Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Beans (Phaseolus vulgarism) with Preemergence Applications of Valor Alone or in Combination From 2004 to 2008
Richard N. Arnold, Daniel Smeal, Kevin A. Lombard, Michael K. O'Neill, Samuel C. Allen, Margaret M. West, Roselyn Yazzie
College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, New Mexico State University (Print Friendly PDF)
Authors: Respectively, Interim Superintendent and College Professor, College Professor, Assistant Professor, Professor, Agricultural Research Scientist, and Agricultural Research Specialist, all of Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico State University; and Dry Bean Crop Manager, Navajo Agricultural Products Industry, Farmington, NM.
Preemergence treatments of Valor and Outlook alone or in combination with either Prowl or Prowl H2O and followed by a sequential postemergence treatment of Raptor plus Basagran were applied to dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) to determine broadleaf weed control and crop injury. All of the herbicides improved dry bean yield compared to the weedy check. Valor applied preemergence gave over 97% control of broadleaf weeds approximately 8 weeks after treatment and did not require a sequential postemergence treatment. Outlook applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O gave poor control of Russian thistle. However, when the sequential postemergence treatment of Raptor plus Basagran was applied to these treatments, Russian thistle control increased from 42 to 63%. Dry bean yields were greater than 4,000 lb/ac in treatments of Valor applied preemergence alone or in combination with either Prowl or Prowl H2O and in all treatments where Raptor plus Basagran was applied as a sequential postemergence treatment.
Approximately 96% of New Mexico’s dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) production occurs in northwestern New Mexico (National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2007). Because of the semi-arid climate and coarse-textured soils in this region, most dry bean production occurs under sprinkler irrigation. Weeds compete vigorously with dry beans, and yield reductions exceeding 50% have been recorded (Blackshaw and Esau, 1991; Arnold et al., 1992; Parker and Fryer, 1975; Wilson, 2005). Ogg and Rodgers (1989) recognized competition from black nightshade as a serious detriment to dry bean production and quality. Wilson et al. (1980) and Arnold et al. (1992) identified redroot and prostrate pigweed, kochia, other nightshade species, barnyardgrass, and Russian thistle as serious competitors in dry bean production in both Nebraska and New Mexico.
Research has shown that weeds that emerge in the first 5 to 7 weeks after planting are more competitive with dry beans than weeds that emerge later. After 7 weeks, dry bean vines shade the row and suppress weed growth (Dawson, 1964). Wilson (1993) indicated that when dry beans are kept weed-free for 4 weeks from proso millet, dry bean yields were comparable to those plots kept weed-free all season.
Dry bean growers usually apply either a preplant incorporated herbicide before planting or a preemergence herbicide after planting followed by one or two cultivations, plus herbicides applied postemergence 4 to 6 weeks after planting (Roselyn Yazzie, personal communication, 2010). Dual and Outlook are used extensively as preemergence herbicides for broadleaf weed control in dry beans in northwestern New Mexico, but neither of these herbicides satisfactorily control Russian thistle. A postemergence mixture of either Pursuit or Raptor in combination with Basagran is then used for escaped broadleaf weeds and Russian thistle.
Valor is a new herbicide that has recently been registered for use in dry beans, soybean, and peanut, and has both soil and foliar activity on many broadleaf weeds, such as redroot and prostrate pigweed, nightshades, and common lambsquarters (Hartzler, 2004; Price et al., 2004). There is little information on the safety and efficacy of Valor when applied preemergence on dry beans for control of broadleaf weeds in northwestern New Mexico. Valor could provide dry bean producers of this region with an additional weed management option for the control of annual broadleaf weeds.
The objective of this five-year (from 2004 to 2008) study was to determine (a) efficacy of Valor applied preemergence alone or in combination with other herbicides followed by sequential postemergence treatments for control of broadleaf weeds in dry beans and (b) their effect on dry bean yield. Common, trade, and chemical names of herbicides applied to dry beans are given in Table 1.
