Evaluating Rimsulforon Efficiency on Controlling Weeds in Potato at Different Growth Stages

پژوهش های حفاظت گیاهان ایران

Article 9, Volume 31, Issue 1 - Serial Number 35, March 2017, Pages 152-165   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jpp.v31i1.58418

Authors

A. Khatami; M.T. Al-e-Ebrahim^* ; M. Mohebodini; R. Majd

University of Mohaghegh Ardabili

Abstract

Introduction Potato is globally the fourth important food crop after rice, wheat, and maize and is cultivated in several countries worldwide like Iran. Weeds are the most important restriction factor for crop development in agricultural systems and the absence of weed control lead to crop yield reduction between 10 to 100 percent and this reduction could be a serious threat for a growing world population to be considered. Rimsulfuron is a sulfonylurea herbicide for control of weeds in potato, corn, wheat, barley and canola. It can be used as pre or post emergence in potato. These herbicide act through inhibition of enzyme acetolactate synthase (ALS), which catalyzes key reactions in the biosynthesis of basic branched-chain amino acids that are essential components of the growth process in plant cell division such as valine, leucine, and isoleucine
Materials and methods In order to study rimsulfuron (Titus 25% DF) effect on weed biomass as a postemergence herbicide, a field experiment was carried out in the farm located 3 km out the city of Ardabil during 2014. The factorial experiment was performed based on randomized complete block design with three replications. Potato cultivar was Agria (common cultivar in Ardabil). The first factor was rimsulfuron doses with six levels (5, 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 gr a.i. / ha), and the second factor was time of application based on different potato growth stages, (Potato emergence, stoloning and tuber bulking). Also two treatment (with and without weeding) were considered as control. Tubers were hand sown on 22th May in rows 75 cm apart and 20 cm in the rows at 10 cm depth. Rimsulfuron was applied by backpack sprayer fitted with 8001 flat fan nozzles. Three weeks after treatment, weed sampling was carried out by a quadrate sized 0.375 m2. Tubers were harvested from two center rows to determine total tuber yield per hectare. Two models fitted to the data were three parameter logistic and three parameter sigmoid.
Data were analyzed using SAS 9.1 and MSTAT-C. Analysis of variance was used to test the significance of variance sources, and Duncan’s Multiple range test (P ≤ 0.05) was used to compare the differences among treatments.
Results and Discussion Results showed that the maximum reduction percent of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.), field bind weed (Convolvulus arvensis L.), lambsquarter (Chenopodium album L.), total weed biomass and density achieved by 40 and 50 gr a.i. / ha application. So that 40 and 50 gr a.i. /ha of rimsulfuron compared to control reduced weed density up to 49.47and 55.38 % and biomass up to 89.97 and 94.63 %, respectively. Also results showed that 40 and 50 gr a.i. /ha of rimsulfuron compared to control reduced biomass of redroot pigweed 89.91 and 95.50 %, Field bind weed 84.28 and 94.79 % and lambsquarter 92.75 and 96.87 percent respectively. That there was not statistically significant difference between 40 and 50 gr a.i. /ha of rimsulfuron.
Among rimsulfuron application times, potato emergence stage reduced total weed density and biomass 36.45 and 68.04 %, respectively which is compared to control (weedy). Rimsulfuron application at potato emergence stage reduced biomass of redroot pigweed and lambsquarter 62.51 and 71.08 percent respectively. However it had no significant effect on biomass of Field bind weed.
The results showed that potato tuber yield was 46.31 and 45.96 ton/ ha while rimsulfuron applied 40 and 50 gr a.i. / ha. Among rimsulfuron application times, potato emergence stage had total tuber yield 47.58 ton/ha.
Conclusion Results showed that the maximum reduction percentage in weed density and biomass was observed for treatments in which were used 40 and 50 gr a.i. / ha application. Application of rimsulfuron at potato emergence reduced weed density and biomass and increased total tuber yield. Itproves the effectiveness of the rimsulfuron for potato emergence without damage. Furthermore the effective dose of rimsulfuron for 50 percent reduction in biomass of redroot pigweed, field bind weed and lambsquarter were 14.36, 12.26 and 10.17 g a.i. /ha, respectively. The results also showed that rimsulfuron application 40 and 50 gr a.i. /ha increased total tuber yield by 19.90 and 20.51% respectively. Application of 40 and 50 gr a.i. / ha at potato emergence stage produced maximum total tuber yield per hectare. The result of this study showed that 40 and 50 gr a.i. /ha rimsulfuron application at potato emergence assessed as the best treatment to control weed and increase total yield.

