U.S. patent application number 17/340177 was filed with the patent office on 2022-04-28 for herbicidal compositions and methods.
This patent application is currently assigned to SePRO Corporation. The applicant listed for this patent is SePRO Corporation. Invention is credited to Kyle Briscoe, Tyler J. Koschnick.
Application Number | 20220125048 17/340177 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | |
Filed Date | 2022-04-28 |
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00001.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00002.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00003.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00004.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00005.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00006.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00007.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00008.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00009.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00010.png)
![](/patent/app/20220125048/US20220125048A1-20220428-D00011.png)
View All Diagrams
United States Patent
Application |
20220125048 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Koschnick; Tyler J. ; et
al. |
April 28, 2022 |
HERBICIDAL COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS
Abstract
Described are preferred methods and compositions for controlling
weeds in soil that involve the use of a bleaching herbicide such as
fluridone in combination with at least one other additional
selected herbicidal agent, which is preferably a PPO-inhibitor such
as fomesafen or flumioxazin. Also described are safening effects of
bleaching herbicidal agents such as fluridone on other herbicides,
and of other herbicides on bleaching herbicidal agents. Further
described are methods and compositions for controlling weeds in
soil that comprise the use of fluridone. Methods and compositions
for controlling weeds in permanent crops are also described.
Inventors: |
Koschnick; Tyler J.;
(Westfield, IN) ; Briscoe; Kyle; (Rocky Mount,
NC) |
|
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
SePRO Corporation |
Carmel |
IN |
US |
|
|
Assignee: |
SePRO Corporation
Carmel
IN
|
Appl. No.: |
17/340177 |
Filed: |
June 7, 2021 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
14886942 |
Oct 19, 2015 |
11026423 |
|
|
17340177 |
|
|
|
|
14332036 |
Jul 15, 2014 |
9204642 |
|
|
14886942 |
|
|
|
|
PCT/US2014/034526 |
Apr 17, 2014 |
|
|
|
14332036 |
|
|
|
|
62065389 |
Oct 17, 2014 |
|
|
|
61813166 |
Apr 17, 2013 |
|
|
|
61814600 |
Apr 22, 2013 |
|
|
|
International
Class: |
A01N 43/40 20060101
A01N043/40; A01N 43/84 20060101 A01N043/84 |
Claims
1. A method for controlling weeds in soil where a permanent crop
resides comprising the step of applying a composition comprising
fluridone to said soil where a permanent crop resides.
2. A method for controlling weeds in the soil where permanent crops
reside comprising the steps of: applying to the soil where said
permanent crops reside a first herbicidal composition; and applying
to the soil where said permanent crops resides a second herbicidal
composition.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of providing
water to the soil where said permanent crops reside.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein said providing is performed by
irrigation.
5-11. (canceled)
12. The method of claim 2, wherein said first herbicidal
composition comprises fluridione.
13. The method of claim 2, wherein said second herbicidal
composition comprises 2,4-D, acetochlor, acifuorfen, carfentrazone,
clethodim, dicamba, dichlobenil, diquat, diuron, fluazifop,
flumiclorac, fluthiacet, fluometuron, flumioxazin, fomesafen,
glufosinate, glyphosate, halosulfuron, indaziflam, isoxaben,
lactofen, metolachlor, napropamide, oryzalin, oxyfluorfen,
paraquat, pendimethalin, penoxsulam, pronamide, pyraflufen-ethyl,
pyrithiobac, pyrithiobac-sodium, pyroxasulfone, rimsulfuron,
safufenacil, sethoxydim, simazine, sulfentrazone, a salt or ester
thereof, or a combination thereof.
14-24. (canceled)
25. The method of claim 2, wherein said permanent crop is almond,
pecan, pistachio, walnut, apple, pear, apricot, cherry, nectarine,
peach, plum, prune, avocado, citrus, date, fig, grape, kiwi, olive,
peanut, pomegranate, potato, sweet potato, pome, stone fruit, or
tobacco.
26-30. (canceled)
31. The method of claim 1, wherein said applying is effective to
apply between about 0.1 pounds of fluridone per acre to about 0.5
pounds of fluridone per acre.
32. The method of claim 1, wherein said applying is effective to
apply between about 0.2 pounds of fluridone per acre to about 0.4
pounds of fluridone per acre.
33. The method of claim 1, wherein said applying is effective to
apply between about 0.225 pounds of fluridone per acre to about
0.35 pounds of fluridone per acre.
34-36. (canceled)
37. A safened herbicidal composition comprising a herbicidally
effective amount of fluridone and a herbicidally effective amount
of a second herbicide.
38-43. (canceled)
44. The method of claim 1 wherein said applying a composition
comprising fluridone is conducted to provide about 0.1 lb/acre to
about 0.5 lb/acre of fluridone to the soil, the method also
comprising, after said applying step, irrigating the soil
sufficiently to deliver an average of at least about 0.05 inches of
water to the soil per day over at least a 60-day period, and
wherein the method is effective to control weeds in the soil
throughout the 60-day period.
45. The method of claim 1, wherein the permanent crop has a growing
season and is in a region susceptible to glyphosate resistant
weeds, and wherein said applying is conducted a single time before
emergence of the weeds and is effective to control the weeds
through the growing season.
46. The method of claim 44, wherein said applying is effective to
control the weeds for at least 90-days.
47-51. (canceled)
52. A method for preemergent control of weeds in soil where a
permanent crop plant resides for a period of at least 60 days,
comprising the step of applying fluridone to the soil by spraying
at a rate of about 0.2 pounds per acre to about 0.8 pounds per acre
and thereafter irrigating the soil, and wherein the fluridone is
applied prior to emergence of the weeds.
53. The method of claim 52, wherein the permanent crop plant is a
citrus tree, a nut tree, or a vine.
Description
REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application is a continuation of U.S. patent
application Ser. No. 14/886,942, filed Oct. 19, 2015, issued Jun.
8, 2021 as U.S. Pat. No. 11,026,423, which is a
continuation-in-part of U. S patent application Ser. No.
14/332,036, filed Jul. 15, 2014 which is a continuation of
International Application No. PCT/US2014/034526, filed Apr. 17,
2014 which claims the benefit of priority to U.S. Provisional
Patent Application No. 61/813,166, filed Apr. 17, 2013 and to U.S.
Provisional Patent Application No. 61/814,600, filed Apr. 22, 2013;
this application also claims the benefit of priority to U.S.
Provisional Patent Application No. 62/065,389 filed on Oct. 17,
2014; each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its
entirety.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0002] The present invention relates generally to herbicidal
compositions and methods.
BACKGROUND
[0003] Herbicides have been widely used to kill unwanted plants or
weeds in crop fields. Glyphosate, also called Roundup.RTM., is a
common agricultural herbicide. This herbicide class functions by
blocking the shikimate pathway in plants. The use of glyphosate
resistant crop strains, also known as Roundup Ready.RTM. crops, in
conjunction with glyphosate herbicide has increased crop yields and
reduced costs for farmers. The use of glyphosate dramatically
decreased the reliance on preemergent or residual herbicides as
most production agriculture transformed to using postemergent
applied glyphosate only. However, the emergence of glyphosate
resistant weeds presents a growing problem for farmers. Weeds not
killed by glyphosate necessitate the use of additional or larger
quantities of herbicides, as well as a decrease in use of no-till
farming methods, both of which increase the cost of farming.
[0004] Another class of herbicides is called Protoporphyrinogen
oxidase (PPO) inhibitors. Herbicides in this class block the
oxidation of the protoporphyrinogen within the chloroplast of a
plant cell. Oxidation of protoporphyrinogen is critical for the
production of protoporphyrin IX, a precursor molecule necessary for
the metabolic synthesis of chlorophyll (a component of
photosynthesis) and heme (an element of electron chain transport).