Table 1. Common, Trade, and Chemical Names of Herbicides Applied to Dry Beans; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM, 2004-2008
|Common Name||Trade Name||Chemical Name|
|Flumioxazin||Valor||2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4- (2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]- 4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole- 1,
|Dimethenamid-p||Outlook||(RS) 2-chloro-N-(2,4-dimethyl-3- thienyl)-N-(2-methoxy-
|Pendimethalin||Prowl and Prowl H2O||N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6- dinitrobenzenamine|
imidazol-2- yl]-5-(methoxymethyl)-3 pyridinecarboxylic acid
|COC||Crop oil concentrate containing at least 83% paraffin-based petroleum oil.|
|32-0-0||A solution mixture of urea and ammonium nitrate with water.|
Materials and Methods
Field experiments were conducted from 2004 to 2008 at the New Mexico State University Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM, to evaluate the response of dry beans and annual broadleaf weeds to Valor applied preemergence alone or in combination followed by sequential postemergence applications of Raptor in combination with Basagran. Soil was a Wall sandy loam (Typic Camborthid, coarse, loamy, mixed, calcareous, mesic family) with a pH of 7.6 and an organic matter content of less than 0.5%. The fields were ripped to a depth of 12 inches; fertilized before planting with N, P2O5, and K2O at 20, 50, and 60 lb/ac, respectively; disked; and leveled before planting and herbicide application. Individual plots were four rows, each 34 inches wide by 30 feet long, with four replications arranged in a randomized complete block design.
Dry beans (var. ‘Bill Z’) were planted on May 26, 2004; May 26, 2005; May 30, 2006; May 29, 2007; and May 30, 2008. Dry bean seeds were planted 1 inch apart and 1.5 inches deep in rows spaced 34 inches apart. Irrigation was supplied by solid set sprinklers.
Preemergence treatments were applied on May 27, May 27, May 31, May 31, and May 29 from 2004 to 2008, respectively, and were immediately incorporated with 0.75 inch of sprinkler-applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied June 30, June 30, June 29, June 27, and July 1 from 2004 to 2008, respectively. All sequential postemergence treatments had a crop oil concentrate (COC) and 32-0-0 added to the herbicide mixture at 16 and 32 oz/ac, respectively. Sequential postemergence treatments were applied when dry beans were in the third to fourth trifoliate leaf stage and weeds were less than 2 inches tall. All treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/ac at 35 psi.
Visual weed control evaluations were taken twice each season on June 29 and July 29, June 29 and July 29, June 27 and August 1, June 27 and July 30, and June 30 and July 31 from 2004 to 2008, respectively. Dry bean injury was evaluated on June 29, June 29, June 27, June 27, and June 30 from 2004 to 2008, respectively. Visual evaluations were based on a scale ranging from 0% (no control or crop injury) to 100% (dead plants). Dry beans were harvested in late August to early September of each year by pulling five feet of the two center rows, and were left in the field for one week to dry before being thrashed with a plot thrasher, after which the seed was weighed.
Weed control evaluations were analyzed as a split-plot design with years as main plots and herbicide treatments as subplots. There were no significant year by treatment interactions for visual weed evaluations and dry bean yield, so data were combined. Treatment means were separated by the Tukey’s HSD test at the 5% level of probability using CoHort Statistical Software Version 2008.
Results and Discussion
Dry Bean Injury
Valor plus Prowl H2O applied preemergence at 1.6 plus 27 oz/ac caused minimal dry bean injury (Table 2). Soltani et al. (2005) found that Valor applied preemergence at approximately 2.0 oz/ac to dry bean classes of black, cranberry, kidney, and white caused injury symptoms of 19, 1, 4, and 19%, respectively, 28 days after emergence. There was no dry bean injury from the sequential postemergence treatments in this study (Table 3).
