Crops ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (4): 262-266.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2022.04.037

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Sensitivity of Foxtail Millets (Setaria italica L.) and Weeds to Cyhalofop-Butyl

Li Binghua1(), Wang Guiqi1, Shi Zhigang2, Liu Xiaomin1, Xu Xian1, Zhao Bochui1, Cheng Ruhong2()   

  1. 1Key Laboratory of Crop Cultivation Physiology and Green Production of Hebei Province/Institute of Cereal and Oil Crops, Hebei Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050035,Hebei, China
    2Cereal Crops Laboratory of Hebei Province/Institute of Millet Crops, Hebei Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050035, Hebei, China
  • Received:2021-04-13 Revised:2021-09-24 Online:2022-08-15 Published:2022-08-22
  • Contact: Cheng Ruhong E-mail:libh197@163.com;rhcheng63@126.com

RichHTML

3

PDF (PC)

160

Abstract:

Bioassay experiment and field plot test were executed to examine the weed sensitivity of cyhalofop-butyl and its safety on foxtail millet for providing theoretical guidance for the application of cyhalofop-butyl in millet field. The results of the laboratory bioassay test showed that Eleusine indica L. was highly sensitive (GR90=45.02g a.i./ha) to cyhalofop-butyl and Setaria faberii Herrm. was commonly sensitive (GR90=124.13g a.i./ha) to it. The selection index of cyhalofop-butyl between Jigu 39 and weeds was higher than 2 and Jigu 39 showed low sensitivity (GR10=284.05g a.i./ha) to cyhalofop-butyl. The selection index of Yugu 18 was below 1 and Yugu 18 showed highly sensitive (GR10=13.70g a.i./ha) to it. The resistant index of Jigu 39 was 9.65. Field test results further showed that cyhalofop-butyl could effectively control grassy weeds in the herbicide-resistant millet field. It had high control effect to E. indica and Digitaria sanguinalis L., both of biomass and number control effect were higher than 96% at the dose of 110g a.i./ha. It also had a significant inhibitory effect on S. faberii and the biomass control effect was higher than 80%. Biomass and plant height of Jigu 39 were unaffected by cyclofop-butyl. According to the study, Yugu 18 shown great susceptibility to cyhalofop-butyl while Jigu 39, a herbicide-resistant millet type, was resistant to it. In a field of herbicide-resistant millet, using cyhalofop-butyl wisely could successfully suppress grass weeds.

Key words: Foxtail millet, Weed, Cyhalofop-butyl, Sensitivity, Herbicide-resistance

Table 1

Experimental plant and herbicide dosage for biomass assay g a.i./hm2"

处理
Treatment		 豫谷18
Yugu 18		 冀谷39
Jigu 39		 谷莠子
S. faberii		 牛筋草
E. indica
氰氟草酯
Cyhalofop-butyl		 15.625 200 15.625 15.625
31.250 250 31.250 31.250
62.500 300 62.500 62.500
125.000 350 125.000 125.000
250.000 400 250.000 250.000
空白对照Control – – –

Fig.1

Fresh weight control effects of cyhalofop-butyl on weeds"

Table 2

The sensitivity of weeds to cyhalofop-butyl"

杂草
Weed		 回归方程
Regression
equation		 相关
系数
r		 95%置信限
95% confidence limit (g a.i./hm2)
GR50 GR90
牛筋草
E. indica		 y =3.00+1.99x 0.94 10.19
（4.29~24.23）		 45.02
（29.16~69.51）
谷莠子
S. faberii		 y =2.88+1.63x 0.98 20.22
（14.27~28.66）		 124.13
（93.88~164.11）

Table 3

Determine the sensitivity of millet to cyhalofop-butyl"

谷子
Millet		 回归方程
Regression equation		 相关系数
r		 95% 置信限95% confidence limit (g a.i./hm2) RI
GR10 GR50
豫谷Yugu 18 y=1.33+2.10x 0.94 13.70（6.25~30.04） 55.86（35.57~87.73） 1.00
冀谷Jigu 39 y=4.61x-7.59 0.91 284.05（251.05~321.40） 538.94（386.65~751.20） 9.65

Table 4

Selection indexes of cyhalofop-butyl between millet varieties and weeds"

材料
Material		 剂量
Dosage		 谷子
Millet		 牛筋草
E. indica		 谷莠子
S. faberii
豫谷Yugu 18 GR10 13.70
杂草Weed GR90 45.02 124.13
选择性指数SI 0.30 0.11
冀谷Jigu 39 GR10 284.05
杂草Weed GR90 45.02 124.13
选择性指数SI 6.31 2.29

Table 5

Weed control effects of cyhalofop-butyl after application 18d"