Examples of PPO inhibitors include acifluorfen, carfentrazone,
flumioxazin, flumiclorac, fluthiacet, fomesafen, lactofen,
oxyfluorfen, pyraflufen-ethyl, saflufenacil and sulfentrazone. In
practice, PPO-inhibitors are generally not used as postemergent
herbicides across a wide-range of crops due to the potential for
injury or killing the crops. They have limited uses as a foliar
spray, primarily as a defoliant or desiccant. PPO-inhibitors are
primarily applied preplant, or used weeks before crops are planted,
to avoid potential phytotoxicty on emerging crop seeds from the
residual remaining in the soil. This interval between application
and planting allows residues to degrade for greater crop safety.
However, preplant applications also reduce the longevity of weed
control after the crops are planted because the herbicide starts to
lose activity as crops are planted. This necessitates the need for
additional weed control measures after planting. Some
PPO-inhibitors contain use directions that require rainfall
following the application and before crops are planted to mitigate
potential crop phytotoxicity. Thus, the use of PPO-inhibitors as
preemergence herbicide just before, at, or immediately after
planting is relatively limited, or very crop specific, due to
significant concern over crop injury. Resistance to PPO inhibitors
has been documented, but not at the magnitude of glyphosate
resistance, causing farmers and industry alike to caution the
repeated application of PPOs as a single chemistry herbicide.
[0005] Fluridone,
1-methyl-3-phenyl-5-[3-(trifluromethyl)phenyl]-4(1H)-pyridone, is a
herbicide in the class of bleaching herbicides. Fluridone's mode of
action inhibits the biosynthesis of carotenoid precursors.
Carotenoid pigments protect chlorophyll from photodegredation. The
inhibition of the synthesis of the precursors allows for the
chlorophyll to become susceptible to degredation. Fluridone is
commonly used in aquatic applications, and has also been used in
agricultural settings, such as for controlling weeds in fields.
Fluridone is sold under several trade names, including Brake.TM.
(SePRO Corporation, Carmel, Ind.). Fluridone is a relatively broad
spectrum herbicide that cannot be used in many crops due to the
potential for phytotoxicity. However, cotton is one crop that is
quite tolerant to fluridone.
[0006] In view of this background, need remains in the area of
improved herbicidal methods and compositions useful for controlling
weeds, particularly in an agricultural context.
SUMMARY
[0007] In one aspect, the present invention provides for improved
methods and compositions for controlling weeds, for example in an
agricultural setting. Such weeds can be, for example, but is not
limited to, Amaranthus palmeri (optionally glyphosate resistant),
also called Palmer amaranth, Palmer pigweed or P. amaranth, in
cotton or other field crops. Other agricultural crops suitable for
methods of the current invention include sweet potatoes, broccoli,
peanuts, melons, soybeans, sunflower, dry beans, rice, corn, fruit,
nuts, grapes, tree, or vine crops. These or other crops can be
generated from any suitable plant-generating material including for
example seeds, tubers, slips, seed plants, roots or other plant
parts, and the like.
[0008] In another aspect, the present invention provides herbicidal
methods and compositions that include a bleaching herbicide, or
phytoene desaturase inhibiting herbicide (PDS-inhibitor), such as
fluridone, norflurazon or another phytoene desaturase inhibiting
herbicide (PDS-inhibitor), and a second herbicide, such as a
PPO-inhibitor herbicide. Preferably, the PPO-inhibitor or other
second herbicide does not require water, or requires lower amounts
of water than the first herbicide (e.g. bleaching herbicide), for
activation. Herbicides used in embodiments of the present invention
may be used as salts and/or esters in addition to use in their free
acid or free base form.
[0009] In additional aspects, fluridone has unexpectedly been found
to safen or reduce the damage caused to a plant by a second
herbicide, in particular where the plant exhibits a significant
phyotoxic response to the second herbicide. As well, other
herbicides have been found to safen or reduce the damage caused to
a plant by fluridone, in particular where the plant exhibits a
significant phytotoxic response to fluridone. Safeners generally
reduce the effect of the herbicide on crop plants and/or improve
the selectivity between crop plants as compared to the weed or
weeds being targeted by the herbicide. Suitable second herbicides
of the present invention for use with fluridone, or with other
similar bleaching herbicides, include but are not limited to
acetochlor, acifluorfen, carfentrazone, dicamba, diuron,
flumiclorac, fluthiacet, fluometuron, flumioxazin, fomesafen,
lactofen, metolachlor, oxyfluorfen, pendimethalin,
pyraflufen-ethyl, pyrithiobac-sodium, pyroxasulfone, saflufenacil
or sulfentrazone. In certain preferred embodiments, the second
herbicide that is safened by fluridone, or another bleaching
herbicide, is fomesafen or flumioxazin, especially in cotton
plants. In additional preferred embodiments, the second herbicide
that safens fluridone, or another bleaching herbicide, is
flumioxazin or fomesafen, especially in soybean plants. Fluridone
may also safen other herbicides used, and when two herbicides are
used in combination, they may safen each other.
[0010] In still other aspects, it has been found, that fluridone, a
herbicide commonly used in aquatic applications, also has
surprisingly beneficial uses in controlling weeds in permanent crop
applications. Permanent crops are those crops produced from plants
which typically last for more than one season and therefore do not
need to be replanted every growing season like seasonal crops do.
Permanent crops include, but are not limited to trees, nuts, and/or
vine crops. When fluridone is used for controlling weeds in
permanent crop applications, it may be desirable to maintain
moisture in the soil where permanent crops reside. Water or
moisture may be provided to the soil where permanent crops reside
by any suitable method, including but not limited to irrigation.
Applicants have discovered that, surprisingly, regular and
substantial irrigation regimes used in permanent crop applications
dramatically increase the duration of weed control provided by
fluridone, making fluridone particularly useful as a preemergent
herbicide in permanent crop plant applications such as the
cultivation of fruit trees, nut trees, and/or vines.
[0011] For example, fluridone may be used to control weeds in crops
of trees, nuts, and/or vines. In some particular embodiments,
fluridone may be used to control weeds in crops of almond
(including for example sweet almond), pecan, pistachio, walnut,
apple, pear, apricot, cherry, nectarine, peach, plum, prune,
avocado, citrus (including for example grapefruit and orange, e.g.
"cara cara" orange (Citrus sinensis)), date, fig, grape (including
for example "Thompson" grape (Vitis vinifera)), kiwi, olive,
peanut, pomegranate, potato, sweet potato, pome, stone fruit,
and/or tobacco.
[0012] Fluridone, alone or in combination with one or more other
herbicides as discussed herein, may be used to control various
weeds, including but not limited to, fiddleneck, redmaid,
horseweed, barnyard grass, common purslane, prickly lettuce,
witchgrass, prostrate spurge, hairy fleabane, and/or yellow
nutsedge. This weed can control can, in certain embodiments, occur
in conjunction with the growth of permanent crop plants.
[0013] Additional embodiments of the invention, as well as features
and advantages thereof, will be apparent from the descriptions
herein.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0014] FIG. 1A and FIG. 1B shows digital images of field treatments
at various active ingredient (ai) application rates. No difference
was seen between treatments due to ideal growing and optimal
herbicide efficacy conditions. No phytotoxicity was seen at any
treatment. All exhibited great control compared to the untreated
control. Top pictures were taken one week post treatment (wpt) and
bottom image was taken at 9 wpt. Digital image A.1. shows a field 1
wpt where Brake was applied at the rate of 0.2 lb ai/A. Digital
image A.2. shows a field 1 wpt where BrakeF2 was applied (0.2:0.125
lb/ai/A). Digital image A.3. shows a field 1 wpt where Fomesafen
was applied at the rate of 0.2 lb ai/A. Digital image B.1. shows a
field 9 wpt where Brake was applied at the rate of 0.2 lb ai/A.
