Off-target Movement Research Articles

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Injury, Growth, and Yield Following Low-Dose Flumioxazin Postemergence Applications

The effects of postemergence (POST) herbicides off-target movement on cotton has been evaluated, but no data is available evaluating simulated off-target movement of residual herbicides. Therefore, low-dose POST applications of flumioxazin were evaluated in cotton at the cotyledon, two- and four-leaf growth stages. Rates evaluated were 12.5, 25, and 50% of the labeled use rate of 72 g ai ha-1. Necrosis, cotton height and width reduction was observed. Cotyledon cotton was injured 69 to 86%, 80 to 91%, and 84 to 97% following the 12.5, 25, and 50% flumioxazin rates, respectively, 3 through 42 DAT. Injury of two-leaf cotton increased from 3 to 14 DAT for all flumioxazin rates with maximum injury of 40, 47, and 58% following the 12.5, 25, and 50% rates, respectively, 14 DAT, but injury decreased following the 14 DAT evaluation. Injury of four-leaf cotton was 46 to 58% 3 DAT and decreased over time regardless of rate. At 42 DAT, two- and four-leaf cotton was injured 14 to 33% and increased with flumioxazin rate. Cotton height and width averaged 40, 80, 86% of the nontreated following the cotyledon, two-, and four-leaf application timings, respectively, 42 DAT. In addition, height was more influenced by flumioxazin rate than cotton width. Yields were 24, 52, and 62% of the nontreated following the cotyledon, two-, and four-leaf applications timings, respectively. In addition, yields following the 12.5, 25, and 50% rates were 53, 45, and 40% of the nontreated. Low-doses of flumioxazin reduced revenue $1,172 to $2,344 ha-1 for lint and $212 to 423 ha-1 for cotton seed. Low-doses of flumioxazin POST can have negative effects on cotton growth and yield and could cause severe economic loss for a cotton producer.

A Real-time Web Tool for Safe Aerial Application to Avoid Off-target Movement of Spray Induced by Stable Atmospheric Conditions in the Mississippi Delta

Abstract. Susceptible crops can be injured far downwind if proper application spray procedure is not followed. Avoidance of stable atmospheric conditions while spraying is important to prevent surface temperature inversion-induced off-target drift of crop protection materials. Our previous studies consistently indicated high likelihood (>90%) of stable atmospheric conditions (unfavorable for spraying) primarily between the hours of 6:00 pm and 6:00 am during clear conditions in the hot summer months at the Mississippi Delta. With the requirement of timely farm operations, a web application has been developed to provide real-time determination of atmospheric stability and to recommend whether aerial applications are appropriate for a particular location and time. An algorithm was developed to determine atmospheric conditions likely for occurrence of a temperature inversion. This algorithm was programmed using the Python programming language and uploaded to an internet-cloud application platform for publication via HTML. The algorithm calculates the potential of a temperature inversion every hour based on air temperature and wind speed data measured at weather stations deployed over the Mississippi Delta and surrounding areas. The web application is adapted for mobile terminals, such as smartphones and tablets, and can provide timely guidance for aerial applicators and producers to avoid crop damage and air quality issues long distances downwind. Keywords: Aerial application, Spray drift, Temperature inversion, Atmospheric stability, Crop protection, Web application, Mobile terminal.

Survey of Nebraska Farmers’ Adoption of Dicamba-Resistant Soybean Technology and Dicamba Off-Target Movement