Table 2. Control of Annual Broadleaf Weeds in Dry Beans with Preemergence Treatments Evaluated in Late June; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM, 2004-2008
|Treatments||Rate (oz/ac)||Crop Injurya||-------- Weed Controla,b ---------|
|-------------- (%) --------------|
|Valor + Prowl||1.6 + 31||0||100||100||100||100|
|Valor + Prowl H2O||1.6 + 27||2||100||100||100||100|
|Outlook + Prowl||12 + 31||0||100||100||100||55|
|Outlook + Prowl H2O||12 + 27||0||100||100||100||64|
|Avg. weeds per yd2, weedy check||35||25||22||7|
|aBased on a visual scale from 0-100, where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants.
bAmare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, and Saskr = Russian thistle.
Table 3. Control of Annual Broadleaf Weeds in Dry Beans with Preemergence Treatments Followed by Sequential Postemergence Treatments Evaluated in Late July and Early August; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM, 2004-2008
|Crop Injuryb||-------- Weed Controlb,c ---------|
|-------------- (%) --------------|
|Valor + Prowl||1.6 + 31||0||97||97||96||98|
|Valor + Prowl H2O||1.6 + 27||0||95||97||96||98|
|Outlook + Prowl||12 + 31||0||91||96||91||36|
|Outlook + Prowl H2O||12 + 27||0||94||96||92||51|
|Valor/Raptor + Basagran||1.6/4 + 8||0||99||98||98||98|
|Outlook/Raptor + Basagran||12/4 + 8||0||98||98||98||92|
|Outlook + Prowl/Raptor + Basagran||12 + 31/4 + 8||0||99||96||98||94|
|Outlook + Prowl H2O/Raptor + Basagran||12 + 27/4 + 8||0||98||96||98||93|
|Valor + Prowl H2O/Raptor + Basagran||1.6 + 27/4 + 8||0||98||98||98||98|
|Avg. weeds per yd2, weedy check||42||22||26||8|
aFirst treatment applied preemergence followed by a slash, then a sequential postemergence treatment. Postemergence treatments applied with a COC and 32-0-0 at 16 and 32 oz/ac, respectively.
Weed populations of redroot and prostrate pigweed and black nightshade were heavy, averaging approximately 39, 24, and 24 plants/yd2, respectively, and Russian thistle infestations were light, averaging approximately 8 plants/yd2 (combined averages of Tables 2 and 3). All preemergence treatments gave excellent control of redroot and prostrate pigweed and black nightshade except the weedy check. Russian thistle control with preemergence treatments of Outlook applied alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O at 12 plus 27 or 31 oz/ac was poor, with only 36, 55, and 64% control, respectively. However, Outlook in combination with Prowl H2O applied preemergence at 12 plus 27 oz/ac gave 9% better control of Russian thistle than did Outlook in combination with Prowl applied at 12 plus 31 oz/ac (Table 2).
Valor applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O at 1.6 plus 31 or 27 oz/ac gave better than 95% control of redroot and prostrate pigweed, black nightshade, and Russian thistle approximately 8 weeks after preemergence application (Table 3). Outlook applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O at 12 plus 27 or 31 oz/ac showed a decrease in redroot and prostrate pigweed and black nightshade control ranging from 4 to 11% approximately 8 weeks after preemergence application (Table 3).
Raptor plus Basagran applied as a sequential postemergence treatment at 4 plus 8 oz/ac to either Valor applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O and Outlook applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O gave good to excellent control of redroot and prostrate pigweed, black nightshade, and Russian thistle (Table 3). Raptor plus Basagran applied as a sequential postemergence treatment at 4 plus 8 oz/ac to Outlook applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O increased Russian thistle control by approximately 63, 62, and 42%, respectively (Table 3).