Digital image B.2. shows a field 9 wpt where BrakeF2 was applied
(0.2:0.125 lb/ai/A). Digital image B.3. shows a field 9 wpt where
Fomesafen was applied at the rate of 0.2 lb ai/A.
[0015] FIG. 2 shows digital images of cotton, taken 7 weeks post
treatment. Treatment application was applied by backpack sprayer.
At the rate of 0.4:0.4 lbs ai per acre (ai/A) there was
phytotoxicity visible on the first true leaves of the cotton,
however, plants grew out of this. Plots were overseeded with P.
amaranth and both ratios completely controlled P. amaranth growth
in the treated areas. Digital image A shows a field 7 wpt where
0.2:0.2 lb ai per acre fluridone:fomesafen was applied. Digital
image B shows a field 7 wpt where 0.4:0.4 lb ai per acre
fluridone:fomesafen was applied.
[0016] FIG. 3A and FIG. 3B shows digital images from a greenhouse
trial. UTC is "untreated control." Brake is fluridone. BrakeF2 is
fluridone plus fomesafen. Growth of treated cotton plants 4 weeks
after planting (FIG. 3A) is shown. Fomesafen has a stunting effect
on cotton. Brake F2 is able to safen fomesafen. Digital images in
FIG. 3A shows a series of cotton plants 4 weeks after planting.
A.1. is untreated control (UTC). A.2. is Brake 0.2 lb ai/A. A.3. is
Fomesafen 0.125 lb ai/A. A.4. is fomesafen 0.2 lb ai/A. A.5. is
Brake F2: Brake 0.2 lb ai/A with Fomesafen 0.125 lb ai/A. FIG. 3B
shows digital images B which show a series of cotton plants 4 weeks
after planting. B.1. and B.2. are untreated controls. B.3. and B.4.
are Brake 0.2 lb ai/A. B.5. and B.6 are Fomesafen 0.2 lb ai/A. B.7
and B.8 are BrakeF2.
[0017] FIG. 4 shows digital images of a demonstration of the
safening effect of fluridone on herbicides. The pot on the left was
treated with a herbicidal mixture of fluridone and flumioxazin. The
pot on the right was treated with flumioxazin only and shows damage
to cotton plant.
[0018] FIG. 5 shows digital images of the safening effect of the
mixture of fluridone and flumioxazin in soybean.
[0019] FIG. 6 shows digital images of soybean plants treated with
various quantities of fluridone and flumioxazin when applied
pre-plant. 6.1. is 0.2 lb/A fluridone+0.008 lb/A of flumioxazin.
6.2. is 0.2 lb/A fluridone+0.016 lb/A of flumioxazin. 6.3. is 0.2
lb/A fluridone+0.128 lb/A of flumioxazin. 6.4. is 0.2 lb/A
fluridone+0.17 lb/A of flumioxazin. 6.5 is untreated control
(UTC).
[0020] FIG. 7 show the percentage of chlorosis observed on soybean
plants treated with fluridone and flumioxazin when applied
pre-plant. UTC is untreated control.
[0021] FIG. 8 shows the percentage of leaves including cotyledon,
unifolate, and/or trifoliate leaves with visible bleaching observed
on soybean plants treated with fluridone and flumioxazin when
applied pre-plant.
[0022] FIG. 9 shows the height of soybean plants 9 days after
treatment with herbicide compositions comprising fluridone;
flumioxazin; as well as compositions with various ratios of
fluridone and flumioxazin.
[0023] FIG. 10 shows the percentage of chlorosis observed in
soybean plants treated with herbicidal compositions.
[0024] FIG. 11 shows the percentage of chlorosis observed in
soybean plants treated with herbicidal compositions.
[0025] FIG. 12 shows digital images of cotton plants 16 days after
treatment with herbicidal compositions comprising fluridone and
fomesafen. 12.1 is untreated control (UTC). 12.2 is 0.25 lb ai/A
fomesafen. 12.3 is 0.1 lb ai/A fluridone+0.25 lb ai/A
fomesafen.
[0026] FIG. 13 shows the height of cotton plants 16 days after
treatment with herbicidal compositions.
[0027] FIG. 14 shows the height of cotton plants 29 days after
treatment with herbicidal compositions.
[0028] FIG. 15 shows the height of cotton plants treated with
various rates of flumioxazin.
[0029] FIG. 16 shows digital images of cotton plants treated with
flumioxazin. 16.1. is 0.0125 lb ai/A flumioxazin. 16.2. is 0.025 lb
ai/A flumioxazin. 16.3. is 0.05 lb ai/A flumioxazin. 16.4. is 0.1
lb ai/A flumioxazin.
[0030] FIG. 17 shows the crop stand, which is the number of viable
plants, for cotton plants treated with herbicidal compositions.
[0031] FIG. 18 shows a digital image where cotton plants were
various treatments were applied to cotton plants. One set of cotton
plants were treated with flumioxazin at the rate of 0.05 lb/A
(18.1.), one set of plants was treated with a combination of
flumioxazin at 0.05 lb/A and fluridone at 0.2 lb/A (18.2.), and one
set was left untreated as an untreated control (18.3., UTC).
[0032] FIG. 19 shows the percentage of cotyledons with excessive
wrinkling and brown spotting due to herbicide injury measured 26
days after treatment.
[0033] FIG. 20 shows the growth stage of cotton plants 26 days
after treatment.
[0034] FIG. 21 shows the damage to cotton plants 16 days after
treatment with herbicidal compositions.
[0035] FIG. 22 shows the damage to cotton plants 21 days after
treatment with herbicidal compositions.
[0036] FIG. 23 shows three digital images of cotton plants treated
with herbicidal compositions. 21.1. is untreated control (UTC).
23.2. is fomesafen 0.375 lb ai/A. 23.3. is Fomesafen+Fluridone
0.375:0.2 lb ai/A.
[0037] FIG. 24 shows the percent chlorosis observed 21 days after
treatment of soybean plants with herbicidal compositions.
[0038] FIG. 25 shows a series of digital images of soybean plants
treated with herbicidal compositions. 25.1. is untreated control
(UTC). 25.2. is Fluridone 0.1 lb ai/A. 25.3. is Fluridone 0.1 lb
ai/A+Flumioxazin 0.05 lb ai/A. 25.4. is Fluridone 0.1 lb
ai/A+Flumioxazin 0.1 lb ai/A. 25.5. is Fluridone 0.1 lb
ai/A+Flumioxazin 0.15 lb ai/A.
[0039] FIG. 26 shows the percentage of leaves with visible
bleaching injury (% PHYBLE) when various herbicidal compositions
are applied to corn plants.
[0040] FIG. 27 shows a digital image of corn plants when various
herbicidal compositions are applied. 27.1. is Fluridone 0.05 lb
ai/A. 27.2. is Fluridone 0.1 lb ai/A. 27.3. is Fluridone 0.15 lb
ai/A. 27.4. is Fluridone 0.05 lb ai/A+Flumioxazin 0.05 lb ai/A.
27.5. is Fluridone 0.1 lb ai/A+Flumioxazin 0.1 lb ai/A. 27.6. is
Fluridone 0.15 lb ai/A+Flumioxazin 0.15 lb ai/A.
[0041] FIG. 28 shows the percentage of cotyledons with excessive
wrinkling and brown spotting due to herbicide injury observed on
cotton plants when various herbicidal compositions are applied.
[0042] FIG. 29 shows digital images of corn plants when various
herbicidal compositions are applied.
