Crops ›› 2017, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 150-154.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2017.01.027

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Safety and Weed Control Efficiency of Foxtail Millet Seedling Stage Herbicides

Li Zhihua1,Jing Xiaolan2,Li Huixia3,Tian Gang3,Liu Xin3,Mu Tingting1   

  1. 1Institute of Sorghum,Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Jinzhong 030611,Shanxi,China
    2Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Taiyuan 030006,Shanxi,China
    3Institute of Millet,Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Changzhi 046011,Shanxi,China
  • Received:2016-09-21 Revised:2016-12-08 Online:2017-02-15 Published:2018-08-26

RichHTML

5

PDF (PC)

235

Abstract:

Millet is sensitive to most herbicides, but artificial weeding is time- and labor-consuming, which restricted the development of millet production. Jingu 50 used as the test plant material, and 10% WP, 40% WP prometryn, 56% MCPA sodium wettable powder, 57% 2,4-D butyl EC four kinds of commonly used herbicides were sprayed on cereal leaves during the trilobites period to study on the safety and weed control efficiency of foxtail miller seedling. Results showed that as seedling stage herbicides, 10% WP dosage strength for 1.8kg/hm 2 had the best weeds control result. 40d after applying pesticide, the average weeds control rate was 65.23%, the average weeds fresh weight inhibition rate of 89.90%. This dosage was safe and could be used as the ideal of foxtail millet seedling stage herbicides dosage. The other three herbicides were safety but the weed control rates were not as good as 10% WP, which could be used as an auxiliary herbicide in weeds control in millet field with appropriate doses when broadleaf weeds were serious.

Key words: Foxtail millet, Herbicide, Dosage, Control effect

Table 1

Different drug concentrations"

除草剂Weedicide 推荐剂量
Recommended dose		 试验施药量
Test dose
T B1 B2
A1 10%谷友可湿性粉剂
（kg/hm2）		 1.08~1.26 1.5 1.8
A2 40%扑草净可湿性粉剂
（kg/hm2）		 0.75 1.2 1.5
A3 56% 2甲4氯纳可湿性粉
剂（kg/hm2）		 1.07~1.43 1.3 1.6
A4 57% 2,4-D丁酯乳油
（L/hm2）		 0.9~1.2 0.9 1.2

Table 2

Different periods the respective treatment zones millet plant performance after application"

处理Treatment 用药后After treatment 15d 用药后After treatment 25d 用药后After treatment 40d
A1B1 叶色正常,部分植株长势较弱 植株长势较弱 植株表现正常
A1B2 叶色正常,植株长势较弱,苗矮 植株长势较弱 植株表现正常
A2B1 叶变浅,少许叶片从叶尖枯萎,苗矮 植株长势较弱 植株表现正常
A2B2 叶片褪绿、黄化,有的叶片从叶尖枯萎,甚至死亡,植株长势弱 植株长势较弱 植株表现正常
A3B1 植株表现正常 植株表现正常 植株表现正常
A3B2 少许叶片叶尖枯萎,植株长势较弱 植株表现正常 植株表现正常
A4B1 植株表现正常 植株表现正常 植株表现正常
A4B2 植株表现正常 植株表现正常 植株表现正常
CK 植株正常 植株生长正常 植株生长正常

Table 3

25 and 40d after spraying the respective treatment zones millet average height cm"

处理
Treatment		 25d苗高
Height of seedling		 40d苗高
Height of seedling
A1B1 33.78b 91.29a
A1B2 32.82b 91.13a
A2B1 35.57ab 89.17a
A2B2 34.33b 88.97a
A3B1 36.01ab 90.40a
A3B2 33.96b 90.09a
A4B1 36.12ab 89.21a
A4B2 34.69b 88.52a
CK 40.21a 92.35a

Table 4

After spraying 15d, 25d the respective treatment zones yatabe weeds 株/m2,%"

