Evaluation of POST-Harvest Herbicide Applications for Seed Prevention of Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)
Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management...
Saved in:
Published in | Weed technology Vol. 29; no. 3; pp. 405 - 411 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Lawrence
The Weed Science Society of America
01.08.2015
Weed Science Society of America Cambridge University Press |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 0890-037X 1550-2740 |
DOI | 10.1614/WT-D-14-00146.1 |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m−2 or approximately 12 million seed ha−1 to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application. Nomenclature: Pyroxasulfone, 5-(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyrazol-4-ylmethyl 4,5-dihydro-5,5-dimethyl-1,2-oxazol-3-yl sulfone; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats; corn, Zea mays L.; wheat, Triticum aestivum L. Aumentos recientes en la prevalencia de Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) requiere que nuevas estrategias de control sean desarrolladas para optimizar el control de malezas y el desempeño de los cultivos. Se realizó un estudio de campo en 2012 y 2013, en Jackson, Tennessee, y en 2013 en Knoxville, Tennessee, para evaluar programas de manejo de malezas POST aplicados después de la cosecha (POST-cosecha) para la prevención de la producción de semilla de A. palmeri GR y para evaluar la residualidad de los herbicidas durante el trigo de invierno. Los tratamientos fueron aplicados POST-cosecha a campos después de la cosecha del maíz, con tres aplicaciones seguidas por un herbicida PRE aplicado al momento de la siembra del trigo. Paraquat solo o en mezcla con S-metolachlor controló 91% del A. palmeri existente 14 d después del tratamiento, pero no controló el rebrote de la maleza. La mezcla en tanque de paraquat con un herbicida residual ya sea metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone más flumioxazin, o pyroxasulfone más fluthiacet mejoró el control de rebrotes o nueva emergencia de plántulas al compararse con paraquat solo. Mediante la implementación de aplicaciones de herbicidas POST-cosecha se previno la adición al banco de semillas de 1,200 semillas m−2 o aproximadamente 12 millones de semillas ha−1. En general, la adición de un herbicida residual brindó solamente 4 a 7% más control de A. palmeri GR que paraquat solo. El daño al trigo fue vidente (<10%) con las aplicaciones PRE en 2012, pero no en 2013. El rendimiento de grano del trigo no fue afectado adversamente por ninguna de las aplicaciones de herbicidas. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m super( -2) or approximately 12 million seed ha super( -1) to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application. Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m⁻² or approximately 12 million seed ha⁻¹ to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application.Nomenclature: Pyroxasulfone, 5-(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyrazol-4-ylmethyl 4,5-dihydro-5,5-dimethyl-1,2-oxazol-3-yl sulfone; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats; corn, Zea mays L.; wheat, Triticum aestivum L. Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m^sup -2^ or approximately 12 million seed ha^sup -1^ to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application. Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m−2 or approximately 12 million seed ha−1 to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application. Nomenclature: Pyroxasulfone, 5-(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyrazol-4-ylmethyl 4,5-dihydro-5,5-dimethyl-1,2-oxazol-3-yl sulfone; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats; corn, Zea mays L.; wheat, Triticum aestivum L. Aumentos recientes en la prevalencia de Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) requiere que nuevas estrategias de control sean desarrolladas para optimizar el control de malezas y el desempeño de los