[0043] FIG. 30 shows Crabgrass sp., yellow nutsedge, and hairy
fleabane control 184 days following PRE applications of fluridone
and flumioxazin in a Kerman, Calif. almond orchard. Values with the
same letter for each weed specie are not statistically different
according to Fisher's Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0044] FIG. 31 shows hairy fleabane control following PRE
applications of fluridone and flumioxazin in a Shafter, Calif.
almond orchard. Values with the same letter for each evaluation
date are not statistically different according to Fisher's
Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0045] FIG. 32 shows yellow nutsedge control following PRE
applications of fluridone and flumioxazin in a Shafter, Calif.
almond orchard. Values with the same letter for each evaluation
date are not statistically different according to Fisher's
Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0046] FIG. 33 shows spotted spurge control following PRE
applications of fluridone and flumioxazin in a Shafter, Calif.
almond orchard. Values with the same letter for each evaluation
date are not statistically different according to Fisher's
Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0047] FIG. 34 shows sprangletop control 211 days following PRE
applications of fluridone and flumioxazin in a Shafter, Calif.
almond orchard. Values with the same letter are not statistically
different according to Fisher's Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0048] FIG. 35 shows fiddleneck, redmaids, and Canadian horseweed
control 58 days following PRE applications of fluridone and
flumioxazin in a Kerman, Calif. vineyard. Values with the same
letter for each weed specie are not statistically different
according to Fisher's Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0049] FIG. 36 shows barnyardgrass, common purslane, and prickly
lettuce control 155 days following PRE applications of fluridone,
flumioxazin, and indaziflam in a Kingsburg, Calif. vineyard. Values
with the same letter for each weed specie are not statistically
different according to Fisher's Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0050] FIG. 37 show switchgrass plant counts following PRE
applications of fluridone and indaziflam in an Elderwood, Calif.
orange orchard. Values with the same letter for each evaluation
date are not statistically different according to Fisher's
Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0051] FIG. 38 shows prostrate spurge plant counts per plot
following PRE applications of fluridone and indaziflam in an
Elderwood, Calif. orange orchard. Values with the same letter for
each evaluation date are not statistically different according to
Fisher's Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0052] FIG. 39 shows percent weed density following PRE
applications of fluridone and indaziflam in an Elderwood, Calif.
orange orchard. Values with the same letter for each evaluation
date are not statistically different according to Fisher's
Protected LSD (.alpha.=0.05).
[0053] FIG. 40 shows preemergence Palmer amaranth control following
fluridone application to a coarse sand soil under varying amounts
of irrigation in a greenhouse. These data suggest that increasing
the amount of irrigation, increases preemergent control.
[0054] FIG. 41 shows preemergence Palmer amaranth control in
dryland cotton and total weed control in irrigated walnut following
fluridone application.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0055] For the purposes of promoting an understanding of the
principles of the invention, reference will now be made to certain
embodiments and specific language will be used to describe the
same. It will nevertheless be understood that no limitation of the
scope of the invention is thereby intended, such alterations and
further modifications, and such further applications of the
principles of the invention as described herein being contemplated
as would normally occur to one skilled in the art to which the
invention relates.
[0056] As discussed above, certain aspects of the present invention
relate to methods and compositions involving the use of a bleaching
herbicide, such as fluridone, diflufenican, picolinafen,
beflubatamid, flurochloridone, flurtamone, fluometuron, and/or
norflurazon, alone and/or in combination with certain other
herbicidal agents, especially PPO-inhibitors, for controlling weeds
including but not limited to glyphosate resistant weeds in an
agricultural setting. The two herbicides in combination can provide
enhanced control of weeds and/or improved safety to the crop when
applied for example before the emergence of plants from seeds or
another plant-generating material, for instance applied in
pre-planting or pre-emergent fashion. This enhanced control can for
example be achieved under initial dry conditions after planting
when little or no water is added to the soil (e.g., in the form of
rainfall and/or by irrigation).
[0057] As used in this specification, and unless otherwise
indicated, the term "herbicide" refers to a molecule or combination
of molecules that retards or otherwise kills undesirable, unwanted
plants such as, but not limited to, deleterious or annoying weeds,
broadleaf plants, grasses, and sedges; and may be used in this
manner for crop protection. "Herbicide" also refers to any salt
and/or ester forms of a herbicide as well as the free acid or free
base form of the herbicide. The phrase "effective amount" means an
amount of herbicide necessary to produce an observable desired
effect to reduce unwanted plant growth, including the effects of
plant necrosis, plant death, growth inhibition, reproduction
inhibition, inhibition of proliferation, and removal, destruction,
or otherwise diminishing the occurrence and activity of
undesirable, unwanted plants. Undesirable, unwanted plants include
herbicide-tolerant or herbicide-resistant weeds such as
glyphosate-tolerant weeds. The term "chlorosis" means a condition
where plant leaves produce insufficient chlorophyll.
[0058] There are many ways to measure and/or assess damage to a
plant, for example the number or percentage of all leaves with
visible bleaching injury may be measured and/or calculated (PHYBLE)
as a measure of chlorosis. In addition, or alternatively, the
number or percentage of cotyledons with excessive wrinkling and/or
brown spotting due to herbicidal injury (PHYGEN) may be measured
and/or calculated as a measure of injury to the plant.
[0059] Cotton (Gossypium spp.) is the world's most important
textile fiber crop and is one of the world's most important oilseed
crops. Cotton plants provide a source of human food, livestock
feed, and raw material for industry. Cottonseed is pressed for
cooking oil and the residual cottonseed meal is used for animal
feed. Industrial uses of cotton include candlewicks, twine, paper
and a multitude of fabric products. The genus Gossypium is very
large, containing about 50 species. Two tetraploid species of
Gossypium have spinnable seed fibers called lint. These two species
are G. hirsutum (referred to as American Upland cotton) and G.
barbadense (referred to as Pima cotton).
[0060] Cotton is a dichotomous plant with perfect flowers, i.e.,
cotton has male, pollen-producing organs and separate female,
pollen-receiving organs on the same flower. The cultivated cotton
flower is surrounded by three triangular bracts forming what is
commonly known as squares. The flower contains an open corolla with
five petals, a staminal column bearing clusters of stamens and
forming a tube that encloses the style. The compound pistil
consists of three to five carpels with stigmas protruding above the
anthers. The ovary develops into a three- to five-loculed capsule
or boll. From seven to nine seeds are set within each lock or
locule. On the day preceding anthesis, a twisted corolla emerges
from the square. On the day of anthesis, the corolla opens and
pollen shedding occurs. The corolla turns red the day following
anthesis and later falls from the plant. Pollination occurs with
the opening of the anthers and shedding of pollen on the stigma or
with the deposit of pollen on the stigma by insects.
[0061] Cotton is slow growing by nature, often times more similar
to trees than other important agronomic crops. It requires hot
weather to grow, delaying the majority of its growth until later in
the season. The majority of weeds, or unwanted plant material, are
not restricted by these weather constraints. This puts cotton at a
disadvantage over a large number of weeds, which are fast growing
and can often out compete cotton early in the season. Thus it is
essential that herbicides are included in any cotton program.
Unfortunately, due to a number of reasons, mostly economical, there
are a limited number of herbicides that are used in weed control
for cotton, and a number of weeds have developed resistance to some
chemistries that are available to cotton growers, in particular,
glyphosate.
[0062] One of the most impactful glyphosate-resistant weeds that
farmers face is P. amaranth. A survey taken by Southwest Press
states that over 50% of American Upland cotton contains resistant
P. amaranth. In response to this epidemic, farmers have increased
usage of other chemistries, which has led to nearly a doubling of
the cost of chemical input per acre. A number of growers have
resorted to wicking, or hand hoeing the plants out, at a much more
significant cost of chemical and labor.
[0063] Herbicides describe below may be used in embodiments of the
present invention in their free acid or free base form as well as
the salt, for example sodium salt, and/or ester derivatives.