氰氟草酯
Cyhalofop-butyl
(g a.i./hm2)		 株数防效Control effect of plant number (%) 鲜重防效Fresh weight control effect (%)
马唐
D. sanguinalis		 牛筋草
E. indica		 谷莠子
S. faberii		 杂草合计
Overall of weed		 马唐
D. sanguinalis		 牛筋草
E. indica		 谷莠子
S. faberii		 杂草合计
Overall of weed
40 54.5c 37.0b 0.0c 9.3c 30.7d 83.1b 45.3b 53.5b
55 69.7bc 87.4a 11.5bc 45.2b 54.3c 95.2ab 43.3b 55.7b
70 78.8b 92.9a 19.1b 52.2b 77.5b 97.5a 47.5b 60.2b
110 97.0a 100.0a 67.2a 82.2a 97.1a 100.0a 80.5a 85.6a

Fig.2

Effects on Jigu 39 plant height and fresh weight after cyhalofop-butyl application 18 days Different letter indicate significant different between treatments at 0.05 level"

[1] 周汉章, 刘红霞, 薄奎勇, 等. 夏谷田杂草为害损失预测模型的研究. 农学学报, 2012, 2(12):12-15.
[2] Reddy S S, Stahlman P W, Geier P W, et al. Tolerance of foxtail,proso and pearl millets to saflufenacil. Crop Protection, 2014, 57:57-62.
doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2013.12.002
[3] Mishra J S. Weed management in millets:Retrospect and prospects. Indian Journal of Weed Science, 2015, 47(3):246-253.
[4] 相金英, 程汝宏. 夏播黍子田除草剂筛选试验初报. 河北农业科学, 2012, 16(6):1-3.
[5] 李志华, 景小兰, 李会霞, 等. 谷子苗期除草剂的安全性及杂草防效研究. 作物杂志, 2017(1):150-154.
[6] Wang T Y, Darmency W H. Cross-resistance to aryloxyphenoxy-propionate and cyclohex anedione herbicides in foxtail millet (Setaria italica). Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology, 1998, 59:81-88.
doi: 10.1006/pest.1997.2309
[7] Ruiz-Santaella J P, Heredia A, Prado R D. Basis of selectivity of cyhalofop-butyl in Oryza sativa L.. Planta, 2006, 223(2):191-199.
pmid: 16160841
[8] 闫潇敏, 宁斌科, 王列平. 新型选择性除草剂——氰氟草酯的开发与使用. 世界农药, 2007, 29(2):43-45.
[9] 张宏军, 崔海兰, 朱文达, 等. 五氟磺草胺和氰氟草酯复配剂对水稻直播田杂草的防除效果及安全性评价. 植物保护, 2011, 37(2):177-181.
[10] 邢春生, 孙俊铭, 韦刚, 等. 40%氰氟草酯·二氯喹啉酸WP对直播水稻田禾本科杂草的防除效果. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 35(19):9036-9037.
[11] Kim J S, Jung-Im O H, Kim T J, et al. Physiological basis of differential phytotoxic activity between fenoxaprop-P-ethyl and cyhalofop-butyl-treated barnyardgrass. Weed Biology and Management, 2010, 5(2):39-45.
doi: 10.1111/j.1445-6664.2005.00158.x
[12] 王俊丽, 徐小博, 孙玥, 等. 乙酰辅酶A羧化酶抑制剂类除草剂的研究进展. 植物学研究, 2019, 8(5):410-415.
[13] Ntanos D A, Koutroubas S D, Mavrotas C. Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) control in water-seeded rice (Oryza sativa) with cyhalofop-butyl. Weed Technology, 2000, 14(2):383-388.
doi: 10.1614/0890-037X(2000)014[0383:BECGCI]2.0.CO;2
[14] Yao X, Wang Y Q, Yue X P, et al. Generation of tribenuron-methyl herbicide-resistant OsCYP81A6-expressing rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) plants for hybrid seed production using chemical‐induced male sterility. Plant Breeding, 2016, 135(3):349-354.
doi: 10.1111/pbr.12361
[15] Aono M, Wakiyama S, Nagatsu M, et al. Seeds of a possible natural hybrid between herbicide-resistant Brassica napus and Brassica rapa detected on a riverbank in Japan. GM Crops, 2011, 2(3):201-210.
doi: 10.4161/gmcr.2.3.18931
[16] 苏少泉. 转基因抗除草剂作物与除草剂开发及使用. 农药, 2002(7):3-7.
[17] 曹坳程, 郭美霞, 蒋红云, 等. 抗除草剂作物对未来化学农药发展的影响. 生物技术通报, 1998(4):22-25.
[18] 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.
[19] 武丽敏, 魏育明, 郑有良. 不同基因型小麦对除草剂Basta敏感性研究. 麦类作物学报, 2004, 24(2):118-120.
[20] Zhao N, Bi Y, Wu C, et al. Cross-resistance to acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors associated with different mutations in Japanese foxtail (Alopecurus japonicus ). Weed Science, 2019, 67(4):1-8.
doi: 10.1017/wsc.2018.79
[21] Deng W, Cai J X, Zhang J Y, et al. Molecular basis of resistance to ACCase-inhibiting herbicide cyhalofop-butyl in Chinese sprangletop [Leptochloa chinensis (L.) Nees] from China. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology, 2019, 158:143-148.
doi: S0048-3575(19)30144-0 pmid: 31378350
[22] 郭文磊, 吴丹丹, 张纯, 等. 5种茎叶处理除草剂对直播稻田禾本科杂草的除草活性及田间防效. 南方农业学报, 2019, 50(6):1240-1246.
[23] 刘庆虎, 陈国奇, 张玉华, 等. 不同叶龄千金子、稗和马唐对氰氟草酯和五氟磺草胺的敏感性. 南京农业大学学报, 2016, 39(5):771-776.
