Transcript
Page 1: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to

Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Lynn M. Sosnoskie and A. Stanley CulpepperUGA, Tifton, GA

Jared WhitakerUGA, Statesboro, GA

Jeremy M. KichlerUGA, Oglethorpe, GA

Alan C. York NCSU, Raleigh, NC

Page 2: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST
Page 3: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

AMAPA is large, competitive, C4 annual that can form dense populations in infested fields,

reducing yields and harvest efficiency

Page 4: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Cotton is particularly susceptible to weed interference

• Planted at lower densities than other crops

• Requires higher temperatures for rapid growth

• Uncompetitive crop canopy

Page 5: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

1X Weathermax + 1X Staple LX at 5 WAT

Page 6: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST
Page 7: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

1/2 inch in 12 hr

4 inches 52 hr

Page 8: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Residual Herbicide use is needed for the management of AMAPA in cotton

• Milo-Pro TM

– Propazine

– PSII electron transport inhibitor

– PRE and POST for grain sorghum

– 0.75 to 1.2 qts/A for sandy loam to clay loam soils

– Not recommended for sands or loamy sands

– Cotton does have some tolerance to propazine

• Abernathy et al. 1969. Agron. J.

• Kendig et al. 2006. PHP

Page 9: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

LocationsMacon County, GA and Moultrie, GA

• Sutton’s Field and Southern Ag Expo• Sandy loam• Planted 28 May, 2009 (Macon)• Planted 14 May, 2009 (Moultrie)• 6’ x 25’ plots, 36” row spacing• DP 0949 B2RF• Herbicide treatments replicated 3X in RCBD• Herbicides applied at application volume of 14.8 Gal/A with

CO2 backpack sprayer and flat fan nozzles

• Crop injury • GLY-R AMAPA control at Macon County site

Page 10: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Macon County and Moultrie, GATRT PRE POST1 POST2

    (2-3 Leaf) (6-8 Leaf)

1 none none none

2Milo-Pro

1 pt/AWMAX WMAX

3Milo-Pro

2 pt/AWMAX WMAX

4Cotoran

2 pt/AWMAX WMAX

5 none WMAX WMAX

6 noneMilo-Pro 1 pt/A

WMAXWMAX

7 noneMilo-Pro 2 pt/A

WMAXWMAX

8 noneParrlay 1.3 pt/A

WMAXWMAX

9 noneStaple 2.5 oz/A

WMAXWMAX

10Reflex 1 pt/A

WMAX WMAX

11Reflex 1 pt/A

Milo-Pro 2 pt/A WMAX

WMAX

12Reflex 1 pt/A

Milo-Pro 1 pt/A WMAX

Milo-Pro 1 pt/A WMAX

Page 11: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Locations

Rocky Mount, NC (2 sites)• Upper Coastal Plain Research Station • Sandy loam• Planted 6 and 13 May, 2009• 12’ x 30’ plots, 36” row spacing • DP 0924 B2RF• Herbicide treatments replicated 4X in RCBD• Herbicides applied at application volume of 14.8 Gal/A with

CO2 backpack sprayer and flat fan nozzles

• Crop injury

Page 12: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Rocky Mount, NCTRT PRE POST1 POST2

    (2-3 Leaf) (6-8 Leaf)

1 none none none

2Milo-Pro

1 pt/APMAX PMAX

3Milo-Pro

2 pt/APMAX PMAX

4Cotoran2 pt/A

PMAX PMAX

5 none PMAX PMAX

6 noneMilo-Pro 1 pt/A

PMAXPMAX

7 noneMilo-Pro 2 pt/A

PMAXPMAX

8 noneParrlay 1.3 pt/A

PMAXPMAX

9 noneStaple 2.5 oz/A

PMAXPMAX

Page 13: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Cotton Injury

Page 14: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Cotton Injury - At Plant Application Data averaged across Macon County and Moultrie, GA, sites

1 WA-PRE 3 WA-PRE

No Pre 0% 0%

Milo-Pro

1 or 2 pt/A

0% 0%

Cotoran

2 pt/A

0% 0%

Reflex

1 pt/A

11% 5%

Page 15: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Reflex Injury at 1pt/A PRE

Page 16: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Cotton Injury – POST Application to 2-3 Leaf Cotton Data averaged across Macon County and Moultrie, GA, sites

1 WA-POST1 3 WA-POST1

Weathermax

22 oz/A

0% 0%

Milo-Pro + Weathermax

1 pt/A + 22 oz/A

0% 0%

Milo-Pro + Weathermax

2 pt/A + 22 oz/A

3% 0%

Parrlay + Weathermax

1.33 pt/A + 22 oz/A

5% 0%

Staple + Weathermax

2.5 oz/A + 22 oz/A

10% 0%

Page 17: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Milo-Pro 2 pt/A plus Roundup POST

1 WA-POST1

Application to 2-3 leaf cotton

Page 18: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Rocky Mount, NC

Some Milo-Pro PRE injury, especially at higher rate, but no more than 10% in any one plot; mean injury was not >6% and was transient

Page 19: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Rocky Mount, NC

Some Milo-Pro POST injury, especially at higher rate, but no more than 10% in any one plot; mean injury was not >8% and was transient