Keywords

Broad leaf weeds; Dose response; Tuber yield; Weed biomass; Weed density

References

1- Alebrahim M.T., Rashed Mohassel M.H., Wilcockson S., Baghestani M.A., and Ghorbani R. 2011. Evaluatin of 6 unregistered herbicides efficacy in Iran potato fields and herbicide relation to cytochromes P450 mono- oxygenase enzyme. Ph.D. thesis Ferdowsi, University of Mashhad, Iran. (in Persian with English abstract).

2- Alebrahim M.T., Rashed Mohassel M.H., Wilcockson S., Baghestani M.A., and Ghorbani R. 2012. Evaluating of some preemergence herbicides for lambsquarter and redroot pigweed control in potato fields. Plant Protection, 25(4): 358- 367.

3- Alebrahim M.T., Rashed Mohassel M.H., Wilcockson S., Baghestani M.A., Ghorbani R., and Serajchi M. 2013. Evaluating of some herbicides for common lambsquarter and prostrate pigweed control in potato fields. Electronic Journal of Crop Production, 6(1):19-37. (in Persian)

4- Alizadeh H., Noruzi Sh., and Oveisi M. 1393. Weed science. Tehran University Press, Iran. 686 p. (in Persian)

5- Anonymous. 2003. Virginia crops and Livestock. Virginia Agricultural statistics Service. 73(2).

6- Anonymus. 2013. www.WSSA.com.

7- Arab H.R., Afshari H., Daliri M.S., Laei G., and Toudar S.R. 2011. The effect of planting date, depth and density on yield and yield components of potato in Shahrood (Iran). Journal of Research in Agricultural Science, 7:141–149.

8- Auskarniene O., Psibisauskiene G., Auskalnis A., and kadzys A. 2010. Cultivar and plant density influence on weediness in spring barely crops. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture, 97: 53- 60.

9- Chakraborty S., Chakraborty N., and Datta A. 2010. Increased nutritive value of transgenic potato by expressing a nonallergenic seed albumin gene from Amaranthus hypochondriacus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 97 (7):3724–3729.

10- Corey V.R., and Joey I. 1998. Weed control and potato variety tolerance to herbicide. Annual report of Mulbauer Experiment Station, Oregon State University.

11- Dallyn S.L. 1976. The use of minimum tillage plus herbicides in potato production American Potato Journal, 51:278- 82.

12- Donald W, 2007. Control of both winter annual and summer annual weeds in no-till corn with between-row mowing systems. Weed Technology, 21:591–601.

13- Fabrio C., Martin de Santa Olalla F., de Juan J.A. 2001. Yield and size of deficit irrigated potatoes. Agricultural Water Management, 48: 255-266.

14- Fathi Gh. 2000. Efficacy of a few chemical and mechanical methods for weed control in corn single cross 704 in Ahvaz conditions. Journal of Iranian Agricultural science, 34(1):187-197. (in Persian)

15- FAO.2014. FAO statistical database. Available at http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC

16- Friesen G.H., and Wall D.A. 1984. Response of potato (Solanum tuberosum) cultivars to metribuzin. Weed Science, 32: 442-444.

17- Haas B.J., Kamoun S., Zody M.C., Jiang R.H.Y., Handsaker R.E., Cano L.M., and et al. 2009. Genome sequence and analysis of the Irish potato famine pathogen Phytophthora infestans. Nature, 461: 393–398.