AbstractIn 2017, dicamba-resistant (DR) soybean was commercially available to farmers in the United States. In August and September of 2017, a survey of 312 farmers from 60 Nebraska soybean-producing counties was conducted during extension field days or online. The objective of this survey was to understand farmers’ adoption and perceptions regarding DR soybean technology in Nebraska. The survey contained 16 questions and was divided in three parts: (1) demographics, (2) dicamba application in DR soybean, and (3) dicamba off-target injury to sensitive soybean cultivars. According to the results, 20% of soybean hectares represented by the survey were planted to DR soybean in 2017, and this number would probably double in 2018. Sixty-five percent of survey respondents own a sprayer and apply their own herbicide programs. More than 90% of respondents who adopted DR soybean technology reported significant improvement in weed control. Nearly 60% of respondents used dicamba alone or glyphosate plus dicamba for POST weed control in DR soybean; the remaining 40% added an additional herbicide with an alternative site of action (SOA) to the POST application. All survey respondents used one of the approved dicamba formulations for application in DR soybean. Survey results indicated that late POST dicamba applications (after late June) were more likely to result in injury to non-DR soybean compared to early POST applications (e.g., May and early June) in 2017. According to respondents, off-target dicamba movement resulted both from applications in DR soybean and dicamba-based herbicides applied in corn. Although 51% of respondents noted dicamba injury on non-DR soybean, 7% of those who noted injury filed an official complaint with the Nebraska Department of Agriculture. Although DR soybean technology allowed farmers to achieve better weed control during 2017 than previous growing seasons, it is apparent that off-target movement and resistance management must be addressed to maintain the viability and effectiveness of the technology in the future.

Response of Non–Dicamba-Resistant Soybean to Dicamba As Influenced by Growth Stage and Herbicide Rate

AbstractIntroduction of the Roundup Ready® Xtend system (Monsanto Co., St. Louis, MO) provides an alternative weed management option for growers, but of concern is the risk of dicamba injury to sensitive crops, particularly soybean from off-target movement and tank contamination. Experiments were conducted to determine the response of soybean to low rates of dicamba over a wide range of application timings. Two glufosinate-resistant varieties (HBK 4950LL–indeterminate and HALO 5.45LL–determinate) commonly grown in Arkansas were chosen for these studies. Two rates of dicamba, 2.18 and 8.75 g ae ha–1(1/256× and 1/64× of the POST labeled rate for dicamba-resistant soybean), were applied at two vegetative (V4, V6) and six reproductive (R1 to R6) growth stages. Compared to the nontreated control, dicamba applied during late vegetative and early reproductive growth of soybean caused leaf injury, plant height reduction, and seed yield loss for both soybean cultivars. Averaged across dicamba rates applied at R1, soybean seed yield was reduced 14% for the HBK 4950LL cultivar and 19% for the HALO 5.45LL cultivar. Averaged over rates, dicamba applied at R1 to the HALO 5.45LL and HBK 4950LL soybean resulted in 48% and 43% visible injury 4 wk after treatment, respectively. Grain yield was similar to that of the nontreated control when dicamba was applied at the later reproductive stages averaged across rates.

Spray particle drift mitigation using field corn (Zea mays L.) as a drift barrier.

Herbicide particle drift reduces application efficacy and can cause severe impacts on nearby vegetation depending on the herbicide mode of action, exposure level, and tolerance to the herbicide. A particle drift mitigation effort placing windbreaks or barriers on the field boundaries to reduce off-target movement of spray particles has been utilized in the past. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effectiveness of field corn (Zea mays L.) at different heights as a particle drift barrier. Applications with a non-air inclusion flat fan nozzle (ER11004) resulted in greater particle drift when compared with an air inclusion nozzle (TTI11004). Eight rows of corn were used as barriers (0.91, 1.22, and 1.98 m height) which reduced the particle drift for both nozzles, especially at shorter downwind distances. Applications with the ER11004 nozzle without corn barriers had 1% of the applied rate (D99 ) predicted to deposit at 14.8 m downwind, whereas this distance was reduced (up to 7-fold) when applications were performed with corn barriers. The combination of corn drift barriers and nozzle selection (TTI11004) provided satisfactory particle drift reduction when the D99 estimates were compared with those for applications with the ER11004 nozzle without corn barriers (up to 10-fold difference). The corn drift barriers were effective in reducing particle drift from applications with the ER11004 and the TTI11004 nozzles (Fine and Ultra Coarse spray classifications, respectively). The corn drift barrier had appropriate porosity and width as the airborne spray was captured within its canopy instead of deflecting up and over it. © 2018 Society of Chemical Industry.