cultivos. Se realizó un estudio de campo en 2012 y 2013, en Jackson, Tennessee, y en 2013 en Knoxville, Tennessee, para evaluar programas de manejo de malezas POST aplicados después de la cosecha (POST-cosecha) para la prevención de la producción de semilla de A. palmeri GR y para evaluar la residualidad de los herbicidas durante el trigo de invierno. Los tratamientos fueron aplicados POST-cosecha a campos después de la cosecha del maíz, con tres aplicaciones seguidas por un herbicida PRE aplicado al momento de la siembra del trigo. Paraquat solo o en mezcla con S-metolachlor controló 91% del A. palmeri existente 14 d después del tratamiento, pero no controló el rebrote de la maleza. La mezcla en tanque de paraquat con un herbicida residual ya sea metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone más flumioxazin, o pyroxasulfone más fluthiacet mejoró el control de rebrotes o nueva emergencia de plántulas al compararse con paraquat solo. Mediante la implementación de aplicaciones de herbicidas POST-cosecha se previno la adición al banco de semillas de 1,200 semillas m−2 o aproximadamente 12 millones de semillas ha−1. En general, la adición de un herbicida residual brindó solamente 4 a 7% más control de A. palmeri GR que paraquat solo. El daño al trigo fue vidente (<10%) con las aplicaciones PRE en 2012, pero no en 2013. El rendimiento de grano del trigo no fue afectado adversamente por ninguna de las aplicaciones de herbicidas. Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S -metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m −2 or approximately 12 million seed ha −1 to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application. Aumentos recientes en la prevalencia de Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) requiere que nuevas estrategias de control sean desarrolladas para optimizar el control de malezas y el desempeño de los cultivos. Se realizó un estudio de campo en 2012 y 2013, en Jackson, Tennessee, y en 2013 en Knoxville, Tennessee, para evaluar programas de manejo de malezas POST aplicados después de la cosecha (POST-cosecha) para la prevención de la producción de semilla de A. palmeri GR y para evaluar la residualidad de los herbicidas durante el trigo de invierno. Los tratamientos fueron aplicados POST-cosecha a campos después de la cosecha del maíz, con tres aplicaciones seguidas por un herbicida PRE aplicado al momento de la siembra del trigo. Paraquat solo o en mezcla con S -metolachlor controló 91% del A. palmeri existente 14 d después del tratamiento, pero no controló el rebrote de la maleza. La mezcla en tanque de paraquat con un herbicida residual ya sea metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone más flumioxazin, o pyroxasulfone más fluthiacet mejoró el control de rebrotes o nueva emergencia de plántulas al compararse con paraquat solo. Mediante la implementación de aplicaciones de herbicidas POST-cosecha se previno la adición al banco de semillas de 1,200 semillas m −2 o aproximadamente 12 millones de semillas ha −1 . En general, la adición de un herbicida residual brindó solamente 4 a 7% más control de A. palmeri GR que paraquat solo. El daño al trigo fue vidente (<10%) con las aplicaciones PRE en 2012, pero no en 2013. El rendimiento de grano del trigo no fue afectado adversamente por ninguna de las aplicaciones de herbicidas. Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and crop performance. A field study was conducted in 2012 and 2013 in Jackson, TN, and in 2013 in Knoxville, TN, to evaluate POST weed management programs applied after harvest (POST-harvest) for prevention of seed production from GR Palmer amaranth and to evaluate herbicide carryover to winter wheat. Treatments were applied POST-harvest to corn stubble, with three applications followed by a PRE herbicide applied at wheat planting. Paraquat alone or mixed with S-metolachlor controlled 91% of existing Palmer amaranth 14 d after treatment but did not control regrowth. Paraquat tank-mixed with a residual herbicide of metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin, or pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet improved control of regrowth or new emergence compared with paraquat alone. All residual herbicide treatments provided similar GR Palmer amaranth control. Through implementation of POST-harvest herbicide applications, the addition of 1,200 seed m⁻² or approximately 12 million seed ha⁻¹ to the soil seedbank was prevented. Overall, the addition of a residual herbicide provided only 4 to 7% more GR Palmer amaranth control than paraquat alone. Wheat injury was evident (< 10%) in 2012 from the PRE applications, but not in 2013. Wheat grain yield was not adversely affected by any herbicide application. Aumentos recientes en la prevalencia de Amaranthus palmeri resistente a glyphosate (GR) requiere que nuevas estrategias de control sean desarrolladas para optimizar el control de malezas y el desempeño de los cultivos. Se realizó un estudio de campo en 2012 y 2013, en Jackson, Tennessee, y en 2013 en Knoxville, Tennessee, para evaluar programas de manejo de malezas POST aplicados después de la cosecha (POST-cosecha) para la prevención de la producción de semilla de A. palmeri GR y para evaluar la residualidad de los herbicidas durante el trigo de invierno. Los tratamientos fueron aplicados POST-cosecha a campos después de la cosecha del maíz, con tres aplicaciones seguidas por un herbicida PRE aplicado al momento de la siembra del trigo. Paraquat solo o en mezcla con S-metolachlor controló 91% del A. palmeri existente 14 d después del tratamiento, pero no controló el rebrote de la maleza. La mezcla en tanque de paraquat con un herbicida residual ya sea metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone más flumioxazin, o pyroxasulfone más fluthiacet mejoró el control de rebrotes o nueva emergencia de plántulas al compararse con paraquat solo. Mediante la implementation de aplicaciones de herbicidas POST-cosecha se previno la adición al banco de semillas de 1,200 semillas m-o aproximadamente 12 millones de semillas ha-1. En general, la adición de un herbicida residual brindó solamente 4 a 7% más control de A. palmeri GR que paraquat solo. El daño al trigo fue vidente (< 10%) con las aplicaciones PRE en 2012, pero no en 2013. El rendimiento de grano del trigo no fiie afectado adversamente por ninguna de las aplicaciones de herbicidas. |
Author | Hayes, Robert M Steckel, Lawrence E Crow, Whitney D Mueller, Thomas C |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Whitney D surname: Crow fullname: Crow, Whitney D – sequence: 2 givenname: Lawrence E surname: Steckel fullname: Steckel, Lawrence E – sequence: 3 givenname: Robert M surname: Hayes fullname: Hayes, Robert M – sequence: 4 givenname: Thomas C surname: Mueller fullname: Mueller, Thomas C email: lsteckel@utk.edu |
BookMark | eNqNks9P2zAUx62JSSuMM6dplnZhB8N7aeykxwoYnYRERYvgZjmOM1ylcbCTSlz3l89p2A4ctp2ere_n--z345AcNK4xhJwgnKHA9PxhzS4ZpgwAU3GG78gEOQeWZCkckAnkM2AwzR4_kMMQNhESSQIT8vNqp-peddY11FV0ebtas4XyOxM6ujC-sNqWhs7btrZ6TwVaOU9XxpR06c3ONL-t1_VL--SC6gy7M8GGTjUdXap6azxVW-Xj9Ymezl9PfaDtXrNfP5L3laqDOX6NR-T-29X6YsFubq-_X8xvWJEK6NhUgynziqPQKQdd5mWlIeH5UAfPEIUpUiW4QCiTeOfIs5nGoqpygxnmOD0ip2Pe1rvnPhYotzZoU9eqMa4PEvPYryzNRPIfKAKISA5Zv7xBN673TSxEYgaC5wDJkPB8pLR3IXhTydbb2IoXiSCH8cmHtbyUMe7HJ4e8_I1D224_gc4rW__F92n0bULn_J9n0mkGCWAe9c-jXikn1Q9vg7xfRUUMKxGhWSTYSBTWxRX7509_AZUwwNQ |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_3146_PS20_28_1 crossref_primary_10_1614_WS_D_16_00094_1 crossref_primary_10_1002_agj2_20770 crossref_primary_10_1017_wet_2019_28 crossref_primary_10_1017_wet_2017_59 crossref_primary_10_1017_wet_2022_48 crossref_primary_10_1017_wet_2017_101 crossref_primary_10_1017_aae_2023_40 crossref_primary_10_3389_fagro_2023_1293293 crossref_primary_10_3390_agronomy10121960 crossref_primary_10_1002_ps_5986 crossref_primary_10_3389_fagro_2022_888664 crossref_primary_10_1002_ps_5068 crossref_primary_10_1614_WS_D_15_00210_1 crossref_primary_10_1017_wet_2024_67 crossref_primary_10_2134_agronj2017_12_0703 |
