Dogan_East_Prague_June2011
-
Upload
tactac-ras -
Category
Technology
-
view
129 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Dogan_East_Prague_June2011
Application condition and performance of glyphosate in Turkey
Prof. Dr. M. Nedim DOGAN
Adnan Menderes University, Faculty of Agriculture, Dept. Plant Protection, Weed Science
AYDIN-TURKEY
A project supported by Monsanto
GLYPHOSATE IN TURKEY
Perennial crops
About 70 % of fruit growers in Aydin province use glyphosate
Roadsides, Railways, Irrigation channels and other non agricultural areas
In cotton prior to harvest as desiccant
Many different formulations
Satisfactory effect against most weed species
However, it is reported by Monsanto people from Turkey thatherbicide fails in controlling
• Sorghum halepense L. (Pers.) Johnsongrass
• Cyperus rotundus L. Purple nutsedge
• Portulaca oleracea L. Common purslane
• Convolvulus arvensis L. Field bindweed
GLYPHOSATE IN TURKEY
What can be the reason ?
• Some problems concerning application and timing
OR
• Resistance
AIM of the project with Monsanto
• Formulation
• Spray water volume
• Spray water quality
• Weed growth stages
• Climatic conditions during application
Methods
Pot experiments
Pot experiments were carried out in the screenhouseof the weed science laboratory at Adnan MenderesUniversity, Faculty of Agriculture, Turkey. Perennialweeds were grown from rhizomes and P. oleraceafrom seeds. A growing medium of turf: sand: perlit andsoil (1:1:1:1) was used for plant growth.
Rhizomes of S. halepense were planted in 3.8 l pots andrhizomes of C. rotundus, C. arvensis and seeds of P.oleracea were in 3.0 l pots.
Four different glyphosate formulations were used in allexperiments
Formulation Trade name Glyphosate
content
(g a.e./l)
MON 79376 Roundup Star 360
MON 79351 Not commercial yet
in Turkey
480
MON 78273 Cayenne 540
Generic Product Sonround 360
Glyphosate was applied at three doses
2160 g a.i./ha Recommended dose
1620 g a.i./ha 75 % of the recommended (25 % reduced)
1080 g a.i./ha Half dose (50 % reduced)
All herbicide treatments were done by using a spray chamber.First the recommended doses of each formulation wereadjusted. Other doses were then obtained as water dilutions.
MODUL I.Effect of water volume on the efficacy of glyphosate
•Water volume 200 and 600 l/ha
• 600 l/ha water volume was achieved by running 3 times(each with 1/3 spilt dose)
•Experiments were carried out two times.
•Average plant heights at the beginning of the experiments
• Johnsongrass 25 and 22 cm, resp.
•Purple nutsedge 5-6 leaves.
•Common purslane 1-3 branches.
Weed species JohnsongrassCommon
purslane
Purple
nutsedge
Experiment**
NS NSI II
Water volume
(l/ha)200 600 200 600 200 600 200 600
Untreated 100 100 100 100
1080 g a.i./ha (50 %) 8,7 b 37,1 a
NS
1,6 b 18,0 a 34,2 a 41,4 a
1620 g a.i./ha (75 %) 4,5 a 15,7 a 0,3 a 1,9 a 15,6 b 26,0 a
2160 g a.i./ha
(recommended)2,7 a 5,9 a 0,0 a 0,4 a 8,2 b 22,4 a
SEM 4,02 2,91 3,96
Relative fresh weights (%) of tested weed species as affected by water volume
Formulation NS, Results are average of all formulations
Johnsongrass treated withhalf dose of glyphosate in200 l/ha volume
Johnsongrass treated withhalf dose of glyphosate in600 l/ha volume
200 l/ha
600 l/ha
MODUL IIEffect of water quality on the efficacy of glyphosate
Jonhsnograss: 33,6 – 50 cm height
Common purslane: 2-4 branches
Purple nutsedge: 5-6 leaves
Three different spray water having different characteristics
• Clean soft water
•Clean hard water (CaCl2 added)
•River water (from Great Meander River)
10.06.2011
Clean water Clean + CaCl2 River water
Total
Hardness
(German)
1,12
(very soft)
21,84
(hard)
22,40
(hard)
pH 6,31 6,64 7,56
EC (µS/cm) 46 846 1008
K (me/l) 0,10 0,09 0,34
Ca (me/l) 0,10 7,35 2,37
Na (me/l) 0,19 0,23 3,58
Mg (me/l) 0,08 0,17 5,11
Properties of spray water used in Experiments
Relative fresh weight (%) of Sorghum halepense and Cyperusrotundus as affected by spray water quality
Water quality S. halepense* C. rotundus**
Dose (g a.i./ha) 1080
(50 %)
1080
(50 %)
1620
(75 %)
2160
(100 %)
Untreated control 100
Clean water 4,4 b 21,7 c 18,0 b 6,0 a
Clean water + CaCl2 5,4 b 43,1 b 24,9 ab 11,9 a
River water 63,8 a 73,0 a 30,7 a 13,6 a
SEM 2,33 4,23
Formulation NS, Results are average of all formulations
1. Untreated2. Clean soft water3. Clean hard water4. River water
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4Half dose 1 week after treatment