[0064] In certain embodiments of the present invention, fluridone
can be applied to soil at a rate of up to about 0.5 pounds per acre
and/or 0.4 pounds per acre, for example in the range of about 0.05
pounds per acre to about 0.5 pounds per acre and/or about 0.05
pounds per acre to about 0.4 pounds per acre. In other embodiments,
fluridone can be applied to soil at a rate of about 0.1 pounds per
acre to about 0.4 pounds per acre. In another embodiment, fluridone
can be applied to soil at a rate of about 0.2 pounds per acre to
about 0.4 pounds per acre. In still another embodiment, fluridone
can be applied to soil at a rate of about 0.3 pounds per acre to
about 0.4 pounds per acre.
[0065] In certain work to date, fomesafen was evaluated for use
with fluridone either in a combination application or as
sequentially applied. A product including a mixture of fluridone
and fomesafen was designated as the Brake F2.TM. product. Fomesafen
is a member of the PPO inhibitor herbicide class and may be applied
pre-plant, pre-emergence or post-emergence (which can be conducted
through post-directed spraying to avoid contact with the plant
leaves) commonly for control or suppression of broadleaf weeds,
grasses and sedges. Fomesafen has the chemical name
5-[2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-N-(methyl
sulfonyl)-2-nitrobenzamide and may also be used as the sodium salt
thereof. In one embodiment, fomesafen may be applied in concert
with fluridone at a ratio in the range of about 0.1:1 w/w
(fluridone:fomesafen) and/or about 0.5:1 to about 10:1 w/w
(fluridone:fomesafen), or about 0.75:1 w/w (fluridone:fomesafen) to
about 10:1 w/w (fluridone:fomesafen). In another embodiment,
fomesafen may be applied in concert with fluridone at a ratio in
the range of about 0.75:1 w/w (fluridone:fomesafen) to about 8:1
w/w (fluridone:fomesafen). In still another embodiment, fomesafen
may be applied in concert with fluridone at a ratio in the range of
about 0.75:1 w/w (fluridone:fomesafen) to about 5:1 w/w
(fluridone:fomesafen). In more preferred embodiments, fomesafen may
be applied in concert with fluridone at a ratio in the range of
about 0.75:1 w/w (fluridone:fomesafen) to about 4:1 w/w
(fluridone:fomesafen). In these applications, embodiments include
those in which the fluridone is applied at any of the rates (pounds
per acre) specified herein. In still another embodiment, fluridone
can be used in as low of a ratio as about 0.1:0.1 w/w
(fluridone:fomesafen).
[0066] The combination of herbicides can provide enhanced control
of weeds, including for example, Palmer amaranth, as compared to a
corresponding treatment using fluridone alone. This enhanced
control as compared to fluridone alone can be observed particularly
under conditions in which the soil receives little or no water
(e.g., in the form of rainfall and/or irrigation) in the period
immediately following (e.g., two weeks following) application of
the combination. Fluridone requires more moisture for activation
than some of the other soil applied herbicides for activation, and
thus under such relatively dry initial conditions the fomesafen can
help to prevent weed breakthrough. This same effect can be provided
in other selected combinations of fluridone or another bleaching
herbicide such as norflurazon with fomesafen or other PPO
herbicides.
[0067] Unexpectedly also, it has been observed that fluridone has a
safening effect on fomesafen, flumioxazin and/or other herbicides.
Herbicides may alternatively may have a safening effect on
fluridone, or two herbicides may safen each other in certain
applications. This affect was measured by observing the size and
height of plants as well as lack of stunting to the cotyledon, and
lack of spots or other phytotoxic symptoms (such as chlorosis,
necrosis, and other visual injury) on the leaves of plants. This
affect can be observed in FIGS. 3A and 3B. In FIG. 3A, the pot on
the far right shows a cotton plant treated with both fluridone and
fomesafen. The pots to the left show cotton plants that were not
treated with any herbicide as a control as well as plants treated
with fluridone only and fomesafen only. The cotton plant treated
with both fluridone and fomesafen is larger than the pots to the
left by visual inspection.
[0068] Other PPO inhibitor herbicides can be used instead of or in
addition to the fomesafen, in additional embodiments.
[0069] Flumioxazin is another herbicide member of the PPO-inhibitor
class that is commonly applied pre-emergent to control weeds, and
has the chemical name
2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,-
6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione. In certain embodiments
of the present invention, flumioxazin can be applied to soil at a
rate of about 0.015 pounds per acre to about 0.25 pounds per acre.
In other embodiments, flumioxazin can be applied to soil at a rate
of about 0.03 pounds per acre to about 0.25 pounds per acre. In
another embodiment, flumioxazin can be applied to soil at a rate of
about 0.3 pounds per acre to about 0.2 pounds per acre. In
applicants work, fluridone has exhibited a safening effect on
flumioxazin in cotton. In certain embodiments, flumioxazin may be
applied in concert with fluridone at a ratio in the range from
about 15:1 w/w fluridone:flumioxazin to about 1:5 w/w
fluridone:flumioxazin. FIG. 4 shows this safening effect. The pot
on the left of FIG. 4 shows three cotton plants treated with both
fluridone and flumioxazin. The pot to the right of FIG. 4 shows
cotton plants treated only with flumioxazin, and although three
cotton plants were planted, only one emerged from the soil and did
so with significant damage to the plant as seen by the brown spots
on the leaves.
[0070] Acifluorfen is a member of the PPO inhibitor herbicide
class, and has the chemical name,
5-[2-Chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid.
Acifluorfen is effective against broadleaf weeds and grasses and is
used agriculturally on fields growing soybeans, peanuts, peas, and
rice. In certain embodiments, acifluorfen is applied in concert
with fluridone as disclosed herein.
[0071] Carfentrazone is a selective broadleaf herbicide member of
PPO inhibitor herbicide family with a triazolinone moiety, and has
the chemical name
(RS)-2-chloro-3-{2-chloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-ox-
o-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-fluorophenyl}propionic acid. In certain
embodiments, carfentrazone is applied in concert with fluridone or
another bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein.
[0072] Flumiclorac is a selective herbicide of the PPO inhibitor
class for post emergence control and suppression of susceptible
broadleaf weeds commonly used in corn and soybean fields, and has
the chemical name
[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-(1,3,4,5,6,7-hexahydro-1,3-dioxo-2H-isoindol-2-yl)ph-
enoxy]acetic acid. In certain embodiments, flumiclorac is applied
in concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as
disclosed herein.
[0073] Fluthiacet or fluthiacet-methyl is a member of the PPO
inhibitor class, and is commonly applied to actively growing weeds
in soybeans to control annual broadleaf weeds, is particularly
effective in controlling velvetleaf, and has the chemical name
acetic
acid[[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-
-.alpha.]pyridazin-1-ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl ester. In
certain embodiments, fluthiacet is applied in concert with
fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein.
[0074] Lactofen is a member of the PPO inhibitor herbicide class
and is generally applied post-emergence, and has the chemical name
ethyl
O-[5-(2-chloro-.alpha.,.alpha.,.alpha.-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzo-
yl]-DL-lactate. In certain embodiments, lactofen is applied in
concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed
herein.
[0075] Oxyfluorfen is a diphenyl-ether member of the PPO inhibitor
herbicide class used for broad spectrum pre- and post-emergent
control of annual broadleaf and grassy weeds in a variety of tree
fruit, nut, vine, and field crops. Oxyfluorfen has the chemical
name 2-chloro-.alpha.,.alpha.,.alpha.-trifluoro-p-tolyl
3-ethoxy-4-nitrophenyl ether. In certain embodiments, oxyfluorfen
is applied in concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide
as disclosed herein.
[0076] Sulfentrazone is a member of the PPO inhibitor herbicide
class, and has the chemical name
2',4'-dichloro-5'-(4-difluoromethyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-t-
riazol-1-yl)methanesulfonanilide. Sulfentrazone is primarily taken
up by the roots of treated plants. Plants emerging from treated
soil turn necrotic and die after exposure to light. Foliar contact
causes rapid desiccation and necrosis of exposed plant tissue.