Experimental methods to evaluate herbicides behavior in soil

O uso de agrotóxicos na agricultura é praticamente indispensável, contudo, estudos estimam que somente 45% do produto aplicado atinge a cultura, sendo que aproximadamente 30% sofrem deriva, 10% são perdidos por algum processo de transporte (lixiviação, volatilização e escoamento) e 15% atingem o solo. Além disso, do total aplicado, apenas 1% atinge o alvo, ou seja, patógenos, plantas daninhas e insetos. Embora avaliações de riscos de contaminação ambiental de agrotóxicos sejam obrigatórios para o registro e comercialização, frequentemente estudos relatam a presença destes em locais não alvos, sendo os corpos de água os principais prejudicados. Vários processos biológicos, físicos e químicos determinam o destino ambiental e a eficiência desses. Assim, diversos métodos experimentais podem ser utilizados para avaliar o comportamento de agrotóxicos no ambiente. Essa revisão objetiva resumir os métodos mais comumente utilizados para descrever e avaliar os processos nos quais o herbicida está sujeito quando presente no solo, bem como, as vantagens e desvantagens de cada um desses. No geral, em se tratando de destino de agrotóxicos no ambiente, os experimentos em laboratórios fornecem informações mais precisas, pois é possível controlar melhor as condições ambientais e isolar fatores de interesse. Mas é importante salientar que não existe um método mais eficiente, o que existe são métodos que podem fornecer um melhor resultado em determinada situação. Por tanto, a escolha do método vai depender do objetivo do estudo e da estrutura disponível.

Herbicide Spray Penetration into Corn and Soybean Canopies Using Air-Induction Nozzles and a Drift Control Adjuvant

AbstractDrift reduction technologies aim to eliminate the smaller droplets that occur with some sprays because these small droplets can move off-target in the wind. Commonly used drift reduction technologies such as air-induction nozzles and spray additives impact on reducing off-target movement is well documented, however, the impact on herbicide penetration into an established crop canopy is not well known. This experiment evaluated the canopy penetration and efficacy of glyphosate treatments applied using four nozzle types (XR11005, AIXR11005, AITTJ11005, and TTI11005), two carrier volume rates (94 and 187 L ha-1), and glyphosate applications with and without a commercial drift reducing adjuvant. Applications were made to corn and soybean fields using glyphosate applied at 1.26 kg ae ha-1with liquid ammonium sulfate at 5% v/v. A rhodamine dye was added (0.025% v/v) to the spray tank of each mixture as a tracer. MylarTMcards were placed in the field above the canopy, in the middle canopy, and on the ground for corn and above and below canopy for soybean. Five cards were at each position in the canopy arranged across the crop row. The addition of a drift reducing adjuvant did not impact canopy penetration. Doubling the carrier volume increased the amount of penetration proportionally and as such the percent reduction was not different. The TTI11005 nozzle had the greatest amount of spray penetration (28%) in the soybean canopies and the XR nozzle had the greatest amount (50%) in the corn canopies. Deposition across the row, beginning in-between the row crop and ending in the row of the crop was 44, 18, and 8% for soybean and 59, 50, and 36% for corn. For both crops, more than half of the herbicide application was captured in the crop canopy. Proper nozzle selection for canopy type can increase herbicide penetration and increasing the carrier volume will increase penetration proportionally.

Mulch Type and Depth Influences Control of Three Major Weed Species in Nursery Container Production

Two commonly used management practices for weed control in container plant production are hand pulling and herbicide applications. There are problems associated with these methods including crop phytotoxicity and environmental concerns associated with off-target movement of herbicides. Other nonchemical weed control methods could reduce herbicide-based environmental concerns, mitigate herbicide-resistance development, and improve the overall level of weed control in container nursery production. Readily available tree-mulch species, eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), ground whole loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) were harvested, chipped, and evaluated at multiple depths with and without the herbicide dimethenamid-p. Pine bark mini-nuggets were also evaluated. Mulches were applied at depths of 1, 2, and 4 inches and evaluated over three 30-day periods for their effectiveness in suppressing spotted spurge (Chamaesyce maculata), long-stalked phyllanthus (Phyllanthus tenellus), and eclipta (Eclipta prostrata). After 30 days, herbicide/mulch combinations, as well as mulch treatments alone, had reduced weed fresh weight 82% to 100% with 1 inch of mulch. By 168 days after treatment, dimethenamid-p had lost all efficacy, and mulch depth was the only factor that still had significant effects, reducing spotted spurge fresh weight by 90%, 99.5%, and 100% with depths of 1, 2, and 4 inches, respectively. The economics of mulch weed control will depend on variables such as available time, nursery layout, location, and availability of resources, equipment, among others. Regardless of variable economic parameters, data from this study reveals that any of these potential mulch species applied at a depth of at least 2 inches will provide long-term weed control in nursery container production.