Weeds were strong competitors with dry beans, reducing yields by between 82 and 87% in the weedy check from 2004 to 2008 (Table 4). Valor plus Prowl applied preemergence at 1.6 plus 31 oz/ac produced the highest yield of dry beans at 4,242 lb/ac. Outlook applied preemergence alone or in combination with Prowl or Prowl H2O at 12 plus 27 or 31 oz/ac had decreases in dry bean yield of between 799 and 1,222 lb/ac compared to when these treatments were applied with a sequential postemergence treatment of Raptor plus Basagran (Table 4). Dry bean yields were 2,451 to 3,689 lb/ac higher in the herbicide-treated plots as compared to the weedy check (Table 4).
The results of this study emphasize the need for good weed control to attain optimal dry bean yields. The herbicide treatments used in this study gave good to excellent control of these weeds without reducing crop yields.
Table 4. Dry Bean Yield from 2004-2008 at Farmington, NM
|Dry Bean Yield
|Valor + Prowl||1.6 + 31||4,242|
|Valor + Prowl H2O||1.6 + 27||4,211|
|Outlook + Prowl||12 + 31||3,289|
|Outlook + Prowl H2O||12 + 27||3,319|
|Valor/Raptor + Basagran||1.6/4 + 8||4,196|
|Outlook/Raptor + Basagran||12/4 + 8||4,226|
|Outlook + Prowl/Raptor + Basagran||12 + 31/4 + 8||4,088|
|Outlook + Prowl H2O/Raptor + Basagran||12 + 27/4 + 8||4,088|
|Valor + Prowl H2O/Raptor + Basagran||1.6 + 27/4 + 8||4,127|
|aFirst treatment applied preemergence followed by a slash, then a sequential postemergence treatment. Postemergence treatments applied with a COC and 32-0-0 at 16 and 32 oz/ac, respectively.|
Arnold, R.N., M. Murray, E.J. Gregory, and D. Smeal. 1992. Weed control in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with imazethapyr combinations. Weed Technology, 7, 362–364.
Blackshaw, R.E., and R. Esau. 1991. Control of broadleaf weeds in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Technology, 5, 532–538.
Dawson, J.H. 1964. Competition between irrigated field beans and annual weeds. Weed Science, 12, 206–208.
Hartzler, B. 2004. Sulfentrazone and flumioxazin injury to soybean [Online]. Ames: Iowa State University. Available from http://www.weeds.iastate.edu/mgmt/2004/ppoinjury.shtml
National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2007. Census of agriculture, New Mexico, volume 1, chapter 2, table 1 [Online]. Available from http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_County_Level/New_Mexico/st35_2_001_001.pdf
Ogg, A.G., and B.S. Rodgers. 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.
Parker, C., and F.D. Fryer. 1975. Weed control problems causing major reductions in world food supplies. Food and Agricultural Organization, Plant Protection Bulletin 23, 83–95.
Price, A.J., W.A. Pline, J.W. Wilcut, J.R. Cranmer, and D. Danehower. 2004. Physiological basis for cotton tolerance to flumioxazin applied postemergence directed. Weed Science, 52, 1–7.
Soltani, N., S. Bowley, and P. Sikkema. 2005. Response of dry beans to flumioxazin. Weed Science, 19, 351–358.
Wilson R.G., G.A. Wicks, and C.R. Fenster. 1980. Weed control in field beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in western Nebraska. Weed Science, 28, 295–299.
Wilson, R.G. 2005. Response of dry bean and weeds to fomesafen and fomesafen tank mixtures. Weed Technology, 19, 201–206.
Wilson, R.G. 1993. Wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) interference in dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Science, 41, 607–610.
Brand names appearing in publications are for product identification purposes only. No endorsement is intended, nor is criticism implied of similar products not mentioned. Persons using such products assume responsibility for their use in accordance with current label directions of the manufacturer.
To find more resources for your business, home, or family, visit the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences on the World Wide Web at aces.nmsu.edu.
Contents of publications may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. For permission to use publications for other purposes, contact firstname.lastname@example.org or the authors listed on the publication.
New Mexico State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and educator. NMSU and the U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating.
Printed and electronically distributed May 2012, Las Cruces, NM.