Return
to 2001 Conference Proceedings
Managing
Volunteer after Herbicide-Resistant Crops
Curtis
Rainbolt, UI Weed Science Doctoral Student; Donn Thill, UI Weed Scientist; Dan
Ball, OSU Weed Scientist, Pendleton, OR; Joe Yenish, WSU Extension Weed Scientist;
and Frank Young, USDA-ARS Weed Scientist, Pullman, WA
ABSTRACT
Alternatives
to Roundup
were evaluated
near Ralston, WA at the USDA Ralston Direct Seeding Project Site and near Moscow,
ID at the University of Idaho Parker Research Farm in 2000. Volunteer Roundup
Ready
spring wheat was
best controlled and its biomass reduced most by Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, and treatments
containing Select
and
Assure II
. Clearfield
wheat was controlled best with Touchdown
,
Assure II
, Select
,
Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
,
and all treatments containing Roundup Ultra RT
.
Roundup Ready
canola was
controlled best with Fallowmaster
,
Landmaster
, and treatments
containing Gramoxone Extra
.
Control of Clearfield
and Liberty Link
canola
was greatest with Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, Touchdown
,
and all treatments containing Roundup Ultra RT
.
Grass herbicides were applied at two growth stages and evaluated for control
of volunteer Roundup Ready
spring wheat at Genessee, ID, Pendleton, OR, and Pullman, WA. At Genessee, control
of Roundup Ready
spring
wheat was 90% or more with all treatments containing Assure II
,
Select
, or Poast
applied at either timing, while at Pendelton and Pullman, control was better
with these treatments applied at the 3 to 4 leaf growth stage, compared to those
made at the 5 to 6 leaf stage.
INTRODUCTION
Farmers are
readily adopting herbicide-resistant crops (HRC) into their crop production
systems. Growers in Canada and the mid-western USA are planting millions of
acres of farmland to herbicide-resistant canola, and corn and soybean, respectively.
Herbicide-resistant wheat will be available soon to USA and Canadian farmers.
They likely will adopt this new technology quickly and with the same enthusiasm
as canola, corn, and soybean growers. Other new HRC will continue to be introduced
during the next several years, which may result in crop rotations containing
mostly or all herbicide-resistant cultivars. However, there is little or no
information on how to safely and effectively incorporate them into Pacific Northwest
(PNW) direct-seed, dry land winter wheat cropping systems. Important, unanswered
questions include how best to control volunteer herbicide resistant crops in
these situations. Traditionally, growers have relied on Roundup
to control volunteer crops and weeds in no-till cropping systems. This poses
a problem for control of volunteer herbicide resistant crops (HRC) such as Roundup
Ready
spring wheat and
canola. Studies were conducted at several locations in the PNW to evaluate alternatives
to traditional methods for control of volunteer Roundup Ready
spring wheat and canola, Clearfield
wheat and canola, and Liberty Link
canola.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ralston,
WA and Moscow, ID. Plots of Roundup Ready
spring wheat and canola, Clearfield
wheat and canola, and Liberty Link
canola were planted into standing wheat stubble to simulate volunteer crops
near Ralston, WA at the USDA Ralston Direct Seeding Project Site on April 31
and near Moscow, ID at the University of Idaho Parker Research Farm on May 8,
2000. Herbicide treatments were applied on May 15 at Ralston and on June 11
at Moscow. Control was evaluated visually at both locations 14 and 21 days after
treatment (DAT). Herbicide treatments were Roundup Ultra RT
,
Landmaster BW
, Fallowmaster
,
Gramoxone Extra
, Rely
,
Touchdown
, Roundup Ultra
RT
+ Rely
,
Roundup Ultra RT
+ Gramoxone
Extra
, Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, Assure II
,
Assure II
+ Roundup Ultra
RT
, Select
,
Select
+ Roundup Ultra
RT
, and an untreated
control (Table 1). Above ground biomass was collected from a 2.7 ft2 area in
each plot in the Roundup Readyâ wheat and Clearfield
wheat at Ralston and in all crops at Moscow 28 DAT. Canola biomass was not collected
at Ralston due to inconsistent emergence and poor stand. Both studies were terminated
immediately after biomass collection to prevent seed production.
Genessee,
ID, Pendleton, OR, and Pullman, WA. Plots of 'Bobwhite' Roundup Ready
spring wheat were seeded to simulate volunteer spring wheat in spring 2000 near
Genessee, ID at the University of Idaho Kambitsch Research Farm on May 5, near
Pendleton, OR at the Oregon State University Columbia Basin Agricultural Research
Center on March 31, and near Pullman, WA on April 5. Treatments were Roundup
Ultra
at 0.56 lb/A, Assure
II
at 0.03, 0.046, and
0.061 lb/A, Roundup Ultra
at 0.56 lb/A + Assure II
at 0.03 lb/A, Roundup Ultra
at 0.56 lb/A + Assure II
at 0.046 lb/A, Roundup Ultra
at 0.56 lb/A + Assure II
at 0.061 lb/A, MON 78195 at 0.525, 0.788, and 1.05 lb/A, Selectâ at 0.109 lb/A,
and Poastâ at 0.375 lb/A applied when the wheat was in the 3 to 4 and in the
5 to 6 leaf stages, and one untreated control (Table 2). Control was evaluated
visually on June 21 and July 5 at Genessee, on May 30 and June 13 at Pendleton,
and on June 19 at Pullman. All studies were terminated prior to spring wheat
seed production.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Ralston,
WA. At Ralston, Roundup Ready
wheat (RRW) biomass was reduced, compared to the untreated control, by all treatments
except Roundup Ultra RT
,
Touchdown
, Landmaster
,and
Fallowmaster
(Table 3).