The Influence of Nozzle Type on Peanut Weed Control Programs

ABSTRACT The increase in herbicide-resistant weeds over the past decade has led to the introduction of crops that are resistant to auxin herbicides. Strict application procedures are required for the use of auxin herbicides in auxin-resistant crops to minimize off-target movement. One requirement for application is the use of nozzles that will minimize drift by producing coarse droplets. Generally, an increase in droplet size can lead to a reduction in coverage and efficacy depending upon the herbicide and weed species. In studies conducted in 2015 and 2016, two of the potential required auxin nozzle types [(AIXR11002 (coarse) and TTI11002 (ultra-coarse)] were compared to a conventional flat-fan drift guard nozzles [DG11002 (medium)] for weed control in peanut herbicide systems. Nozzle type did not influence annual grass or Palmer amaranth control in non-crop tests. Results from in-crop tests indicated that annual grass control was 5% to 6% lower when herbicides were applied with the TTI nozzle when compared to the AIXR or DG nozzles. However, Palmer amaranth control and peanut yield was not influenced by coarse-droplet nozzles. Peanut growers using the coarse-droplet nozzles need to be aware of potential reduced grass control.

Survey of Missouri Pesticide Applicator Practices, Knowledge, and Perceptions

The introduction of soybean and cotton traits with resistance to synthetic auxin herbicides has led to an increase in concern over the off-target movement of dicamba and 2,4-D. A direct-mail survey was sent to Missouri pesticide applicators in January of 2016 to understand current herbicide application practices and applicator knowledge and awareness of the new synthetic auxin technologies. Completed surveys were returned by 2,335 applicators, representing approximately 11% of the state’s registered pesticide applicators. Survey data reported herein provides information regarding current pesticide applicator knowledge and practices and highlights areas that need more emphasis during applicator training. Overall, survey respondents were familiar with physical drift and methods to minimize that risk. However respondents were less familiar with volatility and temperature inversions, which can each influence off-target herbicide movement. Of the 427 commercial applicators and 1,535 noncommercial applicators who answered questions regarding volatility, 81% and 74% respectively, recognized that high temperatures can contribute to a herbicide’s ability to volatilize. However, only 48% and 39% understood that a herbicide’s vapor pressure influences volatility. Answers from the survey indicate further education is needed on the synthetic auxin technologies, such as what herbicides can be used with each technology, proper methods for inspecting and cleaning spray equipment, and the importance of reading herbicide labels. When asked whether applicators were aware of the new 2,4-D-resistant and dicamba-resistant traits, 76% of 443 commercial applicators and only 40% of 1,713 noncommercial applicators selected “yes.” Additionally, survey results suggests that current methods aimed to facilitate communication among producers and applicators, such as FieldWatch and Flag the Technology, may not be successfully adopted, at least in Missouri. Findings from this survey can be utilized to enhance training of pesticide applicators in preparation for the synthetic auxin herbicide technologies.