Cites_doi | 10.1614/WS-D-11-00155.1 10.1080/00224561.1986.12456009 10.1614/WS-D-13-00145.1 10.2134/agronj1989.00021962008100040021x 10.1614/WS-D-11-00222.1 10.1017/S0043174500058549 10.1017/S004317450008872X 10.2135/cropsci1995.0011183X003500050001x 10.1111/aab.12129 10.1080/00224561.1983.12436274 10.1614/WS-04-153-R 10.1614/P2002-139 10.1614/WT-06-145.1 10.1017/S0043174500053777 10.1614/0043-1745(2001)049[0703:RPRHFD]2.0.CO;2 10.1614/0043-1745(2000)048[0481:WSPASE]2.0.CO;2 10.1017/S0043174500079054 10.1017/S0890037X00033297 10.1614/WT-D-11-00059.1 10.2489/jswc.66.4.265 10.1614/WT-D-10-00149.1 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Copyright 2015 Weed Science Society of America Copyright Allen Press Publishing Services Jul-Sep 2015 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright 2015 Weed Science Society of America – notice: Copyright Allen Press Publishing Services Jul-Sep 2015 |
DBID | FBQ AAYXX CITATION 3V. 7X2 7XB 8FE 8FH 8FK 8G5 ABUWG AEUYN AFKRA ATCPS AZQEC BBNVY BENPR BHPHI CCPQU DWQXO GNUQQ GUQSH HCIFZ LK8 M0K M2O M7P MBDVC PADUT PHGZM PHGZT PKEHL PQEST PQGLB PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7S9 L.6 7U7 C1K |
DOI | 10.1614/WT-D-14-00146.1 |
DatabaseName | AGRIS CrossRef ProQuest Central (Corporate) Agricultural Science Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest SciTech Collection ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Research Library ProQuest Central (Alumni) One Sustainability ProQuest Central UK/Ireland Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection ProQuest Central Essentials Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central Natural Science Collection ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Korea ProQuest Central Student ProQuest Research Library SciTech Premium Collection Biological Sciences Agricultural Science Database Research Library Biological Science Database Research Library (Corporate) Research Library China ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central Basic AGRICOLA AGRICOLA - Academic Toxicology Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef Agricultural Science Database Research Library Prep ProQuest Central Student ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest One Community College Research Library (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest One Sustainability Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central Korea Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection Biological Science Collection ProQuest Research Library Research Library China ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central Basic ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition Agricultural Science Collection Biological Science Database ProQuest SciTech Collection ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) AGRICOLA AGRICOLA - Academic Toxicology Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management |
DatabaseTitleList | Toxicology Abstracts AGRICOLA Agricultural Science Database CrossRef |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: BENPR name: ProQuest Central url: https://www.proquest.com/central sourceTypes: Aggregation Database – sequence: 2 dbid: FBQ name: AGRIS url: http://www.fao.org/agris/Centre.asp?Menu_1ID=DB&Menu_2ID=DB1&Language=EN&Content=http://www.fao.org/agris/search?Language=EN sourceTypes: Publisher |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Agriculture |
DocumentTitleAlternate | POST-harvest seed prevention |
EISSN | 1550-2740 |
EndPage | 411 |
ExternalDocumentID | 3787221661 10_1614_WT_D_14_00146_1 43702018 US201600163709 |
Genre | Feature |
GeographicLocations | Tennessee |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: Tennessee |