Shoot-root soil placement studies indicate that sulfentrazone is
primarily absorbed by the roots of the plant following soil
applications. In certain embodiments, sulfentrazone is applied in
concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed
herein.
[0077] Pyraflufen-ethyl is a member of the PPO inhibitor herbicide
class that inhibits protoporphyrinogen IX oxidase that is normally
applied post emergence to broad leaved weeds, and has the chemical
name ethyl
[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methylpyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophe-
noxy]acetate. In certain embodiments, pyraflufen-ethyl is applied
in concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as
disclosed herein.
[0078] Pyroxasulfone is a residual herbicide and is considered to
be a seedling shoot growth inhibitor, and has the chemical name
3-[5-(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3-(trifluoromethyl)pyrazol-4-ylmethylsulf-
onyl]-4,5-dihydro-5,5-dimethyl-1,2-oxazole. In certain embodiments,
pyroxasulfone is applied in concert with fluridone or another
bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein.
[0079] Saflufenacil is another residual herbicide. In certain
embodiments, saflufenacil is applied in concert with fluridone or
another bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein. Saflufenacil can
be applied sufficiently in advance of planting to avoid or
essentially avoid crop injury, for example in certain aspects at
least about 42 days in advance of planting.
[0080] Acetochlor is a member of the chloroacetanilide herbicide
family, and has the chemical name
2-Chloro-N-(ethoxymethyl)-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)acetamide.
Acetochlor is commonly applied preemergence or as a preplant
incorporated herbicide. In certain embodiments, acetochlor is
applied in concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as
disclosed herein.
[0081] Dicamba is a selective herbicide in the chlorophenoxy family
of chemicals, and has the chemical name
3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid. Dicamba is a growth hormone or
auxin. These hormones help to control plant growth. When plants are
treated with dicamba, they grow in abnormal and uncontrollable
ways, and often, the plants die. Dicamba is commonly used on many
broadleaf weeds and woody plants. In certain embodiments, dicamba
is applied in concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide
as disclosed herein.
[0082] Diuron, also called DCMU, has the chemical name
3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea. Diuron is a very specific
and sensitive inhibitor of photosynthesis. It blocks the
plastoquinone binding site of photosystem II, disallowing the
electron flow from where it is generated, in photosystem II, to
plastoquinone. In certain embodiments, diuron is applied in concert
with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed
herein.
[0083] Fluometuron is a bleaching herbicide that is believed to
inhibit photosynthesis and of carotenoid biosynthesis. Fluometuron
has the chemical name
1,1-dimethyl-3-(.alpha.,.alpha.,.alpha.-trifluoro-m-tolyl)urea.
Commonly fluometuron is used as a herbicide in cotton and sugarcane
fields as a preplant, pre-emergence, and post-emergence herbicide
for the control of broadleaf weeds and annual grasses. In certain
embodiments, fluometuron is applied in concert with fluridone or
another bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein.
[0084] Metolachlor is a member of the shoot growth inhibitor
herbicide class, and has the chemical name
2-chloro-N-(6-ethyl-o-tolyl)-N-[(1RS)-2-methoxy-1-methylethyl]acetamide.
In certain embodiments, metolachlor is applied in concert with
fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein.
[0085] Pendimethalin is an herbicide used in preemergence and
postemergence applications to control annual grasses and certain
broadleaf weeds. It inhibits cell division and cell elongation, and
has the chemical name N-(1-ethylpropyl)-2,6-dinitro-3,4-xylidine.
In certain embodiments, pendimethalin is applied in concert with
fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed herein.
[0086] Pyrithiobac and the sodium salt thereof is a member of the
ALS inhibitor herbicide class, and has the chemical name
2-chloro-6-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-ylthio)benzoic acid. In
certain embodiments, pyrithiobac or its sodium salt is applied in
concert with fluridone or another bleaching herbicide as disclosed
herein.
[0087] Other PPO-inhibitors that may also be used in embodiments of
the present invention include, but are not limited to, bifenox,
chlomethoxyfen, fluoroglycofen-ethyl, halosafen, fluazolate,
cinidon-ethyl, thidiazimin, oxidiazon, oxadiargyl, azafenidin,
pentoxazone, benzfendizone, butafenacid, pyraclinil, profluazol,
and/or flufenphyr-ethyl.
[0088] Indaziflam is a member of the cellulose biosynthesis
inhibitors class. This family of herbicides affects the assembly or
the deposition of cellulose in a plant or crop plant. Indaziflam
has the chemical name
N-[(1R,2S)-2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1-yl]-6-[(1RS)-1-fluoroethyl-
]-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine, and may be used in the free base
form, as the corresponding salt form, and/or a mixture of free base
form and corresponding salt form.
[0089] Herbicides used in embodiments of the present invention may
be used as their free acid or free base forms. Derivatives of
herbicides may also be used, for example herbicides may be used as
salts, for example but not limited to sodium salts, and/or esters
of the herbicide.
[0090] In other aspects of applicants work to date, flumioxazin and
fomesafen have demonstrated safening effects on fluridone in
soybeans. Thus, it has been demonstrated that in plants, such as
soybeans, that exhibit significant phytotoxic response to fluridone
or other similar bleaching herbicides, a second herbicide can be
included to safen the use of the bleaching herbicide. This
evidences a very unique safening interaction of fluridone plus
PPO-inhibitors by crop species without the interaction causing a
similar safening effect on the weed. The second herbicide can be
one of those second herbicides identified herein, including more
particularly a PPO inhibitor herbicide in some embodiments, or
specifically flumioxazin or fomesafen in further embodiments. FIG.
5 illustrates the safening effect of the fluridone and flumioxazin
combination on soybean. The pot on left shows that fluridone alone
on soybean causes bleaching to the cotyledon. The pot on the right,
soybeans were treated with both fluridone and flumioxazin, with the
resulting plants having no bleaching, while still maintaining
significant weed control.
[0091] It has been observed that fluridone may cause chlorosis in
soybean plants when used alone. Combinations of fluridone and
flumioxazin may reduce the chlorosis observed in soybean
plants.
[0092] It has also been observed that fomesafen and flumioxazin
cause damage to cotton plants when used alone. Also observed was
the unexpected benefit that fluridone safens fomesafen when used in
combination and that fluridone safens flumioxazin when used in
combination on cotton plants.
[0093] In still other aspects of the present invention, flumioxazin
has been observed to safen fluridone when applied in combination
with fluridone to corn plants. In one particular embodiment,
flumioxazin was observed to safen fluridone as measured by the
percentage of all leaves with visible bleaching injury (% PHYBLE)
which is a measure of chlorosis. Compositions and methods that may
exhibit this safening affect include, compositions comprising
fluridone and/or flumioxazin, and application rates of from about
0.05 pounds per acre (lb/A) to about 0.15 lb/A, and/or from about
0.05 pounds per acre (lb/A) to about 0.2 pounds per acre (lb/A). In
such embodiments, fluridone and/or flumioxazin may be applied
separately and/or together.
[0094] In still other aspects, it has been found, that fluridone, a
herbicide commonly used in aquatic applications, also has
surprisingly beneficial uses in controlling weeds in permanent crop
applications. Permanent crops are those crops produced from plants
which typically last for more than one season and therefore do not
need to be replanted every growing season. This is in contrast to
seasonal crops which do need to be replanted each growing season.
Permanent crops include, but are not limited to trees, nuts, and/or
vine crops.
[0095] For example, fluridone may be used to control weeds in crops
of trees, nuts, and/or vines. In some particular embodiments,
fluridone may be used to control weeds in crops of almond, pecan,
pistachio, walnut, apple, pear, apricot, cherry, nectarine, peach,
plum, prune, avocado, citrus, date, fig, grape, kiwi, olive,
peanut, pomegranate, potato, sweet potato, pome, stone fruit,
and/or tobacco whether such crops are permanent crops, or whether
such crops are seasonal crops.