The Effect of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D) on Peanut when Applied During Vegetative Growth Stages

ABSTRACT The development of 2,4-D-resistant cotton and soybean cultivars has created great concern about the potential off-target movement of 2,4-D onto sensitive broadleaf crops. Peanut is often grown in close proximity to cotton and soybean. Therefore, field studies were conducted during 2012 and 2013 at Plains, Ty Ty, and Attapulgus, GA to evaluate peanut response to 2,4-D at 67, 133, 266, 533, and 1066 g ae ha−1 applied at preemergence (PRE), 10, 20, or 30 d after planting (DAP), corresponding to PRE, V2, V3, and V5 peanut growth stages. Nontreated controls (NTC) were included for comparison. Treatment timing by rate interactions were significant (P < 0.0001). As 2,4-D rate increased peanut injury increased. There was variation in yield loss response dependent on peanut growth stage at application timing. Peanut that was treated preemergence and at the V2 growth stage did not have yield loss at any of the 2,4-D evaluated rates (67 to 1066 g ha−1) relative to the NTC. When peanut was treated at V3 and V5 growth stages with 2,4-D, injury estimates were 5 to 32% from the 67 to 1066 g ha−1 rates respectively, and peanut canopy diameter was stunted 5 to 35% at the same rates. The resulting peanut yield loss was 23 and 36% from 533 and 1066 g ha−1 of 2,4-D applied at V3 and V5 growth stages; in part due to reproductive growth being initiated during that time-frame and peanut had less time to recuperate before harvest. Linear regression models were used to evaluate peanut injury and peanut yield results. Significant correlations were established for V3 and V5 treatments between injury and yield, injury and canopy diameter, and canopy diameter and yield (P < 0.0001), with correlation coefficients of − 0.48, − 0.76, and 0.51, respectively. Growers and extension agents will be able to use these peanut injury estimates and canopy diameter data to make improved predictions of potential peanut yield loss where off-target movement of 2,4-D or sprayer contamination has occurred.

Atmospheric Stability Evaluation at Different Time Intervals for Determination of Aerial Spray Application Timing

Purpose: Evaluation of atmospheric conditions for proper timing of spray application is important to prevent off-target movement of crop protection materials. Susceptible crops can be damaged downwind if proper application procedure is not followed. In our previous study, hourly data indicated unfavorable conditions, primarily between evening 18:00 hrs in the evening and 6:00 hrs next morning, during clear conditions in the hot summer months in the Mississippi delta. With the requirement of timely farm operations, sub-hourly data are required to provide better guidelines for pilots, as conditions of atmospheric stability can change rapidly. Although hourly data can be interpolated to some degree, finer resolution for data acquisition of the order of 15 min would provide pilots with more accurate recommendations to match the data recording frequency of local weather stations. Methods: In the present study, temperature and wind speed data obtained at a meteorological tower were re-sampled to calculate the atmospheric stability ratio for sub-hour and hourly recommendations. High-precision evaluation of temperature inversion periods influencing atmospheric stability was made considering strength, time of occurrence, and duration of temperature inversion. Results and Discussion: The results indicated that atmospheric stability could be determined at different time intervals providing consistent recommendations to aerial applicators, thereby avoiding temperature inversion with minimal off-target drift of the sprayed liquid.

Acute Illness Associated with Exposure to a New Soil Fumigant Containing Dimethyl Disulfide—Hillsborough County, Florida, 2014

ABSTRACTDimethyl disulfide (DMDS) is a new soil fumigant that is considered a replacement for methyl bromide. In 2014, the Florida Department of Health (FDOH) received several complaints of illness following a strong DMDS odor in Hillsborough County. Public health investigation of DMDS-related illness was conducted to assess illness and identify areas to target for prevention activities. This investigation included surveillance, interviews, review of medical records, review of supporting documentation, and determination of pesticide-related illness and injury case status. FDOH interviewed 66 people complaining of illness related to DMDS. Thirty-two were classified as possible and 11 as suspicious cases of DMDS-related illness. Among cases, the mean age was 48 years (range: 3–71 years). The majority were non-Hispanic (n = 43, 100%), white (n = 40, 93%), and female (n = 23, 53.5%). The most common signs and symptoms reported by exposed people included eye pain, throat irritation, nausea, dizziness, headache, and fatigue. There were 88% of cases classified as having low severity of illness and 12% classified as having moderate severity. The average distance from an application site among individuals who reported being exposed at or near their home was 0.74 miles for those classified as cases (n = 36) and 2.84 miles for those not classified as cases (n = 21, P < .05). This is the first known comprehensive report of DMDS-related illness in humans. Even though illnesses associated with DMDS in this investigation were generally of low severity, it is important to identify better ways to prevent off-target movement of DMDS and to improve notification to communities when nearby DMDS applications are planned.