GroupedDBID | 02 08R 09C 09E 0R 123 29R 2AX 2~F 3V. 7X2 8FE 8FH 8G5 AAAZR AABES AABWE AACFU AAEED AAGFV AAKTX AAPSS AAUKB ABBHK ABKMT ABPLY ABQTM ABROB ABTLG ABUWG ABZCX ACCHT ACGFS ACPRK ACQFJ ACUIJ ACUYZ ACWGA ACYZP ADBBV ADGEJ ADKIL ADOCW ADOVH ADOYD ADULT ADZLD AEDJY AENEX AESBF AEUPB AEYYC AFKRA AFLVW AFRAH AGOOT AICQM AIHIV AIRJO AJPFC AKPMI ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ANHSF AS ATCPS ATUCA AYIQA AZQEC BBLKV BBNVY BCGOX BENPR BESQT BHPHI BJBOZ BLZWO BMAJL BPHCQ CAG CBGCD CBIIA CFAFE CJCSC COF CS3 CWIXF DATOO DC7 DFEDG DOHLZ DOOOF DWIUU DWQXO EBS EF EGQIC EJD EQZMY GNUQQ GTFYD GUQSH H13 HCIFZ HGD HTVGU HZ IH6 IL9 IOEEP IOO IS6 JBS JH JHPGK JLS JPM JQKCU JSODD JST KAFGG KCGVB KFECR KM LHUNA LK8 M0K M2O M7P NEJ NHB NIKVX NVHAQ O9- OVD P2P PADUT PQ0 PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS PROAC Q5J RBO RCA ROL S6U SA0 SAAAG SJN T9M TEORI TN5 UT1 WFFJZ WH7 Y3D Y6R ZDLDU ZJOSE ZMEZD ZYDXJ -JH 0R~ AAHKG AASVR AAXTN ABBZL ABJNI ADDNB ADHSS ADOVT ADVJH AEBAK AEBPU AEEJZ AENCP AEPYG AFAZZ AFFIJ AFKQG AFNWH AFRIC AGABE AGJUD AGUYK AHQXX AHRGI AIGNW AIOIP AJCYY AKZCZ AQJOH ARZZG AS~ AUXHV CCPQU CCUQV CFBFF CGQII FBQ HZ~ IPYYG JAAYA JBMMH JENOY JHFFW JKQEH JLXEF LW7 NZEOI ~02 ~EF ~KM AAHBH ABGDZ ABVKB ABXAU ABXHF ABXSQ ACDLN ACHIC AEUYN AFZFC AHXOZ AKMAY AQVQM CCQAD CHEAL IPSME PHGZM PHGZT PQGLB PUEGO AAYXX ABVZP ACAJB AEHGV CITATION ECGQY YR5 7XB 8FK MBDVC PKEHL Q9U 7S9 L.6 7U7 C1K |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-b460t-3c0ed8f516c450cd8dfc0258622057116eb4a65610d257151579c1bff8e171813 |
IEDL.DBID | BENPR |
ISSN | 0890-037X |
IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 08:56:42 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 01:44:37 EDT 2025 Sun Jul 13 04:29:47 EDT 2025 Sun Jul 06 05:08:02 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:07:25 EDT 2025 Sun Aug 24 12:10:34 EDT 2025 Wed Dec 27 19:12:29 EST 2023 Thu Nov 04 13:46:22 EDT 2021 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 3 |
Language | English |
License | https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-b460t-3c0ed8f516c450cd8dfc0258622057116eb4a65610d257151579c1bff8e171813 |
Notes | http://dx.doi.org/10.1614%2FWT-D-14-00146.1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
OpenAccessLink | https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/359365C80B091223CBC6D91677E25722/S0890037X00003833a.pdf/div-class-title-evaluation-of-post-harvest-herbicide-applications-for-seed-prevention-of-glyphosate-resistant-palmer-amaranth-span-class-italic-amaranthus-palmeri-span-div.pdf |
PQID | 1706580022 |
PQPubID | 506325 |
PageCount | 7 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_1855074762 proquest_miscellaneous_1810067621 proquest_journals_1706580022 crossref_primary_10_1614_WT_D_14_00146_1 crossref_citationtrail_10_1614_WT_D_14_00146_1 jstor_primary_43702018 fao_agris_US201600163709 bioone_primary_10_1614_WT_D_14_00146_1 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2015-08-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2015-08-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 08 year: 2015 text: 2015-08-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2010 |
PublicationPlace | Lawrence |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Lawrence |
PublicationTitle | Weed technology |
PublicationYear | 2015 |
Publisher | The Weed Science Society of America Weed Science Society of America Cambridge University Press |
Publisher_xml | – name: The Weed Science Society of America – name: Weed Science Society of America – name: Cambridge University Press |
References | S0890037X00003833_ref3 S0890037X00003833_ref4 S0890037X00003833_ref5 S0890037X00003833_ref6 S0890037X00003833_ref22 S0890037X00003833_ref2 S0890037X00003833_ref20 S0890037X00003833_ref9 S0890037X00003833_ref25 S0890037X00003833_ref26 S0890037X00003833_ref23 Keeley (S0890037X00003833_ref11) 1987; 35 Coffman (S0890037X00003833_ref7) 1991; 5 (S0890037X00003833_ref1) 2015; 2 S0890037X00003833_ref10 Nowak (S0890037X00003833_ref17) 1983; 38 Culpepper (S0890037X00003833_ref8) 2011 S0890037X00003833_ref15 Taylor (S0890037X00003833_ref24) 1997; 45 S0890037X00003833_ref12 Koskinen (S0890037X00003833_ref13) 1986; 41 Menges (S0890037X00003833_ref14) 1987; 35 S0890037X00003833_ref18 S0890037X00003833_ref19 Schweizer (S0890037X00003833_ref21) 1984; 32 S0890037X00003833_ref16 |