处理
Treatment		 15d 25d
禾本科杂草Gramineous weeds 阔叶杂草
Broadleaf weeds		 平均防效
Average control effect		 禾本科杂草 Gramineous weeds 阔叶杂草
Broadleaf weeds		 平均防效
Average control effect
株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect
A1B1 4.88 57.49 14.68 76.06 9.78 66.78 15.88 35.24 18.08 73.57 16.98 54.41
A1B2 2.68 76.66 11.12 81.87 6.90 79.27 10.24 58.24 15.48 77.37 12.86 67.81
A2B1 4.00 65.16 16.40 73.26 10.20 69.21 14.20 42.09 19.32 71.75 16.76 56.92
A2B2 2.20 80.84 12.44 79.72 7.32 80.28 7.76 68.35 16.76 75.50 12.26 71.93
A3B1 - - 17.56 71.04 17.56 71.04 - - 24.52 64.14 24.52 64.14
A3B2 - - 15.56 74.62 15.56 74.62 - - 21.92 67.94 21.92 67.94
A4B1 - - 23.56 61.58 23.56 61.58 - - 27.08 60.41 27.08 60.41
A4B2 - - 16.44 73.19 16.44 73.19 - - 23.24 66.02 23.24 66.02
CK 11.48 - 61.32 - 36.40 - 24.52 - 68.40 - 46.46 -

Table 5

After each treatment spraying 40d yatabe weeds and fresh weight control effect 株/m2, g/m2, %"

