Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T03:21:12.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to Repeated Applications of Dinitroaniline Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. Wayne Keeling  and
John R. Abernathy
J. Wayne Keeling
Affiliation:
Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn., Lubbock, TX 79401
John R. Abernathy
Affiliation:
Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn., Lubbock, TX 79401
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dinitroaniline herbicides have been used on the Texas Southern High Plains since the mid-1960s. Over this same period, cotton yields in this region have declined in spite of improved varieties and technology. Repeated applications of trifluralin and pendimethalin, each applied at 1x and 2x rates, were incorporated in 1983 through 1988. Variations in cotton stands, yields, and fiber quality were high due to environmental conditions. After six repeated applications, no reductions in cotton growth or yield were observed, even at the highest rates.

Keywords

Pendimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenaminetrifluralin, 2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4 (trifluoromethyl)benzenaminecotton, Gossypium hirsutum (L.)Fiber qualitypreplant incorporated herbicidespersistence
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 527 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Abernathy, J. R., and Keeling, J. W. 1979. Efficacy and rotational crop response to levels and dates of dinitroaniline herbicide applications. Weed Sci. 27:312–317.Google Scholar
2. Bryson, C. T., and Webster, L. 1988. Long term non-effects of trifluralin on cotton growth and yield. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Conf., p. 384.Google Scholar
3. Dowler, C. C., and Hauser, E. W. 1975. Weed control systems in cotton on Tifton loamy sand soil. Weed Sci. 23:40–42.Google Scholar
4. Hamilton, K. C., and Arle, H. F. 1976. Preplanting applications of dinitroanilines in cotton. Weed Sci. 24:51–53.Google Scholar
5. Hurst, H. R. 1977. Are herbicides cutting yields? Proc. Beltwide Cotton Proc. Conf., p. 61–63.Google Scholar
6. Koskinen, W. C., Oliver, J. E., Kearney, P. C., and McWhorter, C. G. 1984. Effect of trifluralin soil metabolites on cotton growth and yield. J. Agric. Food Chem. 32:1246–1248.Google Scholar
7. Koskinen, W. C., Leffler, H. R., Oliver, J. E., Kearney, P. C., and McWhorter, C. G. 1985. Effect of trifluralin metabolites on cotton boll components and fiber and seed properties. J. Agric. Food Chem. 33:958–961.Google Scholar
8. Miller, J. H., Keeley, P. E., Carter, C. H., and Thullen, R. J. 1975. Soil persistence of trifluralin, benefin, and nitralin. Weed Sci. 23:211–214.Google Scholar
9. Neal, T. J., and Ethridge, D. E. 1986. Analysis of Texas High Plains cotton yield trends. Tex. Tech. Univ., Col. Agric. Sci. Publ. T-1-242.Google Scholar
10. Oliver, L. R., and Frans, R. E. 1968. Inhibition of cotton and soybean roots from incorporated trifluralin and persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 16:199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Ray, L. L. 1975. What is a cotton stand? Proc. West. Cotton Prod. Conf., p. 25–27.Google Scholar
12. Reddy, V. R., Baker, D. N., Whisler, F. D., and Fye, R. E. 1987. Application of GOSSYM to yield decline in cotton. I. Systems analysis of effects of herbicides on growth, development and yield. Agron. J. 79:42–47.Google Scholar