References_xml | – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref15 doi: 10.1614/WS-D-11-00155.1 – volume: 41 start-page: 365 year: 1986 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref13 article-title: Weed control in conservation tillage publication-title: J Soil Water Conserv doi: 10.1080/00224561.1986.12456009 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref16 doi: 10.1614/WS-D-13-00145.1 – volume-title: Georgia Cotton Newsletter year: 2011 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref8 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref25 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref5 doi: 10.2134/agronj1989.00021962008100040021x – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref18 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref2 doi: 10.1614/WS-D-11-00222.1 – volume: 32 start-page: 76 year: 1984 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref21 article-title: Weed seed decline in irrigated soil after six years of continuous corn (Zea mays) and herbicides publication-title: Weed Sci doi: 10.1017/S0043174500058549 – volume: 45 start-page: 497 year: 1997 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref24 article-title: Sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) seed production and viability as influenced by late-season postemergence herbicide applications publication-title: Weed Sci doi: 10.1017/S004317450008872X – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref4 doi: 10.2135/cropsci1995.0011183X003500050001x – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref22 doi: 10.1111/aab.12129 – volume: 38 start-page: 162 year: 1983 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref17 article-title: Obstacles to adoption of conservation tillage publication-title: J Soil Water Conserv doi: 10.1080/00224561.1983.12436274 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref10 doi: 10.1614/WS-04-153-R – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref23 doi: 10.1614/P2002-139 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref3 doi: 10.1614/WT-06-145.1 – volume: 35 start-page: 328 year: 1987 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref14 article-title: Weed seed population dynamics during six years of weed management systems in crop rotations on irrigated soil publication-title: Weed Sci doi: 10.1017/S0043174500053777 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref26 doi: 10.1614/0043-1745(2001)049[0703:RPRHFD]2.0.CO;2 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref6 doi: 10.1614/0043-1745(2000)048[0481:WSPASE]2.0.CO;2 – volume: 35 start-page: 199 year: 1987 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref11 article-title: Influence of planting date on growth of Palmer amaranth ( Amaranthus palmeri) publication-title: Weed Sci doi: 10.1017/S0043174500079054 – volume: 5 start-page: 76 year: 1991 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref7 article-title: Weed–crop responses to weed management systems in conservation tillage corn (Zea mays) publication-title: Weed Technol doi: 10.1017/S0890037X00033297 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref9 doi: 10.1614/WT-D-11-00059.1 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref20 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref19 doi: 10.2489/jswc.66.4.265 – ident: S0890037X00003833_ref12 doi: 10.1614/WT-D-10-00149.1 – volume: 2 year: 2015 ident: S0890037X00003833_ref1 article-title: Supplemental Zidua herbicide label publication-title: Page |
SSID | ssj0016220 |
Score | 2.1757598 |
Snippet | Recent increases in the prevalence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth mandate that new control strategies be developed to optimize weed control and... |
SourceID | proquest crossref jstor fao bioone |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Enrichment Source Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 405 |