[0096] Additional herbicides may be applied in combination with,
prior to, and/or subsequent to application of herbicides including,
but not limited to, fluridone. For example, other herbicide classes
that may be used in methods of certain embodiments of the present
disclosure include PPO-inhibitors, cellulose inhibitors,
acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors, acetyl coenzyme A
carboxylase (ACCase) inhibitors, mitosis inhibitors, photosystem II
(PSII) inhibitors, long-chain fatty acid inhibitors, and/or a
combination thereof. Suitable additional herbicides include, for
example, but are not limited to, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
(2,4-D), acetochlor, acifuorfen, carfentrazone, clethodim, dicamba,
dichlobenil, diquat, diuron, fluazifop, flumiclorac, fluthiacet,
fluometuron, flumioxazin, fomesafen, glufosinate, glyphosate,
halosulfuron, indaziflam, isoxaben, lactofen, metolachlor,
napropamide, oryzalin, oxyfluorfen, paraquat, pendimethalin,
penoxsulam, pronamide, pyraflufen-ethyl, pyrithiobac,
pyrithiobac-sodium, pyroxasulfone, rimsulfuron, safufenacil,
sethoxydim, simazine, sulfentrazone, a salt or ester thereof,
and/or a combination thereof. Such additional herbicides may be
applied preplant, postplant, preemergence, and/or postemergence of
the crop and/or the weed to be controlled.
[0097] Suitable PPO-inhibitors for use in embodiments of the
present disclosure include, but are not limited to, flumioxazin,
saflufenacil, p-ethyl, carfentrazone, sulfentrazone, pyroxasulfone,
fomesafen, lactofen, acifluorfen, flumiclorac, oxygluorfen, and/or
combinations thereof.
[0098] Suitable ACCase inhibitors for use in embodiments of the
present disclosure include, but are not limited to, clethodim,
fluazifop, sethoxydim, and/or a combination thereof.
[0099] Suitable ALS inhibitors for use in embodiments of the
present disclosure include, but are not limited to, halosulfuron,
rimsulfuron, penoxsulam, and/or a combination thereof.
[0100] Suitable mitosis inhibitors for use in embodiments of the
present disclosure include, but are not limited to, pendimethalin,
oryzalin, and/or a combination thereof.
[0101] Suitable PSII inhibitors for use in embodiments of the
present disclosure include, but are not limited to, simazine,
diuron, and/or a combination thereof.
[0102] Suitable long chain fatty acid inhibitors for use in
embodiments of the present disclosure include, but are not limited
to napropamide.
[0103] Suitable cellulose inhibitors for use in embodiments of the
present disclosure include, but are not limited to, dichlobenil,
isoxaben, indaziflam, and/or a combination thereof.
[0104] When fluridone is used in the methods of the present
disclosure, any herbicidally effective quantity of fluridone may be
applied. For example, in one embodiment, the applying step may be
performed to apply fluridone at a rate of about 0.05 pounds
fluridone per acre to about 0.5 pounds fluridone per acre. In other
embodiments, fluridone may be applied at a rate of about 0.1 pounds
fluridone per acre to about 0.5 pounds of fluridone per acre, about
0.2 pounds of fluridone per acre to about 0.4 pounds of fluridone
per acre, about 0.225 pounds fluridone per acre to about 0.35
pounds fluridone per acre. In still other embodiments, fluridone
may be applied at a rate of about 0.2 to about 0.8 pounds of
fluridone per acre. Additionally or alternatively, the fluridone
can be applied in such an amount that fluridone residues will
remain in the soil for at least 1 month after application and/or in
such an amount that effective weed control from the fluridone
application is maintained for at least 1 month after the
application.
[0105] When a second or additional herbicidal active ingredient is
utilized in methods and compositions of the present disclosure,
such active ingredient may be applied at a rate of greater than
about 0.05 pounds active ingredient per acre, between about 0.05
pounds active ingredient per acre to about 0.5 pounds active
ingredient per acre, and/or between about 0.1 pounds active
ingredient per acre to about 0.4 pounds of active ingredient per
acre.
[0106] Methods and compositions of this disclosure may be used, for
example, in other permanent and/or seasonal crops in addition to
cotton and soybeans. For example, the methods and compositions of
the present disclosure may be utilized for weed control of crops
including, but not limited to, trees, nuts, and/or vine crops. In
other embodiments, methods and compositions of the present
disclosure may be utilized for weed control of crops including, but
not limited to, almond, pecan, pistachio, walnut, apple, pear,
apricot, cherry, nectarine, peach, plum, prune, avocado, citrus,
date, fig, grape, kiwi, olive, peanut, pomegranate, potato, sweet
potato, pome, stone fruit, and/or tobacco crops.
[0107] In some embodiments, when methods and compositions of the
present disclosure are used to control weeds in permanent crops,
the herbicidal compositions will be applied to the soil where the
permanent crops reside. This places the herbicide in proximity to
the weeds which may be diverting nutrients and water in the soil
from the crops. In such applications, the herbicidal compositions
can be applied by any suitable means, including for example
spraying liquid formulations of the herbicide(s) onto the soil
(such as, but not limited to, from a backpack sprayer or another
mobile spray apparatus or motorized vehicle with a tank containing
the composition to be sprayed and that is moved through the subject
area of soil to be treated, e.g., orchard, etc.) and/or by
spreading solid herbicidal compositions on the soil. The
application of the herbicidal composition can be conducted in the
late fall and/or early spring and/or may be applied prior to
emergence of weeds and/or subsequent to emergence of weeds
(postemergence). The timing of application of the herbicidal
composition may also be considered in relation to the annual growth
cycle of the crop plant. For example, permanent crop plants
generally have a dormant phase, a budding phase, a flowering phase,
a fruit fill phase, and a harvest phase. In certain embodiments,
the herbicidal composition is applied after the harvest phase of a
given annual growth cycle and prior to the budding phase, or prior
to the flowering phase, of the subsequent annual growth cycle. In
some embodiments, only a single application of the herbicidal
composition is made prior to the annual growing season of the
permanent crop plant (which herein means the period from the
budding phase to the harvest of the fruit, nut or other permanent
crop), where that growing season is greater than about 90 days,
greater than about 120 days, or greater than about 150 days. Such a
single application of fluridone as a preemergent herbicide can, in
certain embodiments, provide control of weeds for at least 50%, at
least 75%, or 100%, of the growing season, and/or for at least 90
days, at least 120 days, and/or at least 150 days.