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1. Untreated2. Clean soft water3. Clean hard water4. River water
Recommended dose 1 week after treatment
Effect of weed growth stage on the efficacy of glyphosate
•Water volume: 200 l/ha•Growing weeds within different intervals•Treatment at the same time
Growth stagesEarly Middle Late
Johnsograss: 22 cm 40 cm 80 cm
Common purslane: 3-4 branches 5-6 branches flowered
Purple nutsedge: 3-4 leaves 6-8 leaves 13-14 leaves
Dose (g a.i./ha) 1620 (75 %) 2160 (100 %)
Growth stage Early Middle Late Early Middle Late
Untreated 100 100
Glyphosate 0,8 b 3,9 b 19,7 a 0,8 b 3,0 b 17,4 a
SE 2,8
Relative fresh weight (%) of Sorghum halepense as affected by growth stage
Effect of weed growth stage on the efficacy ofglyphosate on Sorghum halepense
Early22 cm
Middle40 cm
Late80 cm
1 2 3 41 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1. Untreated2. 1080 g3. 1620 g4. 2160 g
Half dose 2 weeksafter treatment
1 2 3 4
Effect of weed growth stage on the efficacy ofglyphosate on Cyperus rotundus
Dose (g a.i./ha) 1620 (75 %) 2160 (100 %)
Growth stage Early Middle Late Early Middle Late
Untreated 100 100
Glyphosate 100 a 43 b 88,9 a 53,6 a 3,7 b 36,8 a
SE 9,8
Dose (g a.i./ha) 1620 (75 %) 2160 (100 %)
Growth stage Early Middle Late Early Middle Late
Untreated 100 100
Glyphosate 29,5 b 16,9 b 100,0 a 6,8 b 12,1 b 48,4 a
SE 7,1
Early 3-4 leaf Middle 6-8 leaf
Late 10-13 leaf
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1. Untreated2. 1080 g3. 1620 g4. 2160 g
Recommendeddose 3 weeksafter treatment
Effect of weed growth stage on the efficacy ofglyphosate on Portulaca oleracea
Dose (g a.i./ha) 1620 (75 %) 2160 (100 %)
Growth stage Early Middle Late Early Middle Late
Untreated 100 100
Glyphosate 2,7 c 25,0 b 52,9 a 1,4 c 23,1 b 49,8 a
SE 4,0
Dose (g a.i./ha) 1620 (75 %) 2160 (100 %)
Growth stage Early Middle Late Early Middle Late
Untreated 100 100
Glyphosate 5,3 c 100,0 a 86,3 b 3,5 c 86,3 a 60,4 b
SE 9,0
Early3-4 branches
Middle5-6 branches
Late Beginning of flowering
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1. Untreated2. 1080 g3. 1620 g4. 2160 g
Half dose 2 weeksafter treatment
RESULT
All investigated factors influenced theperformance of glyphosate on all weed species
Early growth stages, low water volume andclean spray water affected the glyphosateperformance positively
Herbicide formulation was not important
Recommended dose provided in most casesreliable weed control
Problem weeds reported by Monsanto people in Turkey
Johnsongrass:
Quite sensitive to glyphosate even at the larger growth stages.
Problems can be attributed to misapplications, low doses incombination with wrong water volumes and low water quality
Common purslane:
Quite sensitive to glyphosate only at early growth stages, butthe sensitivity is lower as plants become older. Water volumeand quality affected the glyphosate performance on this weedslightly
Problems can be associated with wrong application timings(larger growth stages and/or low application doses
Purple nutsedge:• Less sensitive than other two species, only recommendeddose with low water volume, good water quality andsuitable growth stages provide satisfactory weed control
•Problems can be associated with all investgated factors,but still more investgations are needed to improve theefficacy
Field bindweed: ???
Further Studies (Pot Experiments)
Effect of climatic factors during application time (time of day) onglyphosate efficacy
In these experiments, interactions between the climatic conditionsduring the application and glyphosate efficacy will be evaluated.
Herbicide treatments will be done in the morning early, duringmidday and at the evening.
Temperature, humidity and light conditions will be recorded
Interactions among water volume, water quality, growth stagesand application time (time of day)
Further Studies (Field Experiments)
• Since results showed that purple nutsedge (C. rotundus) wasreal problem, this weed will be aimed in field experiments
• Since it was not possible to work with field bind weed (C.arvensis) in pot experiments, a field experiment will be alsoconducted for this weed
• 2 glyphosate formulations X 2 water quality X 2 growth stagesX 2 application times (time of day) X 3 replications
• An experiment with C. arvensis has started on 11‐12th June2011 in a fig orchard in Aydin ‐ Turkey
During field experiment, 10.06.2011
Significant thanks to Monsantofor financial support
Thank you very much for yourattention