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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inWeed technology Vol. 29; no. 3; pp. 405 - 411
Main Authors Crow, Whitney D, Steckel, Lawrence E, Hayes, Robert M, Mueller, Thomas C
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Lawrence The Weed Science Society of America 01.08.2015
Weed Science Society of America
Cambridge University Press
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0890-037X
1550-2740
DOI10.1614/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