Effect of Nozzle Selection and Spray Volume on Droplet Size and Efficacy of Engenia Tank-Mix Combinations

Sprayer applicator-controlled variables, such as nozzle selection and spray volume, will become increasingly important for making labeled POST applications of dicamba in next-generation cropping systems. A field experiment was conducted in 2013 and 2014 at the Northeast Research and Extension Center in Keiser, AR. Tank mixtures of Engenia (a new form of dicamba), glyphosate, glufosinate, andS-metolachlor were applied with TeeJet AIXR, AITTJ60, and TTI nozzles. Two nozzle sizes, 11003 and 11006, were used to vary spray volume from 94 L ha−1to 187 L ha−1, respectively. For barnyardgrass, a significant decrease in control was observed when spray volume was reduced for glyphosate + dicamba in 2013. In 2014, an overall decrease in control was observed for the TTI nozzle when spray volume was reduced to 94 L ha−1, averaged across all herbicide treatments. The addition of the productS-metolachlor to glyphosate + glufosinate + dicamba significantly reduced the droplet spectra for all nozzle types. For example, addingS-metolachlor into the tank-mix decreased the volume median diameter (Dv50) for the TTI nozzle at 187 L ha−1spray volume from 789 μm to 570 μm. The results from this research demonstrate that using low spray volume and coarser nozzles could reduce efficacy of the herbicides on the weed species evaluated. Nozzle selection and spray volume have key roles in maximizing efficacy of POST applications in dicamba-resistant crops. Additionally, evaluating droplet spectra of potential dicamba-containing tank-mixtures is critical for producing the desired droplet size to minimize off-target movement.

A Practical Interpretation and Use of theUSDA Aerial Fixed-Wing Nozzle Models

<abstract> <b><sc>Abstract. </sc></b>Proper selection and operation of spray nozzles associated with aerial applications is critical to insuring efficacy while mitigating off-target movement. Labels for most agrochemical products applied in the United States specifically define the droplet size or spray classification that can be used to apply that product. Droplet size associated with most aerial application nozzles is a function of the combination of orifice size, spray pressure, orientation angle, and airspeed used. Recently, a set of computational models for the most commonly used aerial application nozzles were developed and released for use by applicators. While these models allow applicators to determine the droplet size characteristics associated with their specific nozzle and operational setup, determining the proper combination of orifice, pressure, orientation, and airspeed, can be an interactive process, leading to frustration and ultimately non-use of the models. To minimize the iterative calculations and provide a more intuitive, visual interpretation of the computational droplet size models, a series of graphical representations of each nozzle‘s complete operational space were developed for use by applicators. These graphical interfaces allow for optimal operational combinations to be more quickly identified and integrated into the application system setup decision matrix. The ultimate goal of this work is to increase the usage rate of the spray droplet size models by aerial applicators by providing a more intuitive and efficient user interface.

Control of Silky Crazyweed (Oxytropis sericea) with Aminopyralid + 2,4-D and Picloram + 2,4-D on Native Rangeland

AbstractTechniques for preventing crazyweed toxicity in livestock have generally fallen into two categories: excluding livestock access to infested ranges during early spring and fall, and controlling crazyweed populations through herbicide application. Although picloram has been used to control crazyweed effectively in the past, aminopyralid has shown efficacy at lower application rates, exhibits less potential off-target movement, and has been classified as a reduced-risk product. Differences in the response of silky crazyweed and nontarget grasses and forbs to picloram + 2,4-D and aminopyralid + 2,4-D were investigated. Picloram + 2,4-D was applied at a rate of 0.3 kg ae ha−1picloram + 1.1 kg ae ha−12,4-D, and aminopyralid + 2,4-D was applied at a rate of 0.1 kg ae ha−1aminopyralid + 1.2 kg ae ha−12,4-D. Silky crazyweed canopy cover, number of flowering stalks, plant size, and biomass decreased 15 mo after herbicide treatments (MAT) with average percentage of relative reductions of 92, 95, 90, and 99%, respectively. Crazyweed density decreased by 1.5 ± 0.2 SE plants m−2and 1.3 ± 0.2 plants m−2, a relative reduction of 95 and 80%, 15 MAT in aminopyralid + 2,4-D– and picloram + 2,4-D–treated plots, respectively. Plots treated with aminopyralid + 2,4-D had 4% lower nontarget forb canopy cover than did picloram + 2,4-D plots 15 MAT. Grass biomass remained similar within treatments over time for control, aminopyralid + 2,4-D and picloram +2,4-D plots, and was similar in all plots 15 MAT. Plots treated with herbicides had, on average, 11% greater grass cover than did control plots 15 MAT (aminopyralid + 2,4-D: 89%; picloram + 2,4-D: 85%; control: 76%).

