Comparison of Efficacy in Split and Single Dose Application of Mesosulfuron Methyl+Iodosulfuron Methyl Sodium on Wild Oat (Avena ludoviciana)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• z Avarseji
• M.H Rashed Mohasel
• A Nezami
• M Abbaspoor
• M Nasiri mahalati

Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

10.22067/gsc.v12i2.39149

Abstract

Nowadays herbicide reduction and different approaches leading to this goal like split application have been brought to attention. Two green house experiments were carried out to investigate the efficiency of single and split application of mesosulfuron-methy+iodosulfuron methyl to control wild oat (Avena ludoviciana). The influence of applications intervals and the ratios of the two applications doses were studied. Analysis of the data performed based on two statistical approaches: comparison between ED90 of the treatments and joint action model. The study revealed that both single and split application efficacy decreased as application timing was delayed but this reduction was more highlighted at single spray. 75:25 ratio approximately at all application timing showed more activity to control wild oat. But considering joint action model, 50:50 ratio was the only rate that showed antagonism at late growth stages of wild oat (spray 7 and 14 days after 2 leaf stage). There was an additive reaction for both 50:50 and 75:25 ratios at early growth stage of wild oat (spray 3 days after 2 leaf stage). Totally it could be concluded that efficacy of split application of mesosulfuron-methy+iodosulfuron methyl was more potent than that of the single one.

Keywords

• Additive dose model, Dose response curve, Herbicide activity
• Joint action mode
• Isobole
• Reduced doses

20.1001.1.20081472.1393.12.2.7.2

---

References

1- شبکه اطلاع رسانی گندم. 1386. وزارت جهاد کشاورزی. http://www.iranwheat.ir/sath/archive/90/pdf90/29-11-90.pdf

2- Bradford, K. 2002. Low-rate split-applied herbicide treatments for Wild Oat (Avena fatua) control in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technology. 16: 149-155.

3- Dexter, A. G., and J. L. Luecke. 1999. Survey of weed control and production practices on sugarbeet in eastern North Dakota and Minnesota. Sugarbeet Research and Extension Reports: 30: 39-69.

4- Doll, J. D. 1983. Yellow Nutsedge Control in Field Crops. North Central Region Extension. Publication No. 220. 4 pp.

5- Ferna´ndez-Quintanilla, C. L., Navarrete, C. Torner, and M. J. Sa´nchez Del Arco. 1997. Avena sterilis en cultivos de cereales. In: Biologı´a de las Malas Hierbas de Espana (eds X Sans & C Ferna´ndez-Quintanilla), 4–17 Phytoma, Valencia, Spain: In Barroso J., Fernandez-quintanilla C., Ruiz D., Hernaiz P. and Rew L.J. 2004. Spatial stability of Avena sterilis ssp. Ludoviciana populations under annual applications of low rates of imazamethabenz. European Weed Research Society Weed Research. 44: 178–186.

6- Kudsk, P. 2002. Optimizing Herbicide Performance In: Weed Management Handbook (ed. REL Naylor), 9th ed. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK. 323–344.

7- Kudsk, P., and J. C. Streibig. 2003. Herbicides- a- two edged sword. Weed Research. 43: 90-102.

8- Lockhart, S., and A. K. Howatt. 2004. Split applications of herbicides at reduced rates can effectively control wild oat (Avena fatua) in wheat. Weed Technology. 18:369-374.

9- Martin, M. P., and R. J. Field. 1988. Influence of time of emergence of wild oat on competition with wheat. Weed Research. 28:111-116.

10- Mathiassen, S. K., H. W. Ravn, and P. Kudsk. 2007. Is dose-splitting of graminicides as effective as a single application? Weed Research. 47:252-261.

11- Mekki, M. and G. D. Leroux. 1994. Activity of nicosulfiron and rimsulfuron and their mixture on field corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max) and seven weed species. Weed Science. 8: 436-440.

12- Miller, S. D., and H. P. Alley. 1987. Weed control and rotational crop response with AC 222,293. Weed Technology. 1:29-33.

13- Ramsdale, B. K. and C. G. Messersmith. 2002. Low-rate split applied herbicide treatments for wild oat (Avena fatua) control in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technology. 16: 149–155.

14- Ritz, C. and J. C. Streibig. 2005. Bioassay analysis using R. Journal of Statistical Software 12(5). URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v12/i05/ .

15- Seefeldt, S. S., J. E. Jensen, and E. P. Furst. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of dose-response relationships. Weed Technology. 9:218-227.

16- Stoller, E. W. 1981. Yellow Nutsedge: A Menace in the Corn Belt. U.S. Department of Agriculture. ARS. Technical Bulletin No. 642. 16 pp.

17- Streibig, J. C., P. Kudsk, and J. E. Jensen. 1998. A general joint action model for herbicide mixtures. Pesticide Science. 53: 21-28.

18- http://www.bayercropscience.com.au/resources/uploads/label/file8664.pdf