处理Treatment 禾本科杂草Gramineous weeds 阔叶杂草Broadleaf weeds 平均 Average
株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 鲜重
Fresh
weight		 鲜重防效Fresh weight control effect 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 鲜重
Fresh
weight		 鲜重防效Fresh weight control effect 株数
Number		 株防效
Strain control effect		 鲜重
Fresh
weight		 鲜重防效Fresh weight control effect
A1B1 18.64 33.43 1.04 77.40 17.92 74.94 3.48 95.21 18.28 53.19 2.26 86.31
A1B2 13.32 52.43 0.76 83.48 15.72 78.02 2.68 96.31 14.52 65.23 1.72 89.90
A2B1 17.32 38.14 0.72 84.35 21.20 70.36 12.84 82.31 19.26 54.25 6.78 83.33
A2B2 14.64 47.71 0.60 86.95 18.16 74.61 9.60 86.78 16.40 61.16 5.10 86.87
A3B1 - - - - 24.84 65.27 23.12 68.15 24.84 65.27 23.12 68.15
A3B2 - - - - 23.04 67.78 12.76 82.42 23.04 67.78 12.76 82.42
A4B1 - - - - 29.68 58.50 15.80 78.24 29.68 58.50 15.80 78.24
A4B2 - - - - 28.48 60.18 12.48 82.81 28.48 60.18 12.48 82.81
CK 28.00 - 4.60 - 71.52 - 72.60 - 49.76 - 38.60 -
[1] 张超, 张晖, 李翼新 . 小米的营养以及应用研究进展. 中国粮油学报, 2007,22(1):51-55.
[2] 程汝宏, 刘正理 . 谷子育种中几个主要性状选育方法的探讨. 华北农学报, 2003,18(院庆专辑):145-149.
[3] 郭平毅 . 农田化学除草.北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 1996.
[4] 王节之, 王根全, 郝晓芬 , 等. 除草剂蔫去津对谷子及谷田杂草的影响. 山西农业科学, 2008,36(9):57-59.
[5] 周汉章, 任中秋, 刘环 , 等. 谷田杂草化学防除面临的问题及发展趋势. 河北农业科学, 2010,14(11):56-58.
[6] 周汉章, 刘环, 薄奈勇 , 等. 除草剂谷友对谷田杂草的除草效果及对谷子安全性的影响. 河北农业科学, 2010,14(11):40-43.
[7] 周汉章, 刘环, 宋银芳 , 等. 44%谷友WP对谷田杂草的防除及其对谷子产量的影响. 中国农学通报, 2011,27(30):135-141.
[8] 任建跃 . 除草剂土壤处理对谷子生物学特性的影响. 安徽农学通报, 2008,14(5):116-117.
[9] 王鑫, 原向阳, 郭平毅 , 等. 单嘧磺隆对谷子营养价值的影响.安徽农业科学, 2006, 34(3): 516, 518.
[10] 姚满生, 郭平毅, 王鑫 . 甲磺隆对高粱和谷子生理代谢的影响. 安徽农业科学, 2007,35(36):11753-11754.
[11] 马国兰, 刘都才, 刘雪源 , 等. 不同除草剂对直播稻田杂草的防效及安全性评价. 杂草科学, 2014,32(1):91-96.
[12] 张立媛, 琦明玉, 赵国娟 , 等. 赤峰地区谷田除草剂防效初探. 吉林农业科学, 2015,40(6):80-83,100.
[13] 田伯红, 王建广, 李雅静 , 等. 杂交谷子适宜除草剂筛选研究. 河北农业科学, 2010,14(11):46-47.
[14] 张海金 . 谷子田除草剂除草试验初报. 河北农业科学, 2008,12(2):58-59.
[15] 郭青海, 王宏富, 赵晓玲 , 等. 扑草净不同处理对谷子幼苗过氧化物酶活力及同工酶的影响. 山西农业科学, 2009,37(7):11-13.
[16] 赵长龙 . 谷子和糜子田土壤处理除草剂安全性与药效筛选试验研究. 农药科学与管理, 2013,34(3):60-65.
[17] 景小兰, 李志华, 穆婷婷 , 等. 抗除草剂杂交谷子晋谷50号轻简高效配套栽培技术研究.作物杂志, 2016(2):168-172.
[18] 张盼盼, 王君杰, 陈凌 , 等. 不同除草剂对糜子田杂草的防除效果. 西北农业学报, 2013,22(10):208-212.
[19] 王凤芝, 孙福华, 张晓东 . 2甲4氯钠防除稻田扁杆镳草药效试验. 河北农业科学, 2005,9(4):40-42.
[20] 李香菊, 李秉华, 苏立军 , 等. 2,4-D丁酯麦田除草效果及其对小麦安全性的研究. 河北农业科学, 2002,6(4):1-4.
[21] 宋喜娥, 王宏富, 郭平毅 , 等. 几种不同茎叶处理除草剂对谷子的安全性研究. 山西农业科学, 2010,38(4):65-67,96.
[1] Wang Xiaolin, Ji Xiaoling, Zhang Panpan, Zhang Xiong, Zhang Jing. Correlation Analysis between Aboveground Biomass#br# Allocation and Grain Yield in Different Varieties of#br# Foxtail Millet in the Dry Land of Loess Plateau [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 150-155.
[2] Zhang Jianhua, Guo Ruifeng, Cao Changlin, Fan Na, . Study on Effect and Safety of Controlling Weed#br# in Sorghum Field by Several Stem and#br# Leaf Treatment Herbicide [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 162-166.
[3] Zhao Cunhu, Kong Qingquan, Chen Wenjin, . Screening of Postemergence Herbicides#br# in the Broad Bean Field [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 167-172.
[4] Menghan Wei, Huifang Xie, Lu Xing, Hui Song, Shujun Wang, Suying Wang, Haiping Liu, Nan Fu, Jinrong Liu. Comprehensive Evaluation of Yield and Agronomic Characters of Foxtail Millet Germplasms from North China [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 42-47.
[5] Jianguang Liu,Guiyuan Zhao,Junli Zhao,Zhao Geng,Yongqiang Wang,Hanshuang Zhang. Progress in the Structure, Expression and Function of Plant Carboxylesterases [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 32-36.
[6] Min Song,Haipeng Zhang,Xingtao Lu,Cuixia Wu,Yong Zhang. Control Effect of Six Soil-Applied Herbicides on Lamium amplexicaule L. in Winter Wheat Field [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 161-165.
[7] Chao Ding,Jianhua Zhang,Wenbin Bai,Ruifeng Guo,Changlin Cao. Effects of Commonly Used Herbicides on Physiological, Biochemical and Yield Quality of Sorghum [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(5): 149-155.