The best treatments were Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, Gramoxone Extra
,
Assure II
, Select
,
Roundup Ultra RT
+ Select
,
and Roundup Ultra RT
+
Assure II
, which reduced
RRW biomass 92 to 96%. All herbicides reduced biomass of Clearfield
wheat (CFW) compared to the untreated control; biomass of CFW was reduced 89%
or more by all treatments except Rely
(49% reduction). Volunteer crop control 14 days after treatment (DAT) (data
not shown) was similar to 21 DAT (Table 4), with the exception of slightly higher
control of RRW and CFW with treatments containing Gramoxone Extra
14 DAT. By 21 DAT, RRW control was best (89 to 96%) with Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, and treatments
containing Select
or Assure
II
. CFW control was 88%
or greater with all treatments except Rely
(36%) and Gramoxone Extra
(83%). Control of glyphosate-resistant canola (RRC) was best with Roundup Ultra
RT
+ Gramoxone Extra
(98%) and Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
(100%). Control
of Clearfield
canola (CFC)
and Liberty Link
canola
(LLC) was 88% or better with Gramoxone Extra
,
Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
,
Touchdown
, and all treatments
containing Roundup Ultra RT
.
Moscow,
ID. At Moscow, all treatments containing Rely
,
Gramoxone Extra
, Assure
II
, and Select
reduced RRW biomass compared to the untreated control (Table 5). Assure II
and Select
treatments
reduced biomass most (86 to 92%). CFW biomass was reduced by all treatments
compared to the untreated control. Biomass was reduced 87% or greater with all
treatments containing Roundup Ultra RT
,
Touchdown
, Assure II
,
or Select
. RRC biomass
was reduced by Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
(100%),Landmaster
(96%), Fallowmaster
(92%),
Roundup Ultra RT
+ Gramoxone
Extra
(77%), Gramoxone
Extra
(76%), Rely
(67%), and Roundup Ultra RT
+ Rely
(61%),. CFC biomass
was reduced 89% or more by all treatments except Assure II
and Select
. LLC biomass
was reduced 82% or more by all treatments except Rely
,
Assure II
, and Select
.
Volunteer crop control 14 DAT (data not shown) was similar to 21 DAT (Table
6), with the exception of slightly higher control of RRW and CFW with treatments
containing Gramoxone Extra
14 DAT. By 21 DAT, RRW control was 91% or better with Assure II
,
Roundup Ultra RT
+ Assure
II
, Select
,
and Roundup Ultra RT
+
Select
. CFW control was
89 to 100% with Select
,
Assure II
, Touchdown
,
and all treatments containing Roundup Ultra RT
except Roundup Ultra RT
+ Gramoxone Extra
. RRC
was controlled 96 to 100% with Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, Landmaster
,
and Fallowmaster
. Control
of CFC and LLC was 93% or better with Gramoxone Extra
+ Direx
, Touchdown
,
and all treatments containing Roundup Ultra RT
except Roundup Ultra RT
+ Rely
.
Genessee,
ID, Pendleton, OR, and Pullman, WA. At Genessee on June 21, volunteer
Roundup Ready
wheat (RRW)
control ranged from 83 to 97% for all treatments applied at the 3 to 4 leaf
stage (Table 7), except Roundup Ultra RT
alone (0% control). Control ranged from 30 to 44% for all treatments applied
at the 5 to 6 leaf stage, with the exception of Roundup Ultra RT
alone (0%). By July 5, all treatments, except Roundup Ultra RT
alone, controlled RRW 90 to 99%. Control was best (97% or better) with Select
or Poast
applied at either
timing.
At Pendleton
on May 30, volunteer RRW control was 97% or better for all treatments applied
at the 3 to 4 leaf stage, except Roundup Ultra RT
applied alone (0% control). Control ranged from 63 to 85% for all treatments
applied at the 5 to 6 leaf stage, with the exception of Roundup Ultra RT
applied alone (0%). By June 13, RRW control ranged from 98 to 100% for all treatments
applied at the 3 to 4 leaf stage and from 75 to 92% for all treatments applied
at the 5 to 6 leaf stage, with the exception of Roundup Ultra RT
applied at either timing (0%).
At Pullman
on June 19, volunteer RRW control ranged from 90 to 95% for all treatments applied
at the 3 to 4 leaf stage and from 70 to 88% for all treatments applied at the
5 to 6 leaf stage, with the exception of Roundup Ultra RT
applied at at either timing (0%).






