtures.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Emergence Weed Control Options in Tree Nut Orchards
    Post-emergence Weed Control Options in Tree Nut Orchards Marcelo L. Moretti1, Rolando Mejorado1, Seth Watkins1, David Doll2, and Bradley D. Hanson1 1University of California, Davis, Dept. of Plant Sciences,2Cooperative Extension Merced County [email protected] Herbicides are the primary means of vegetation management in tree nut orchards in California. Among registered herbicides, post-emergence (POST) materials, like glyphosate, are the most widely used in tree crops because of low cost and broad weed control spectrum. However, herbicide resistance has compromised the efficacy of POST only herbicide programs in many parts of the state. Most cases of resistance in orchards are glyphosate-resistant hairy fleabane, horseweed, ryegrass, and junglerice. To manage resistant weed species, pre-emergence (PRE) herbicides can be applied during winter before weeds emerge; however, PRE herbicide use can be limited by cost and the need for rainfall to incorporate them. Even when PRE herbicides are used, most orchards will need a POST treatment to control weed escapes and to prepare the orchard for harvest operations. One approach to optimize control of late emerging or glyphosate-resistant weeds is to use alternate herbicides, mixtures, rates, or more appropriate application timing. The objective of this project was to evaluate POST control of hairy fleabane and yellow nutsedge with different herbicides combinations. Methods Field experiments were conducted in a three year-old almond orchard infested with hairy fleabane and yellow nutsedge. The orchard was located in a sandy soil area in Merced County, and irrigated with solid set sprinklers. The area is known to be infested with glyphosate-resistant hairy fleabane.
    [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]
  • Glyphosate Poisoning
    Toxicol Rev 2004; 23 (3): 159-167 REVIEW ARTICLE 1176-2551/04/0003-0159/$31.00/0 © 2004 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved. Glyphosate Poisoning Sally M. Bradberry, Alex T. Proudfoot and J. Allister Vale National Poisons Information Service (Birmingham Centre) and West Midlands Poisons Unit, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK Contents Abstract ...............................................................................................................159 1. Epidemiology .......................................................................................................160 2. Mode of Action .....................................................................................................161 3. Mechanisms of Toxicity ..............................................................................................161 3.1 Glyphosate ....................................................................................................161 3.1.1 Acute Toxicity ............................................................................................161 3.1.2 Chronic Toxicity ...........................................................................................161 3.2 Surfactants .....................................................................................................161 3.2.1 Polyoxyethyleneamine ....................................................................................162 3.2.2 Surfactants Derived from Plant Fats .........................................................................162 3.2.3 Other Surfactants
    [Show full text]
  • (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2015/0132413 A1 BESSETTE Et Al
    US 2015O132413A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2015/0132413 A1 BESSETTE et al. (43) Pub. Date: May 14, 2015 (54) PESTICIDAL COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING abandoned, which is a continuation of application No. ROSEMARY OL AND WINTERGREEN OIL 09/340,391, filed on Jun. 28, 1999, now Pat. No. 6,986, 898. Applicant: EcoSMART Technologies, Inc., (71) (60) Provisional application No. 60/140,845, filed on Jun. Roswell, GA (US) 28, 1999, provisional application No. 60/094,463, (72) Inventors: Steven M. BESSETTE, San Clemente, filed on Jul. 28, 1998, provisional application No. CA (US); A. David LINDSAY, Franklin, 60/100,613, filed on Sep. 16, 1998, provisional appli TN (US) cation No. 60/122,803, filed on Mar. 3, 1999. Publication Classification Appl. No.: 14/309,860 (21) (51) Int. C. AOIN 6.5/22 (2006.01) (22) Filed: Jun. 19, 2014 AOIN 65/16 (2006.01) AOIN3L/6 (2006.01) Related U.S. Application Data AOIN37/02 (2006.01) AOIN 65/28 (2006.01) (60) Division of application No. 13/755,958, filed on Jan. AOIN3L/08 (2006.01) 31, 2013, now Pat. No. 8,877,219, which is a division (52) U.S. C. of application No. 12/872,725, filed on Aug. 31, 2010, CPC ................ A0IN 65/22 (2013.01); A0IN 65/28 now abandoned, which is a division of application No. (2013.01); A0IN 31/08 (2013.01); A0IN 31/16 11/746,927, filed on May 10, 2007, now abandoned, (2013.01); A0IN37/02 (2013.01); A0IN 65/16 which is a continuation of application No.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital-Breeding Lepidoptera
    VOLUME 59, NUMBER 3 143 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 59(3), 2005, 143–160 EXTRINSIC EFFECTS ON FECUNDITY-MATERNAL WEIGHT RELATIONS IN CAPITAL-BREEDING LEPIDOPTERA WILLIAM E. MILLER Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 USA email: [email protected] ABSTRACT. Capital-breeding Lepidoptera depend for reproduction on metabolic resources assembled either entirely or primarily by their larvae, the former termed 'perfect' the latter 'imperfect'. Empirical evidence suggests that maternal size determines capi- tal-breeder fecundity. The fecundity-maternal size relation is usually formulated as F = bW + a, where F is fecundity, W is final ma- ternal size in units such as weight of newly transformed pupae, b is the slope, and a the intercept. Exhaustive search yielded 71 fe- cundity-maternal pupal weight relations for 41 capital breeders in 15 families, 58 of which, including 2 previously unpublished, were based on individual specimens, and 13 on grouped specimens. In 22 individual-specimen relations, cohorts divided into 2 or more subgroups were reared simultaneously at different temperatures, on different diets, or exposed to other extrinsic factors. These 22 'multiform' relations were compared with 36 'uniform' relations, and where possible cohort subgroups were compared. Pupal weights of cohort subgroups were affected much oftener than underlying slopes and intercepts. Individual-specimen slopes based on transformed data ranged 0.52-2.09 with a mean and standard error of 1.13±0.04, and slopes did not differ significantly among perfect, imperfect, multiform, and uniform categories. Despite the evident similarity, one relation does not apply to all capital breed- ers.
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Control Guide for Ohio, Indiana and Illinois
    Pub# WS16 / Bulletin 789 / IL15 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION Tables Table 1. Weed Response to “Burndown” Herbicides .............................................................................................19 Table 2. Application Intervals for Early Preplant Herbicides ............................................................................... 20 Table 3. Weed Response to Preplant/Preemergence Herbicides in Corn—Grasses ....................................30 WEED Table 4. Weed Response to Preplant/Preemergence Herbicides in Corn—Broadleaf Weeds ....................31 Table 5. Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides in Corn—Grasses ...................................................32 Table 6. Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides in Corn—Broadleaf Weeds ..................................33 2015 CONTROL Table 7. Grazing and Forage (Silage, Hay, etc.) Intervals for Herbicide-Treated Corn ................................. 66 OHIO, INDIANA Table 8. Rainfast Intervals, Spray Additives, and Maximum Crop Size for Postemergence Corn Herbicides .........................................................................................................................................................68 AND ILLINOIS Table 9. Herbicides Labeled for Use on Field Corn, Seed Corn, Popcorn, and Sweet Corn ..................... 69 GUIDE Table 10. Herbicide and Soil Insecticide Use Precautions ......................................................................................71 Table 11. Weed Response to Herbicides in Popcorn and Sweet Corn—Grasses
    [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]
  • 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]
  • 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]