Control period and economic threshold level of glyphosate tolerant weeds in 2.4-D resistant soybean

Abstract

Weed densities, species, costs of control, crop value and interference periods should be considered for weed management. With this regard, three experiments were carried out to evaluate weed control periods and weed density in a new soybean cultivar. In ths first trial, control efficacy was measured by visual phytotoxicity of four weed species I. hederifolia, E. heterophylla, Conyza spp. and R. brasiliensis using four different herbicides with two doses each: glyphosate (720 and 1,440 g ea ha-1), 2.4-D (670 and 1,340 g ea ha-1), glufosinate (400 and 600 g ea ha-1) and glyphosate + 2.4-D (410 + 390 and 820 + 780 g ea ha-1). Herbicides were sprayed in an entirely randomized 4x8+1 factorial scheme with six repetitions. In the second experiment, 2,4-D-resistant soybean growth was measured under increasing densities of the same weeds (21 plants m² vs 21, 42, 84, 168 and 336 plants m²). This experiment was conducted under entirely randomized design with 25 treatments with four repetitions. Critical level of damage and economic threshold level of each weed species in soybean were measured using non-linear regressions. In a third experiment, weed with soybean were submitted to increasing periods of control and coexistence (7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 49 and 70 days after soybean emergence, plus two control treatments). Glufosinate and glyphosate+2.4-D (820 + 780 g ea ha-1) showed greater weed control than glyphosate alone (720 g ea ha-1). The yield loss of 0.85, 2.12, 5.71 and 34.24% were found for each weed of E. heterophylla, I. hederifolia, R. brasiliensis and Conyza spp., coexisting with soybean. There was a soybean grain yield loss of 50% in the weedy treatment. Soybean weed management should occur between 18thand 48th days after its emergence. Economic threshold level on soybean yield suggested is below one plant of Conyza spp. and R. brasiliensis per m-². The use of glufosinate and glyphosate+2,4-D provides a greater flexibility of herbicide use for farmers