[1] Ma Ke, Feng Lei, Zhao Xiatong, Zhang Liguang, Yuan Xiangyang, Dong Shuqi, Guo Pingyi, Song Xi’e. Effects of Sowing Distance and Sowing Amount on the Growth Characteristics and Yield of Zhangzagu 10 [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(4): 172-178.
[2] Lü Jianzhen, Ren Ying, Wang Hongyong, Zhang Tingjun, Ma Jianping, Zhao Kai. Comprehensive Phenotype Evaluation of 264 Major Foxtail Millet Bred Varieties (Lines) [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(4): 22-31.
[3] Qin Na, Zhu Cancan, Dai Shutao, Song Yinghui, Li Junxia, Wang Chunyi. Fine Mapping and Functional Analysis of Yellow Leaf Mutant ylm-1 in Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(3): 55-62.
[4] Guo Yongxin, Zhou Hao, Sun Peng, Wang Yaqing, Ma Ke, Li Xiaorui, Dong Shuqi, Guo Pingyi, Yuan Xiangyang. Effects of Planting Patterns on Lodging Resistance and Yield of Zhangza 10 in Different Ecological Areas [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(2): 195-202.
[5] Zhao Lirong, Ma Ke, Zhang Liguang, Tang Sha, Yuan Xiangyang, Diao Xianmin. Analysis of Agronomic Traits and Quality of Foxtail Millet Varieties in Different Ecological Regions [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(2): 44-53.
[6] Xie Huimin, Wu Ke, Liu Wenqi, Wei Guoliang, Lu Xian, Li Zhuanglin, Wei Shanqing, Liang He, Jiang Ligeng. Effects of Partial Substitution of Seaweed Fertilizers and Microbial Inoculant for Chemical Fertilizer on Rice Yield and Its Components [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(1): 161-166.
[7] Li Huixia, Liu Hong, Wang Yuwen, Tian Gang, Liu Xin, Zheng Zhiyin. Study on the Technique of Removing False Hybrids from Foxtail Millet Herbicide-Resistant Hybrids [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(6): 72-77.
[8] Wang Yuting, Miao Xingfen, Wang Di. Screening and Evaluation of Atrazine-Resistant Germplasm Resources of Foxtail Millet at Germination Stage [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(5): 194-204.
[9] Gao Peng, Guo Meijun, Yang Xuefang, Dong Shuqi, Wen Yinyuan, Guo Pingyi, Yuan Xiangyang. Responses of Photosynthetic Fluorescence Parameters in Foxtail Millet and Maize Leaves under Nicosulfuron Stress [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 70-77.
[10] Shen Jie, Wang Yuguo, Guo Pingyi, Yuan Xiangyang. Effects of Humic Acid on Ascorbate-Glutathione Cycle in the Leaves of Foxtail Millet Seedlings under Drought Stress [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(2): 173-177.
[11] Jia Suqing, He Lu, Du Yanwei. Effects of Different Tillage Methods on Root Development,Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Spring Millet in Arid Area [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(5): 194-198.
[12] Wang Furong, Zhang Jianxue, Guo Minjiang, Zhang Yahong, Fan Tiping, Wang Yahong, Zhang Yan, Pei Guoping, Lei Jianming. Effects of Post-Emergence Herbicide Spraying at Different Stages on Weed Control, and Yield and Quality of Winter Rapeseed [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(5): 204-208.
[13] Yang Yongqing, Gao Fangfang, Ma Yajun, Chen Xin, Zhang Jie. Effects of Different Fertilizer Treatments on Yield, Quality and Economic Benefit of Foxtail Millet in Dry Farming Area of Shanxi Province [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 195-201.
[14] Chen Diwen,Zhou Wenling,Ao Junhua,Huang Ying,Jiang Yong,Han Xihong,Qin Yimin,Shen Hong. Effects of Seaweed Extract on Yield, Quality and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Sweet Corn [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(2): 134-139.
[15] Zhao Lijuan,Yuan Hongmei,Zhao Liwei,Guo Wendong,Li Zhijiang,Li Xiangyu,Ma Jinfeng,Li Yandong,Song Weifu,Yang Xuefeng,Liu Dongjun. The Phenotypic Variations and GA Sensitivity of a Dwarf Mutant d93090 in Foxtail Millet [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(6): 27-32.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!