Assessment of Dicamba and 2,4-D Residues in Palmer amaranth and Soybean

IF 1.3 3区 农林科学 Q3 AGRONOMY Weed Technology Pub Date : 2023-09-04 DOI:10.1017/wet.2023.60
M. L. Zaccaro-Gruener, J. Norsworthy, L. Piveta, L. Barber, Andy Mauromoustakos
{"title":"Assessment of Dicamba and 2,4-D Residues in Palmer amaranth and Soybean","authors":"M. L. Zaccaro-Gruener, J. Norsworthy, L. Piveta, L. Barber, Andy Mauromoustakos","doi":"10.1017/wet.2023.60","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Off-target movement of 2,4-D and dicamba are sometimes to blame as the cause of symptoms observed in weeds growing in production fields. Pesticide regulatory authorities routinely sample tissue of weeds or crops from fields under investigation for potential illegal use of auxin herbicides. This research aimed to determine if analytical tests of herbicide residue on soybean or Palmer amaranth vegetation treated with dicamba or 2,4-D could be used to differentiate between rates applied and how the residue levels decay over a one-month interval. Four rates of each herbicide (1X, 0.1X, 0.01X, and 0.001X) were applied, with a 1X rate of dicamba and 2,4-D assumed to be 560 and 1065 g ae ha-1, respectively. Experiments included dicamba- and 2,4-D-resistant soybean (Xtend and Enlist traits, respectively) and Palmer amaranth categorized by size (8-15 cm, 20-30 cm, and 35-50 cm in height). Analytical results showed that herbicide residues were detected above detection limits of 0.04 µg g-1 for dicamba and 0.004 µg g-1 for 2,4-D, respectively, particularly for samples treated with a 1X and 0.1X rate of dicamba or 2,4-D. Non-detections were frequent, even as early as 2 to 3 days after treatment (DAT), with 0.01X and 0.001X rates of 2,4-D or dicamba. Dicamba residues declined rapidly on Xtend soybean treated with dicamba, and 2,4-D residue in Enlist soybean. The severity of auxin symptomology generally agreed with the ability to detect dicamba or 2,4-D residue in plant tissue for Palmer amaranth, while, for soybean, this was not always the case. Hence, detecting dicamba or 2,4-D residues in both Palmer amaranth and soybean vegetation, along with visible symptoms on both plants during investigations, would generally indicate an earlier direct application of the auxin herbicide rather than off-target movement being the cause of detection.","PeriodicalId":23710,"journal":{"name":"Weed Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Weed Technology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/wet.2023.60","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Off-target movement of 2,4-D and dicamba are sometimes to blame as the cause of symptoms observed in weeds growing in production fields. Pesticide regulatory authorities routinely sample tissue of weeds or crops from fields under investigation for potential illegal use of auxin herbicides. This research aimed to determine if analytical tests of herbicide residue on soybean or Palmer amaranth vegetation treated with dicamba or 2,4-D could be used to differentiate between rates applied and how the residue levels decay over a one-month interval. Four rates of each herbicide (1X, 0.1X, 0.01X, and 0.001X) were applied, with a 1X rate of dicamba and 2,4-D assumed to be 560 and 1065 g ae ha-1, respectively. Experiments included dicamba- and 2,4-D-resistant soybean (Xtend and Enlist traits, respectively) and Palmer amaranth categorized by size (8-15 cm, 20-30 cm, and 35-50 cm in height). Analytical results showed that herbicide residues were detected above detection limits of 0.04 µg g-1 for dicamba and 0.004 µg g-1 for 2,4-D, respectively, particularly for samples treated with a 1X and 0.1X rate of dicamba or 2,4-D. Non-detections were frequent, even as early as 2 to 3 days after treatment (DAT), with 0.01X and 0.001X rates of 2,4-D or dicamba. Dicamba residues declined rapidly on Xtend soybean treated with dicamba, and 2,4-D residue in Enlist soybean. The severity of auxin symptomology generally agreed with the ability to detect dicamba or 2,4-D residue in plant tissue for Palmer amaranth, while, for soybean, this was not always the case. Hence, detecting dicamba or 2,4-D residues in both Palmer amaranth and soybean vegetation, along with visible symptoms on both plants during investigations, would generally indicate an earlier direct application of the auxin herbicide rather than off-target movement being the cause of detection.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
麦草畏和2,4-D在紫苋和大豆中的残留评价
2,4-D和麦草畏的脱靶运动有时被认为是生产田杂草出现症状的原因。农药监管机构经常从被调查可能非法使用生长素除草剂的田地中抽取杂草或作物的组织样本。这项研究旨在确定用麦草畏或2,4-D处理的大豆或帕尔默苋植被上除草剂残留的分析测试是否可以用来区分施用速率和残留水平如何在一个月内衰减。每种除草剂施用四种速率(1X、0.1X、0.01X和0.001X),麦草畏和2,4-D的1X速率分别假定为560和1065 g ae ha-1。实验包括抗麦草畏和2,4-D的大豆(分别为Xtend和Enlist性状)和按大小分类的Palmer苋(高度分别为8-15厘米、20-30厘米和35-50厘米)。分析结果表明,麦草畏和2,4-D的除草剂残留量分别高于0.04µg g-1和0.004µg g-2的检测限,尤其是用1倍和0.1倍麦草畏或2,4-D处理的样品。即使早在治疗后2至3天(DAT),未检测到的情况也很常见,2,4-D或麦草畏的检出率分别为0.01X和0.001X。麦草畏处理的Xtend大豆中麦草畏残留量迅速下降,Enlist大豆中2,4-D残留量迅速减少。生长素症状的严重程度通常与检测植物组织中麦草畏或2,4-D残留的能力一致,而对于大豆,情况并非总是如此。因此,在调查期间,在Palmer苋和大豆植被中检测到麦草畏或2,4-D残留,以及在这两种植物上的明显症状,通常表明检测的原因是生长素除草剂的早期直接施用,而不是脱靶运动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Weed Technology
Weed Technology 农林科学-农艺学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
21.40%
发文量
89
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Weed Technology publishes original research and scholarship in the form of peer-reviewed articles focused on understanding how weeds are managed. The journal focuses on: - Applied aspects concerning the management of weeds in agricultural systems - Herbicides used to manage undesired vegetation, weed biology and control - Weed/crop management systems - Reports of new weed problems -New technologies for weed management and special articles emphasizing technology transfer to improve weed control -Articles dealing with plant growth regulators and management of undesired plant growth may also be accepted, provided there is clear relevance to weed science technology, e.g., turfgrass or woody plant management along rights-of-way, vegetation management in forest, aquatic, or other non-crop situations. -Surveys, education, and extension topics related to weeds will also be considered
期刊最新文献
Target site mechanism confers resistance pattern of ACCase-inhibitors in bearded sprangletop (Leptochloa fusca ssp. fascicularis) from California Response of stevia (Stevia rebaudiana) to reduced risk synthetic and nonsynthetic herbicides applied post-transplant Glyphosate-resistant and susceptible downy brome (Bromus tectorum) management with soil-applied residual herbicides Integrating Cover Crops and Herbicides for Weed Control in Soybean Effect of herbicide programs on control and seed production of multiple herbicide-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in corn resistant to 2,4-D/glufosinate/glyphosate
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1