AS  Vol.4 No.12 , December 2013
Response of cranberry and kidney beans to linuron
ABSTRACT

Field studies were conducted in 2009 and 2010 at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario and the University of Guelph Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario to determine the tolerance of four cultivars of cranberry bean (“Etna”, “Hooter”, “SVM Taylor”, and “Capri”) and four cultivars of kidney bean (“Red Hawk”, “Pink Panther”, “Calmont”, and “Majesty”) to linuron applied preemergence at 1125 and 2250 g·ai·ha-1. One week after emergence (WAE), linuron applied PRE caused 0.4% to 1.2% injury in “Etna”, “Hooter”, “SVM Tayler”, and “Capri” cranberry bean and 3.1% to 3.6% injury in “Red Hawk”, “Pink Panther”, “Calmont”, and “Majesty” kidney bean. At 2 and 4 WAE, there was no difference in injury among the dry bean cultivars. Contrast comparing injury due to linuron in cranberry vs kidney bean cultivars indicated 2.3%, 1.7%, and 1.2% greater injury in kidney bean compared to cranberry bean at 1, 2, and 4 WAE, respectively. Linuron PRE caused slightly greater injury in kidney bean compared to cranberry bean but crop injury was minimal with no adverse effect on plant height, shoot dry weight, seed moisture content, and yield under the environments evaluated. Based on this research, linuron applied PRE at the proposed rate of 1125 g·ai·ha-1 can be safely used in cranberry and kidney beans in Ontario.


Cite this paper
Soltani, N. , Shropshire, C. and Sikkema, P. (2013) Response of cranberry and kidney beans to linuron. Agricultural Sciences, 4, 649-653. doi: 10.4236/as.2013.412087.
References
[1]   Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (2007) Canada: Dry bean imports and exports.
http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1174506503179&lang=eng

[2]   Kulasekera, K. (2013) Estimated area, yield, production and farm value of specified field crops, Ontario, 2001-2012, (Metric Units).
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/stats/crops/estimate_metric.htm

[3]   Arnold, N.R., Murray, W.M., Gregory, J.E. and Smeal, D. (1993) Weed control in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with imazethapyr combinations. Weed Technology, 7, 361-364.

[4]   Bauer, T.A., Renner, K.A., Penner, D. and Kelly J.D. (1995) Pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) varietal tolerance to imazethapyr. Weed Science, 43, 417-424.

[5]   Blackshaw, R.E. and Esau, R. (1991) Control of annual broadleaved weeds in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Technology, 5, 532-538.

[6]   Urwin, C.P., Wilson, R.G. and Mortensen, D.A. (1996) Responses of dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars to four herbicides. Weed Technology, 10, 512-518.

[7]   Wilson, R.G. and Miller, S.D. (1991). Dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) responses to imazethapyr. Weed Technology, 5, 22-26.

[8]   Malik, V.S., Swanton, C.J. and Michaels, T.E. (1993) Interaction of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars, row spacing, and seeding density with annual weeds. Weed Science, 41, 62-68.

[9]   Wilson, R.G. (1993) Wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) interference in dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Science, 41, 607-610.

[10]   Zimdahl, R.L. (1980) Weed-crop competition. International Plant Protection Center, Oregon State University, Corvallis.

[11]   Bassett, I.J. and Munro, D.B. (1985) The biology of Canadian weeds. 67. Solanum ptycanthum Dun., S. nigrum L., and S. sarrachoides Sendt. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 65, 401-414.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/cjps85-055

[12]   Ogg, A.G. and Rogers, B.S. (1989) Taxonomy, distribution, biology, and control of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States and Canada. Weed Science, 4, 25-58.

[13]   Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) (2011) Guide to weed control. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs, Toronto.

[14]   Senseman, S.A. (2007) Herbicide handbook. 9th Edition, Weed Science Society of America, Champaign.

[15]   Van Gessel, J.M., Monks, W.D. and Quintin, R.J. (2000) Herbicides for potential use in lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus) production. Weed Technology, 14, 279-286.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/0890-037X(2000)014[0279:HFPUIL]2.0.CO;2

[16]   Sikkema, P.H., Hekmat, S., Shropshire, C. and Soltani, N. (2009) Response of black, cranberry, kidney, and white bean to linuron. Weed Biology and Management, 9, 173-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-6664.2009.00336.x

[17]   Renner, K.A. and Powell, G.E. (1992) Responses of navy bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) grown in rotation to clomazone, imazethapyr, bentazon, and acifluorfen. Weed Science, 40, 127-133.

[18]   Sikkema, P., Soltani, N., Shropshire, C. and Cowan, T. (2004) Sensitivity of kidney beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) to soil applications of S-metolachlor and imazethapyr. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 84, 405-407.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/P03-069

[19]   Soltani, N., Shropshire, C., Cowan, T. and Sikkema, P. (2003) Tolerance of cranberry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) to soil applications of S-metolachlor and imazethapyr. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 83, 645-648.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/P03-006

[20]   Soltani, N., Shropshire, C., Cowan, T. and Sikkema, P. (2004) Tolerance of black beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) to soil applications of S-metolachlor and imazethapyr. Weed Technology, 18, 166-173.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT-03-044R

[21]   Poling, K. (1999) Dry edible bean responses to dimethenamid and metolachlor. M.S. Thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing.

[22]   Singh, S.P., Gepts, P. and Debouck, D.G. (1991) Races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), fabaceae. Economic Botany, 45, 379-396.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02887079

[23]   Singh, S.P., Gutierrez, J.A., Molina, A., Urrea, C. and Gepts, P. (1991) Genetic diversity in cultivated common bean: II. Marker-based analysis of morphological and agronomic traits. Crop Science, 31, 23-29.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100010005x

[24]   Singh, S.P., Nodari, R. and Gepts, P. (1991) Genetic diversity in cultivated common bean: I. Allozymes. Crop Science, 31, 19-23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100010004x

[25]   Soltani, N., Bowley, S. and Sikkema, P.H. (2005) Responses of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) to flumioxazin. Weed Technology, 19, 351-358.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT-04-146R1

[26]   Sikkema, P., Shropshire, C. and Soltani, N. (2007) Dry bean response to preemergence-applied KIH-485. Weed Technology, 21, 230-234.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT-06-050.1

 
 
Top