Influence of Droplet Size on Efficacy of the Formulated Products Engenia™, Roundup PowerMax®, and Liberty®

As auxin-type herbicide-resistant crops become commercially available, nozzle selection will become a highly important variable for maintaining efficacy of herbicide solutions while minimizing off-target movement. Field experiments were conducted in 2013 and 2014 in Keiser, AR, to evaluate interactions among theN,N-bis-(aminopropyl)methylamine form of dicamba formulated as Engenia™, the potassium salt of glyphosate formulated as Roundup PowerMax®, and glufosinate formulated as Liberty®applied with three different nozzle types. Three TeeJet nozzles with an 11004 orifice (Turbo TeeJet [TT], Air Induction Extended Range [AIXR], and Turbo TeeJet Induction [TTI]) were used. To supplement the field data, droplet spectra for each nozzle and tank mixture combination were determined at the West Central Research and Extension Center in North Platte, NE. For most herbicide treatments and nozzle combinations, Palmer amaranth control 4 wk after treatment was &gt; 95% both years. In 2013, TT nozzles provided 96% control of barnyardgrass and TTI nozzles provided 89% control, averaged across herbicides, except for Engenia alone. A similar effect of nozzle selection was observed in 2014. When treatments were applied to 20-cm-tall barnyardgrass in 2014, compared with 8-cm-tall plants in 2013, an antagonistic effect was observed when Engenia was tank-mixed with Roundup PowerMax. The weed control data correlated with the droplet spectrum analysis such that as volume median diameter (Dv50) increased from TT nozzles to the TTI nozzles, efficacy decreased for most tank mixtures. Results from the droplet analysis showed thatDv50relative to water decreased for Liberty alone and not when tank-mixed with Engenia or Roundup PowerMax. These results suggest that nozzle selection will play a key role in maximizing efficacy of POST applications in dicamba-resistant crops. Additionally, evaluating droplet spectra of potential dicamba-containing tank mixtures is critical for producing desired droplet size to minimize off-target movement.

The Effect of Dicamba on Peanut When Applied during Vegetative Growth Stages

ABSTRACT The development of dicamba-resistant cotton and soybean cultivars has created great concern about the potential off-target movement of dicamba onto sensitive species, including broadleaf crops. Peanut is often grown in close proximity to cotton and soybean. Therefore, field studies were conducted during 2012 and 2013 at Plains, Ty Ty, and Attapulgus, GA to evaluate peanut response to rates of dicamba (35, 70, 140, 280, and 560 g ae ha−1) applied at preemergence (PRE), 10, 20, or 30 d after planting (DAP) corresponding to PRE, V2, V3, and V5 peanut growth stages, respectively. Nontreated controls were included for comparison. As dicamba rate increased, both peanut injury and peanut yield loss increased. Peanut response to dicamba was fit to log-logistic regression models for injury and linear regression models for yield loss. Peanut injury increased with rate of dicamba, but was variable among the locations. A general trend was that peanut plants became more sensitive to dicamba injury as plants approached reproductive stage, as evidenced through a declining linear relationship between I50 values (i.e. rate of dicamba that elicits a 50% crop response) and timing of application. PRE applications of dicamba had I50 values that ranged from 125 to 323 g ha−1 of dicamba, while I50 values were 44 to 48 g ha−1 of dicamba at the V5 peanut growth stage. There was a linear relationship between peanut yield and dicamba rate, with 560 g ha−1 causing maximum yield losses ranging from 0 to 86% when applied PRE, 24 to 82% when applied at V2 growth stage, 30 to 95% when applied at V3 growth stage, and 45 to 88% when applied at V5 growth stage. Across all treatments and locations, there was also a negative linear relationship between peanut yield and peanut crop injury, with a decline of 8.5% yield for every 10% increase in crop injury. Growers and their consultants/extension agents can use this peanut injury data to predict potential peanut yield loss from sprayer contamination or off-target movement of dicamba.

