甜菜品种和群体对出苗期除草剂的响应

Trevor M. Dale, J. McGrath, K. Renner
{"title":"甜菜品种和群体对出苗期除草剂的响应","authors":"Trevor M. Dale, J. McGrath, K. Renner","doi":"10.5274/JSBR.42.3.119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Injury from herbicides may reduce sugarbeet yield or sugar content. Previous research has shown a differential response of sugarbeet varieties to herbicides. We evaluated the growth response of fourteen sugarbeet varieties, and four USDA sugarbeet entries (three USDA experimental hybrids and their pollinator) to postemergence applications of the micro-rate of desmedipham plus phenmedipham (1:1 ratio) at 0.09 kg ai/ha plus triflusulfuron at 0.004 kg ai/ha plus clopyralid at 0.023 kg ae/ha plus methylated seed oil at 1.5% v/v. Sugarbeets were sprayed three times at weekly intervals beginning at the cotyledon growth stage. Sugarbeet varieties differed in their response to micro-rate herbicide applications. Leaf area, fresh weight and dry weight of Hilleshog E-17 and ACH 555, two diploid varieties, were not reduced by micro-rate applications, while the leaf area of Beta 5400 and Beta 5736, two triploid varieties, was reduced by 24 and 35%, respectively, compared to their respective untreated controls. In a second experiment, the leaf area and fresh and dry weight of Spartan and Hilleshog E-17 were not reduced by postemergence microrate applications in the growth chamber or field, compared to their respective controls. Hilleshog E-38, ACH 185, and Beta 5736 had significant reductions in leaf area and dry weight in the growth chamber and field, while RH-5 had significant reductions in the growth chamber only, and tolerance was not correlated with ploidy level. Among the USDA materials, reductions in growth measures were evident in all entries; however, reductions in the experimental hybrid with SP85576 cms were markedly less for all traits except growth chamber dry weight (27% reduction in fresh weight, 20% reduction in leaf area and 16% reduction in","PeriodicalId":403165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sugarbeet Research","volume":"142 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Response of Sugarbeet Varieties and Populations to Postemergence Herbicides\",\"authors\":\"Trevor M. Dale, J. McGrath, K. Renner\",\"doi\":\"10.5274/JSBR.42.3.119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Injury from herbicides may reduce sugarbeet yield or sugar content. Previous research has shown a differential response of sugarbeet varieties to herbicides. We evaluated the growth response of fourteen sugarbeet varieties, and four USDA sugarbeet entries (three USDA experimental hybrids and their pollinator) to postemergence applications of the micro-rate of desmedipham plus phenmedipham (1:1 ratio) at 0.09 kg ai/ha plus triflusulfuron at 0.004 kg ai/ha plus clopyralid at 0.023 kg ae/ha plus methylated seed oil at 1.5% v/v. Sugarbeets were sprayed three times at weekly intervals beginning at the cotyledon growth stage. Sugarbeet varieties differed in their response to micro-rate herbicide applications. Leaf area, fresh weight and dry weight of Hilleshog E-17 and ACH 555, two diploid varieties, were not reduced by micro-rate applications, while the leaf area of Beta 5400 and Beta 5736, two triploid varieties, was reduced by 24 and 35%, respectively, compared to their respective untreated controls. In a second experiment, the leaf area and fresh and dry weight of Spartan and Hilleshog E-17 were not reduced by postemergence microrate applications in the growth chamber or field, compared to their respective controls. Hilleshog E-38, ACH 185, and Beta 5736 had significant reductions in leaf area and dry weight in the growth chamber and field, while RH-5 had significant reductions in the growth chamber only, and tolerance was not correlated with ploidy level. Among the USDA materials, reductions in growth measures were evident in all entries; however, reductions in the experimental hybrid with SP85576 cms were markedly less for all traits except growth chamber dry weight (27% reduction in fresh weight, 20% reduction in leaf area and 16% reduction in\",\"PeriodicalId\":403165,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sugarbeet Research\",\"volume\":\"142 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sugarbeet Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5274/JSBR.42.3.119\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sugarbeet Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5274/JSBR.42.3.119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

除草剂的伤害可能会降低甜菜产量或含糖量。先前的研究表明,不同品种的甜菜对除草剂有不同的反应。我们评估了14个甜菜品种和4个美国农业部的甜菜品种(3个美国农业部的实验杂交品种及其传粉者)对羽化后施用0.09 kg ai/ha的地麦啶加phenmedipham(1:1比例)+ 0.004 kg ai/ha的三氟虫龙+ 0.023 kg ae/ha的氯吡酯+ 1.5% v/v的甲基化籽油的生长响应。从甜菜子叶生长期开始,每周喷3次。不同品种甜菜对微量除草剂的反应不同。二倍体品种Hilleshog E-17和ACH 555的叶面积、鲜重和干重未受微率施用的影响,而三倍体品种Beta 5400和Beta 5736的叶面积分别比未施用的对照减少了24%和35%。在第二个试验中,与各自的对照相比,苗期后在生长室或田间施用微肥料均未减少斯巴达和Hilleshog E-17的叶面积、鲜重和干重。Hilleshog E-38、ACH 185和Beta 5736在生长室和田间均显著降低了叶片面积和干重,而RH-5仅在生长室显著降低了叶片面积和干重,耐受性与倍性水平无关。在美国农业部的材料中,增长指标的下降在所有条目中都很明显;然而,SP85576 cm试验杂交种除生长室干重减少27%、叶面积减少20%、叶片干重减少16%外,其他性状的减少幅度都明显较小
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Response of Sugarbeet Varieties and Populations to Postemergence Herbicides
Injury from herbicides may reduce sugarbeet yield or sugar content. Previous research has shown a differential response of sugarbeet varieties to herbicides. We evaluated the growth response of fourteen sugarbeet varieties, and four USDA sugarbeet entries (three USDA experimental hybrids and their pollinator) to postemergence applications of the micro-rate of desmedipham plus phenmedipham (1:1 ratio) at 0.09 kg ai/ha plus triflusulfuron at 0.004 kg ai/ha plus clopyralid at 0.023 kg ae/ha plus methylated seed oil at 1.5% v/v. Sugarbeets were sprayed three times at weekly intervals beginning at the cotyledon growth stage. Sugarbeet varieties differed in their response to micro-rate herbicide applications. Leaf area, fresh weight and dry weight of Hilleshog E-17 and ACH 555, two diploid varieties, were not reduced by micro-rate applications, while the leaf area of Beta 5400 and Beta 5736, two triploid varieties, was reduced by 24 and 35%, respectively, compared to their respective untreated controls. In a second experiment, the leaf area and fresh and dry weight of Spartan and Hilleshog E-17 were not reduced by postemergence microrate applications in the growth chamber or field, compared to their respective controls. Hilleshog E-38, ACH 185, and Beta 5736 had significant reductions in leaf area and dry weight in the growth chamber and field, while RH-5 had significant reductions in the growth chamber only, and tolerance was not correlated with ploidy level. Among the USDA materials, reductions in growth measures were evident in all entries; however, reductions in the experimental hybrid with SP85576 cms were markedly less for all traits except growth chamber dry weight (27% reduction in fresh weight, 20% reduction in leaf area and 16% reduction in
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信