[8] Junhong Wang,Xuexia Pei,Jianyou Dang,Xueping Wu. Effects of Two Herbicides and Application Dosage on Growth and Antioxidase Activities of Flag Leaf in Wheat [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(3): 157-161.
[9] Yanmin Li,Xiantao Qi,Changlin Liu,Fang Liu,Chuanxiao Xie. Progress of Crop Breeding on Resistance to Herbicides [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(2): 1-6.
[10] Gouliang Song,Xiaolei Feng,Guangyu Fan,Gaolei Shi,Shuangdong Li,Feng Wang,Xiaoming Wang,Zhihai Zhao. Analysis of Parental Combining Ability of New Sterile Lines in Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(2): 44-50.
[11] Xiaodong Dai,Cancan Zhu,Na Qin,Yufeng Yang,Yannan Wang,Guohong Yang,Bing Si,Shihui Liu,Junxia Li. Effects of Uniconazole and Plant Density on Yield and Its Relavent Components of Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(2): 104-108.
[12] Lijuan Zhao,Jinfeng Ma,Yandong Li,Xiangyu Li,Zhijiang Li,Hongmei Yuan,Wendong Guo. Mutagenic Effects of 60Co-γ-Ray Radiation on Dry Seeds of Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(1): 38-43.
[13] Tingting Mu,Huiling Du,Xiaolan Jing,Zhihua Li,Qi Guo,Gang Tian,Huixia Li,Zhang Liu. Effects of Exogenous Selenium on Yield Components and Selenium Content in Grain of Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(1): 73-78.
[14] Xiaodong Dai,Xinzhi Xu,Cancan Zhu,Yufeng Yang,Na Qin,Yannan Wang,Chunyi Wang,Xiaoping Yang,Guohong Yang,Junxia Li. Study on the Effects of N P K Fertilizer in Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2016, 32(5): 147-151.
[15] Chao Jiang,Jianjun Yin,Xiujian Guo. Control Effect of Six Kinds of Herbicides on Field Weed in Panicum miliaceum L. [J]. Crops, 2016, 32(5): 167-169.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] Guangcai Zhao,Xuhong Chang,Demei Wang,Zhiqiang Tao,Yanjie Wang,Yushuang Yang,Yingjie Zhu. General Situation and Development of Wheat Production[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 1 -7 .
[2] Baoquan Quan,Dongmei Bai,Yuexia Tian,Yunyun Xue. Effects of Different Leaf-Peg Ratio on Photosynthesis and Yield of Peanut[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 102 -105 .
[3] Xuefang Huang,Mingjing Huang,Huatao Liu,Cong Zhao,Juanling Wang. Effects of Annual Precipitation and Population Density on Tiller-Earing and Yield of Zhangzagu 5 under Film Mulching and Hole Sowing[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 106 -113 .
[4] Wenhui Huang, Hui Wang, Desheng Mei. Research Progress on Lodging Resistance of Crops[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 13 -19 .
[5] Yun Zhao,Cailong Xu,Xu Yang,Suzhen Li,Jing Zhou,Jicun Li,Tianfu Han,Cunxiang Wu. Effects of Sowing Methods on Seedling Stand and Production Profit of Summer Soybean under Wheat-Soybean System[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 114 -120 .
[6] Mei Lu,Min Sun,Aixia Ren,Miaomiao Lei,Lingzhu Xue,Zhiqiang Gao. Effects of Spraying Foliar Fertilizers on Dryland Wheat Growth and the Correlation with Yield Formation[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 121 -125 .
[7] Xiaofei Wang,Haijun Xu,Mengqiao Guo,Yu Xiao,Xinyu Cheng,Shuxia Liu,Xiangjun Guan,Yaokun Wu,Weihua Zhao,Guojiang Wei. Effects of Sowing Date, Density and Fertilizer Utilization Rate on the Yield of Oilseed Perilla frutescens in Cold Area[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 126 -130 .
[8] Pengjin Zhu,Xinhua Pang,Chun Liang,Qinliang Tan,Lin Yan,Quanguang Zhou,Kewei Ou. Effects of Cold Stress on Reactive Oxygen Metabolism and Antioxidant Enzyme Activities of Sugarcane Seedlings[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 131 -137 .
[9] Jie Gao,Qingfeng Li,Qiu Peng,Xiaoyan Jiao,Jinsong Wang. Effects of Different Nutrient Combinations on Plant Production and Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium Utilization Characteristics in Waxy Sorghum[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 138 -142 .
[10] Na Shang,Zhongxu Yang,Qiuzhi Li,Huihui Yin,Shihong Wang,Haitao Li,Tong Li,Han Zhang. Response of Cotton with Vegetative Branches to Plant Density in the Western of Shandong Province[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 143 -148 .