THE EFFECT OF DICAMBA ON PEANUT WHEN APPLIED DURING VEGETATIVE GROWTH STAGES

Abstract The development of dicamba-resistant cotton and soybean cultivars has created great concern about the potential off-target movement of dicamba onto sensitive broadleaf crops. Peanut is often grown in close proximity to cotton and soybean. Therefore, field studies were conducted during 2012 and 2013 at Plains, Ty Ty, and Attapulgus, GA to evaluate peanut response to dicamba rates 35, 70, 140, 280, and 560 g ae ha-1 applied at preemergence (PRE), 10, 20, or 30 d after planting (DAP) corresponding to PRE, V2, V3, and V5 peanut growth stages, respectively. Nontreated controls were included for comparison. Location by rate (P < 0.0002) and location by treatment timing (P < 0.004) interactions were significant. As dicamba rate increased peanut injury and yield loss increased. There was variation in peanut response by location after PRE treatments. Plains peanut was injured less among locations, possibly due to the Greenville soil there having higher organic matter and clay contents at 3.8 and 30%, resp...

Influence of Herbicide Active Ingredient, Nozzle Type, Orifice Size, Spray Pressure, and Carrier Volume Rate on Spray Droplet Size Characteristics

Recent concerns regarding herbicide spray drift, its subsequent effect on the surrounding environment, and herbicide efficacy have prompted applicators to focus on methods to reduce off-target movement of herbicides. Herbicide applications are complex processes, and as such, few studies have been conducted that consider multiple variables that affect the droplet spectrum of herbicide sprays. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of nozzle type, orifice size, herbicide active ingredient, pressure, and carrier volume on the droplet spectra of the herbicide spray. Droplet spectrum data were collected on 720 combinations of spray-application variables, which included six spray solutions (five herbicides and water alone), four carrier volumes, five nozzles, two orifice sizes, and three operating pressures. The laboratory study was conducted using a Sympatec laser diffraction instrument to determine the droplet spectrum characteristics of each treatment combination. When averaged over each main effect, nozzle type had the greatest effect on droplet size. Droplet size rankings for nozzles, ranked smallest to largest using volume median diameter (Dv0.5) values, were the XR, TT, AIXR, AI, and TTI nozzle with 176% change in Dv0.5 values from the XR to the TTI nozzle. On average, increasing the nozzle orifice size from a 11003 orifice to a 11005 increased the Dv0.5 values 8%. When compared with the water treatment, cloransulam (FirstRate) did not change the Dv0.5 value. Clethodim (Select Max), glyphosate (Roundup PowerMax), lactofen (Cobra), and glufosinate (Ignite) all reduced the Dv0.5 value 5, 11, 11, and 18%, respectively, when compared with water averaged over the other variables. Increasing the pressure of AIXR, TT, TTI, and XR nozzles from 138 to 276 kPa and the AI nozzle from 276 to 414 kPa decreased the Dv0.5 value 25%. Increasing the pressure from 276 to 414 kPa and from 414 to 552 kPa for the same nozzle group and AI nozzle decreased the Dv0.5 value 14%. Carrier volume had the least effect on the Dv0.5 value. Increasing the carrier volume from 47 to 187 L ha−1 increased the Dv0.5 value 5%, indicating that droplet size of the herbicides tested were not highly dependent on delivery volume. The effect on droplet size of the variables examined in this study from greatest effect to least effect were nozzle, operating pressure, herbicide, nozzle orifice size, and carrier volume.