Page 20: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

GLY-R AMAPA Control

Page 21: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

GLY-R AMAPA Control - At Plant ApplicationMacon County, GA

1 WA-PRE 3 WA-PRE

No Pre 0% 0%

Milo-Pro

1 or 2 pt/A

99% 85-96%

Cotoran

2 pt/A

98% 82%

Reflex

1 pt/A

99% 99%

Page 22: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

8 22 28 40 47 54 61 80 135

DA-PRE

GL

Y-R

AM

AP

A C

on

tro

l (%

)Milo-pro 1 pt/A Milo-pro 2 pt/A Cotoran 2 pt/A Reflex 1 pt/A

Page 23: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

GLY-R AMAPA Control – POST1 ApplicationMacon County, GA

1 WA-POST1 3 WA-POST1

No PRE

Parrlay POST1

0% 0%

No PREMilo-Pro (1 pt) POST1

0% 7%

No PREMilo-Pro (2 pt) POST1

60% 47%

No PRE

Staple POST1

95% 77%

All treatments received Weathermax at 22 oz/A at POST1

Page 24: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

0

20

40

60

80

100

6 18 25 32 39 58 113

DA-POST1

GL

Y-R

AM

AP

A C

on

tro

l (%

)

Milo-pro 1 pt/A Milo-pro 2 pt/A Parrlay 1.33 pt/A Staple 2.5 oz/A

Page 25: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

GLY-R AMAPA Control – All POST ApplicationsMacon County, GA

1 WA-POST2 2 WA-POST2 1 WA-POST3 3 WA-POST3

Reflex

PRE84% 75% 77% 67%

Reflex

PRE

Milo-Pro (1 pt/A)

POST1

Milo-Pro (1 pt/A)

POST2

97% 94% 93% 93%

Reflex

PRE

Milo-Pro (2 pt/A)

POST1

97% 85% 88% 88%

All treatments received Weathermax at 22 oz/A at POST1 and POST2

All treatments received Direx and MSMA at Layby (POST3)

Page 26: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Reflex PRE fb WMAX fb WMAX fb Direx + MSMA

Page 27: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Reflex PRE fb Milo-Pro (2 pt/A) + WMAX fb WMAX fb Direx + MSMA

Page 28: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Reflex PRE fb Milo-Pro (1 pt/A) + WMAX fb

Milo-Pro (1 pt/A) + WMAX fb Direx + MSMA

Page 29: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

GLY-R AMAPA Control and YieldMacon County, GA

End of season control

Yield

(lbs seed cotton/A)

Reflex

PRE

50% 732

Reflex

PRE

Milo-Pro (1 pt/A)

POST1,2

86% 1359

Reflex

PRE

Milo-Pro (2 pt/A)

POST1

78% 1192

All treatments received Weathermax at 22 oz/A POST1 and POST2

All treatments received Direx and MSMA at Layby (POST3)

Page 30: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Cotton Injury and Yield Clayton, NC

% Chlorosis

3 WA-PRE

% GR

3 WA-PRE

Yield(lbs seed cotton/A)

No Pre 0% 0% 2971

Milo-Pro PRE

2 pt/A

10% 13% 2577

Milo-Pro PRE

4 pt/A

27% 32% 2003

Injury ratings of 5 to 7% were observed 1-3 WA-PRE applications of Milo-Pro at 1 pt/A at Attapulgus, GA. No injury was observed 6 WA-PRE. This isn’t different than what was seen at Rocky Mount.

Injury ratings of 13 to 32% were observed 1-3 WA-PRE applications of Milo-Pro at 2 pt/A at Attapulgus, GA. Injury was still 33% 3 WA-POST2.

Page 31: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Previous Research

• Abernathy et al. 1969. Agron. J.

– 48 cotton varieties evaluated for resistance to propazine broadcast PRE at 0.56 kg/ha

– Sandy loam with OM <1%

– Injury ratings ranged from 3-53%• Aubun M, Acala B-3080, Paymaster 303 = 3%• Coker 5110, Coker 312 = 8%• Paymaster 111A, Deltapine SR-2 = 50%• Blightmaster A-5 = 53%

– Less than 20% was regarded as a tolerant response to propazine

Page 32: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Previous Research

• Kendig et al. 2006. Plant Health Progress

– DP 5415RR was screened for tolerant to propazine

– 5 rates: 0, 0.25X, 0.5X, 1X, 2X of 1.12 kg/ha

– 4 growth stages: PRE, cotyledon, 2-lf, 4-lf

– Some injury observed for PRE applications (sandy-loam) but visual injury and weight reductions were greatest from over the top applications made at the cotyledon and 2-lf stages

– Injury increased with rate

Page 33: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Summary

• Milo-Pro applied PRE at 1-2 pts/A injured cotton 0-7% (Attapulgus, Rocky Mount); injury was transient

• There was no observable injury at Macon County and Moultrie for Milo-Pro applied PRE

• Higher rates (4 lbs/A), on sandier soils (Attapulgus, Clayton) with adequate rainfall resulted in unacceptable injury ratings due to PRE applications

• Injury resulting from POST applications of Milo-Pro did not exceed 8%; injury was not greater than what was observed for Staple; injury was transient

Page 34: Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST

Summary• Residual herbicides (PRE and POST) are crucial for managing

Palmer amaranth

• Milo-Pro (2 pt/A) and Reflex (1 pt/A) provided 96% and 99% control, respectively at 3 WA-PRE, the timing of the first POST application

• Milo-Pro was most effective as a POST applied herbicide when following Reflex PRE (residual and topical activity)

• A single application (2 pt/A POST1) or two applications (1 pt/A POST1 and POST2) of Milo-Pro provided 85% and 94% control, respectively, of GLY-R Palmer 2 WA-POST2 and carried the crop to layby and harvest

• According to these results, Milo-Pro may be a useful component in an INTEGRATED program to manage GLY-R Palmer amaranth


Top Related