2016
Herbicide-resistant horseweed (marestale) burndown options in no-till soybean
Contributor/Checkoff:
Category:
Sustainable Production
Keywords:
AgricultureCrop protectionHerbicide
Parent Project:
This is the first year of this project.
Lead Principal Investigator:
Christy Sprague, Michigan State University
Co-Principal Investigators:
Project Code:
1604
Contributing Organization (Checkoff):
Institution Funded:
Brief Project Summary:

Horseweed (marestail) continues to be a significant problem in manyMichigan soybean fields. Resistance to ALS-inhibitors (Group 2), glyphosate (Group 9), and in many cases resistance to both of these classes of herbicides leaves no options for postemergence control of horseweed in Roundup Ready or non-GMO soybean. In addition to multiple herbicide-resistance - prolonged emergence, changes in tillage practices and capabilities of long distance seed dispersal have also contributed to the increased prevalence of horseweed in many of Michigan’s soybean fields. In 2011, we conducted a trial that examined several spring burndown options for glyphosate-resistant horseweed control. This information...

Unique Keywords:
#weed control
Information And Results
Project Deliverables

Information from this research will be used to further develop and demonstrate recommendations for control of herbicide-resistant horseweed to Michigan soybean growers. We will continue to hold meetings throughout the state to make growers aware of the issues and the options for control of this weed. The awareness from our outreach efforts will continue to be important to identify and manage this troublesome weed.

Final Project Results

Update:

View uploaded report PDF file

Shiawassee County:
• There was a high population of glyphosate-resistant horseweed at this location.
• Fall applications of Sharpen at 2 fl oz/A + MSO, 2,4-D ester at 1 pt + glyphosate, Sharpen at 1 fl oz + 2,4-D ester + MSO, and Clarity at 1 pt all provided good to excellent control of horseweed at the time of planting.
• Following each of these treatments with an effective spring burndown treatment, resulted in 99-100% control of horseweed within 21 d after the spring application.
• Spring only treatments provided greater than 90% control within 21 DAT.
• By 47 DAT, several of the herbicide treatments started to break and there were only 5 of 20 treatments that resulted in greater than 90% control. These treatments still provided greater than 80% horseweed control at 60 DAT. All but one of these had a fall burndown herbicide application.
• A subsection of treatments were examined to determine the residual activity of several PRE non-ALS herbicides (Table 1). Authority MTZ at the high rate of 18 oz/A provided 90% control 61 DAT. None of these treatments were above 90% by 96 DAT.
• By 96 DAT, only one treatment had enough residual activity to have 90% horseweed control. The residual control of this treatment combine three sites of action and one of these was the ALS-inhibitor chlorimuron, which probably helped with the longer activity since this population was not ALS-resistant.

Table 1 is attached.

• The POST ALS-treatments worked best with the spring treatments that had provided some good initial control, FirstRate at 0.45 oz and Classic at 0.67 oz worked the best.
• Due to the continued emergence of horseweed at this location (including later emergence), even with a good fall and spring treatment growers planting a soybean that would allow them to apply an effective POST would be beneficial for control (LibertyLink or Roundup Ready 2 Xtend). Issues will arise without a POST option.

Ionia County:
• Overall treatments worked well in this trial.
• All fall treatment with the exception of Sharpen 1 oz/A + MSO (81%) provided greater than 90% horseweed control at the spring application timing.
• At 80 d after the spring application, treatments that generally looked the best had a fall followed by spring treatment. Residual herbicide treatment selection was similar for most of the treatments.

The United Soybean Research Retention policy will display final reports with the project once completed but working files will be purged after three years. And financial information after seven years. All pertinent information is in the final report or if you want more information, please contact the project lead at your state soybean organization or principal investigator listed on the project.