SubjectTerms | Amaranthus palmeri buried seeds corn field experimentation flumioxazin glyphosate Glyphosate resistance grain yield Harvesting herbicide resistance Herbicides metolachlor metribuzin Paraquat pesticide application planting Prevention pyroxasulfone Regrowth Seed banks stubble Tennessee Triticum aestivum Weed control WEED MANAGEMENT—MAJOR CROPS weeds Winter wheat Zea mays |
Title | Evaluation of POST-Harvest Herbicide Applications for Seed Prevention of Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) |
URI | http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1614/WT-D-14-00146.1 https://www.jstor.org/stable/43702018 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1706580022 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1810067621 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1855074762 |
Volume | 29 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwhV1Lb9QwELbo9gIHxKtqoEVGQqgc3NqJnccJbdstKw6l6u6qe7Mc22lXKsnSZA9c-eWMEycFIcohUhSPncgTe77xjL5B6D3VXBWJigkYx5yAhchIrkNFCkOFyqzKqGmzLc7j6YJ_WYqlP3CrfVplvye2G7WptDsjP3I0L8Khm_DT-jtxVaNcdNWX0NhC27AFp2KEto8n5xeXQxwhDjtixjSjhEbJ0pP7gE06upqTU8I4cU5CfOjilPmqqkr7h4HaKlTVZyr-tVu3JujsGXrqsSMed8p-jh7Z8gV6Mr6-8_wZ9iX6ORnYu3FV4Iuvszlx5X9gNDyFGVzplbF4_FvUGgNqxTOwYbhnc-q6fr79sb6paoCi5NLWDmWWDe6qrWD1TYGJa27wwdjfbWq8bttWH1-hxdlkfjIlvswCyXlMGxJpak1aCBZrLqg2qSk0IKHUzZ1IGIttzlXscJaB9e0AUJJplhdFahlYNhbtoFEJE7eLMDVK04KlRhjNMyVyAd4USGaZ4lQlUYA-dJMs1x2XhnQ-CGhDXs3lKbghstWGZAE67JUgtScrdzUzbv_d4WDo8N-xd0GrUoF2armYhY5jD64ooVmAdlpVD0NweAoCaYD2et1Lv8href9LBujd0AzL08VcVGmrDcikzAGCOGQPyThSOQ5Crx9-zRv0GD5GdPmHe2jU3G3sPmCiJn_rf_xfPhEGOg |
linkProvider | ProQuest |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1LbxMxELb6OAAHxKvqQgEjASoHt_a-sj4gFEhKSkuomo2am-u1vTRS2Q3djVCv_CB-I-N9AUKUUw-RouzYG-1nz_dNxplB6DlVvkx7MiRAjgkBhuAkUa4kqaaB5EZyqqvTFuNwNPU_zILZCvrR_hfGHqtsfWLlqHWu7G_ku7bMS2DVjftm8ZXYrlE2u9q20KiXxYG5_AYhW_F6fwD4vnDdvWH8bkSargIk8UNaEk9Ro6M0YKHyA6p0pFMFxA_K3gXtwlhoEl-GVlZoWM6W73tcsSRNI8PAkTMP5l1F6yAzOOyi9bfD8dFxl7ewk1S6lVNCvd6sKSYEHLh7EpMBYT6xQUm4Y_OiyTzPM_MHIa6mMm9PRv7FDhXl7d1Btxutivv14rqLVkx2D93qf75o6nWY--j7sKsWjvMUH32axMS2G4LZ8AgQm6u5Nrj_W5Ycg0rGE-BM3FaPqoe-P79cnOUFSF9ybAqrarMS191dsPwigVLLM7zdb94tC7yors1fPUDTawFgA61l8OA2EaZaKpqySAda-VwGSQDRG1hyLn0qe56DXtYPWSzq2h3CxjyAhjiJxQDCHlGhIZiDdloQhGqKo9seHef_HrDdDfjv3JuAqpCATiGmE9fW9IOX16PcQRsV1N0UPnwKBpGDtlrsReNUCvFrCzjoWXcZ3IHN8cjM5EuwiZgVIKHLrrKxRex8MHp49W2eohuj-OOhONwfHzxCN-GLBfXZxy20Vl4szWPQY2XypNkEGJ1e9777CX0QQPU |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1LbxMxEB61qYTggHhV3VLASIDKwY292ecBoUASUopC1CRqbq7X9tJIbTZ0E6Fe-Vn8Osb7CCBEOfUQKcqOZ6Mde75vMpMZgBdMeTINZUARHBOKCBHTRLmSppr5MjYyZrqothgE_Yn3cepPN-BH_V8YW1ZZ-8TCUetM2d_Im7bNi2_ZjdtMq7KIYaf3dvGV2glSNtNaj9Mot8iRufqG4Vv-5rCDtn7pur3u-H2fVhMGaOIFbElbihkdpT4PlOczpSOdKiQByPJd5DGcBybxZGAphsatbbE_jBVP0jQyHJ06b6HeTdgKERWjBmy96w6Gx-schlVScNiYUdYKp1VjIcTD5smYdij3qA1QggObI01mWTY3f4DjZiqzukryL6Qo4K93D-5WvJW0y412HzbM_AHcaX-5rHp3mIfwvbvuHE6ylAw_j8bUjh5CbaSP1pupmTak_VvGnCBjJiPET1J3kiqXfji_WpxlOdJgemxyy3DnS1JOeiHyQiK8Ls_Ifrt6t8rJorg2e_0IJjdigG1ozPHB7QBhWiqW8kj7Wnmx9BMfIzmUjGPpMRm2HHhVPmSxKPt4CBv_oDXEyVh0MAQShTUEd-CgNoJQVaN0O6_j_N8L9tcL_qt7B60qJFonF5ORa_v74asVstiB7cLUaxUefooCkQN7te1F5WBy8es4OPB8fRldg833yLnJVigTcUtGApdfJ2Mb2nkotHv9bZ7BLTxv4tPh4Ogx3Mbv5ZdlkHvQWF6uzBOkZsvkaXUGCJze9LH7CaWJRSE |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+POST-Harvest+Herbicide+Applications+for+Seed+Prevention+of+Glyphosate-Resistant+Palmer+amaranth+%28Amaranthus+palmeri%29&rft.jtitle=Weed+technology&rft.au=Crow%2C+Whitney+D&rft.au=Steckel%2C+Lawrence+E&rft.au=Hayes%2C+Robert+M&rft.au=Mueller%2C+Thomas+C&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.pub=Cambridge+University+Press&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=405&rft_id=info:doi/10.1614%2FWT-D-14-00146.1&rft.externalDBID=HAS_PDF_LINK&rft.externalDocID=3787221661 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0890-037X&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0890-037X&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0890-037X&client=summon |