18- Hassanpanah D., Hosseinzadeh A.A., and Allahyari N. 2009. Evaluation of planting date effects on yield and yield components of Savalan and Agria cultivars in Ardabil region. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 7:525–528.

19- Hijmans R.J. 2003. The effect of climate change on global potato production. American Journal of Potato Research, 80: 271–280.

20- Hutchinson P.J.S., Eberlein C.V., and Tonks D.J. 2004. Broadleaf weed control and potato crop safety with postemergence rimsulfuron, metribuzin and adjuvant combination. Weed Technology, 18:750-756.

21- Hutchinson P.J., Bodyston R.A., and Ransom C. 2005. Weed management in potatoes with spartan herbicide. Pacific Northwest Extension Bulletin. 577.6.

22- Li P.H. 1985. Potato Physiology, Academic Press, USA. 602 Pp.

23- Mithila C.J., Blackshaw R.E., Cachcart R.J. and Hall J.C. 2008. Physiological bassis for reduced glyphosate efficacy on weed growth under low soil nitrogen. Weed Science, 56: 12-17.

24- Musavi M. 2001. Integrated weed management. Tehran Miaad publication, 193 p. (in Persian)

25- Rao V.S. 2000. Principles of Weed Science, second ed. Science Publishers, Inc, New Hampshire.

26- Robinson D.K., Monks D.W., and Monaco T.J. 1996. Potato (Solanum tuberosum) tolerance and susceptibility of eight weeds to rimsulfuron with without metribuzin. Weed Technology, 10:29-34.

27- Samadi E., and Alebrahim M.T. 2015. Effect of dose and oxadiargyl application time at the different growth stages on weed biomass and tuber yield of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 9(4):625-644. (in Persian with English summary)

28- Seefldet S.S., Jensen J.E., and Fuerft E.P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dese- response relationship. Weed Technology, 9:218-225.

29- Shane Hennigh D., and Al-Khatib k. 2010. Response of Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus- galli)٫ Green Foxtail (Setaria viridis), Longspine Sandbur (Cenchrus longispinus), and Large Crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) to nicosulfuron and rimsulfuron. Weed Science, 58:189- 194.

30- Somanni L. 1992. Dictionary of Weed Science. Argotic Publishing Academy (India).

31- Stall W.M. 1999. Weed control in potato. Horticultural Science Department, Cooperative Extention Services, University of Florida Publication, HS- 194.

32- Steckel L.E., Defelice M.S., and Sims B.D. 1990. Integrating reduced rates of postemergence herbicides and cultivation for broadleaf weed control in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Science, 38:541-545.

33- Tollenaar M., Missanka S.P., Aguilera A., Weise S.F., Weisw F., and Swanton C.J. 1999. Effect of weed interference and soil nitrogen on four maize hybrids. Agronomy Journal, 86:569-601.

34- Tonks D.J., and Eberlein C.V. 2001. Postemergence weed control rimsulfuron and various adjuvants in potato (Solanum tuberosum). Weed Technology, 15:613-616.

35- Uchino H., Iwama K., Jitsuyama Y., Ichiyama K., Sugiura E.R.I., Yudate T., Nakamura S., and Gopal J.A.I. 2012. Effect of inter seeding cover crops and fertilization on weed suppression under an organic and rotational cropping system stability of weed suppression over years and main crops of potato, maize and soybean. Field Crops Research, 127:9–16.

36- Van Der Linden C.G., Anithakumari A.M., van Culemborg M., and Visser R.G.F. Dissecting the genetics of abiotic stress tolerance in potato. In: Plant and Animal Genomes 19th Conference, 15–19 Jan. 2011. San Diego.

37- Van der Zaag D.E. 1992. Potatoes and their cultivations in the Netherlands. Netherlands Potato Consultative Institute publication, The Netherlands, 47p.

38- Zand E., Baghestani M.A., and Montazeri M. 2005. Weed control in wheat field in Iran. Tehran Amoozesh Keshavarzi publication, 85p. (in Persian)

39- Zand E., Mousavi S.K., and Heidari A. 2008. Herbicides and their applications. University of Mashhad Press. 552 p. (in Persian)