[0108] Methods and compositions of this disclosure may be used, for
example, in the complete or partial control of noxious plants, also
called weeds. In certain aspects, these noxious plants include, for
example: Abutilon theophrasti, Acanthospermum hispidum, Acalypha
ostryifolia, Amaranthus albus, Amaranthus hybridus, Amaranthus
palmeri, Amaranthus retroflexus, Amaranthus rudis (waterhemp),
Amaranthus spp., Amaranthus spinosus, Amaranthus tuberculatus,
Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Ambrosia trifida, Acalypha ostryifolia,
Anoda cristata, Artemisia biennis, barnyardgrass, Brachiaria
platyphylla, Brassica kaber, Brassica napus, Bromus secalinus,
Bromus tectorum, Calandrinia ciliate, Capsella bursa-pastoris,
Cassia occidentalis, Cerastium vulgatum, Chenopodium album, Conyza
spp., Conyza canadensis, Convolvulus arvensis, crabgrass, Croton
glandulosus, Cucumis melo, Cyperus iria, Datura stramonium,
Descurainia sophia, Descurainia pinnata, Desmodium tortuosum,
Digitaria sanguinalis, Digitaria ischaemum, Eclipta prostrate,
Echinochloa crus-galli, Eleusine indica, Eragrostis diffusa,
Erigeron spp., Erodium cicutarium, Erodium moschatum, Euphorbia
maculate, Euphorbia heterophylla, fleabane, fiddleneck, Geranium
carolinianum, henbit, Hibiscus trionum, horseweed, Indigofera
hirsute, Ipomoea coccinea, Ipomoea hederacea, Ipomoea lacunose,
Ipomoea purpurea, Jacquemontia tamnifolia, Kochia scoparia, Lactuca
serriola, lambsquarters, Lamium amplexicaule, Laminum purpureum,
Lolium multiflorum, Malva neglecta, Malva parviflora, marestail,
Matricaria maritime, Melochia corchorifolia, Mollugo verticillata,
nutsedge, Oenothera laciniata, Panicum dichotomiflorum, Panicum
texanum, Panicum maximus, Panicum maximum, pigweed, Plantago major,
Poa annua, Polygonum convolvulus, Polygonum lapathifolium,
Polygonum pensylvanicum, Polygonum persicaria, Portulaca oleracea,
prickly lettuce, primrose, purslane, Raphanus raphanistrum,
Richardia scabra, Salsola iberica, Senicio glabellus, Senicio
vulgaris, Senna obtusifolia, Sesbania exaltata, Setaria faberi,
Setaria glauca, Setaria verticillata, Setaria viridis, Sida
spinosa, Silene latifolie, Sisymbrium altissimum, Solanum nigrum,
Solanum ptycanthum, Solanum sarrachoides, Sonchus oleraceus,
Sorghum halepense, Spurge spp., Stellaria media, swine cress,
Taraxacum officinale, Trianthema portulacastrum, Tribulus
terrestris, Tripleurospermum maritima, Verbesina encelioides,
witchgrass, Xanthium strumarium, Hairy fleabane (Conyza
bonariensis), Marestail (Conyza canadensis), Jungle rice
(Echinochloa colona), Kochia (Kochia scoparia), Italian ryegrass
(Lolium perenne spp. multiflorum), Ridge rygrass (Lolium rigidum),
spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus), Tall waterhelp (Amarantus
spinosus), Tall waterhelp, (Amaranthus tuburculatus), Common
ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Giant ragweed (Ambrosia
trifida), Goosegrass (Eleusine indica), Ragweed Parthenium
(Parthenium hysterophorus), Annual bluegrass (Poa annua),
Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). In certain aspects, these or
other weeds to be controlled can be resistant to glyphosate or
other herbicides.
[0109] Any herbicide herein can be applied separately in a liquid
or solid form, or a combination product containing some or all
herbicides can be applied in either liquid or solid form. Typical
liquid formulations include emulsions, suspensions (including
suspensions containing microcapsules), solutions, emulsifiable
concentrates, and flowables. Common solid forms include granules,
wettable powders, water-dispersible solids (including
water-dispersible granules containing microencapsulated herbicides)
or dusts. The herbicidal formulations can also contain, in addition
to the active herbicide(s) other ingredients such as adjuvants,
surfactants, solvents, wetting agents, suspending agents,
anti-caking agents, dispersing agents, emulsifiers, anti-freeze
agents, antifoaming agents, and other additives.
[0110] Compositions according to this invention may contain the two
or more herbicides in numerous different physical forms. In some
cases, a composition may be produced by simply physically mixing
("tank mixing") commercially available products containing the
active herbicides. Alternatively, a package may be manufactured and
sold which contains the two or more herbicides in separate
containers, but packaged together, e.g. in a "multi-pack" format
such as a "twin-pack" or "tri-pack".
[0111] Alternatively, previously prepared compositions ("premixes")
containing the two or more herbicides can be produced. Suitable
liquid compositions would include solutions or emulsions containing
the two or more herbicides. A solid product containing the two or
more herbicides could also be produced, for instance, as
impregnated granules or flowable powders.
[0112] The concentration of the active ingredient or ingredients in
the herbicidal compositions of this invention is generally from
about 0.001 to about 98 percent by weight. Concentrations from
about 0.01 to about 90 percent by weight are often employed. In
compositions designed to be employed as concentrates, the active
ingredient is generally present in a concentration from about 5 to
about 98 weight percent, preferably about 10 to about 90 weight
percent. Such compositions are typically diluted with an inert
carrier, such as water, before application. The diluted
compositions usually applied to weeds or the location of weeds can
contain about 0.0001 to about 1 weight percent active ingredient,
or about 0.001 to about 0.05 weight percent.
[0113] In certain embodiments, a concentrated liquid composition
comprising fluridone is used to prepare, upon dilution, a liquid
composition for application to control weeds, including for
application to the soil to control weeds in permanent crops as
discussed herein. In some embodiments, such a concentrated liquid
composition may have a fluridone concentration of at least about
0.5 pounds of fluridone per gallon (e.g., greater than or equal to
0.5 pounds fluridone per gallon), or at least about 1 pound of
fluridone per gallon (e.g., greater than or equal to 0.5 pounds
fluridone per gallon), and typically in the range of about 0.5 to 5
pounds of fluridone per gallon. In certain preferred embodiments, a
concentrated solution of fluridone comprises 1.6 pounds fluridone
per gallon of composition or 0.5 pounds fluridone per gallon of
composition.
[0114] Prior to application, such as but not limited to a
concentrated composition comprising an active ingredient such as
fluridone may be diluted with another liquid, such as water, to
prepare a less-concentrated composition. In certain embodiments,
the volume ratio of the concentrate composition to the other liquid
used in preparing the diluted composition for application is in the
range of about 1:2 (v/v)(about 0.8 pounds active ingredient per
gallon (w/v)) to about 1:300 (v/v)(about 0.005 pounds active
ingredient per gallon (w/v)), or in the range of about 1:10
(v/v)(about 0.16 pounds active ingredient per gallon) to about
1:200 (about 0.008 pounds active ingredient per gallon (w/v)), or
in the range of about 1:10 (v/v)(about 0.16 pounds active
ingredient per gallon (w/v)) to about 1:100 (v/v)(about 0.016
pounds active ingredient per gallon (w/v)). Additionally or
alternatively, the concentration of fluridone in the prepared
liquid composition to be applied can be in the range of about 0.001
to about 1 pounds per gallon, more preferably about 0.016 to about
0.16 pounds per gallon. The application of the diluted composition
to control weeds in permanent or other crops as disclosed herein
can be achieved by any suitable method, with spray application
being preferred (such as, but not limited to a backpack
sprayer).
[0115] Typically, herbicidal compositions of the present disclosure
will not be formulated for extended release and thus will be
immediately bioavailable upon application to the soil, although, in
certain embodiments they may be formulated for extended release.
When herbicidal compositions of the present disclosure are not
formulated for extended release, typically these formulations will
not comprise extended release polymeric encapsulation, or other
mechanisms to retard release of a herbicide.
[0116] Suitable agricultural adjuvants and carriers that may be
useful in preparing the herbicidal mixtures or compositions of the
invention are well known to those skilled in the art. Liquid
carriers that can be used include water, toluene, xylene, petroleum
naphtha, crop oil, acetone, methyl ethyl ketone, cyclohexanone,
trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, ethyl acetate, amyl acetate,
butyl acetate, propylene glycol monomethyl ether and diethylene
glycol monomethyl ether, methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, amyl
alcohol, ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, glycerine, and the
like. Water is generally the carrier of choice for the dilution of
concentrates. Solid carriers that can be used include talc,
pyrophyllite clay, silica, attapulgus clay, kaolin clay,
kieselguhr, chalk, diatomaceous earth, lime, calcium carbonate,
bentonite clay, Fuller's earth, cottonseed hulls, wheat flour,
soybean flour, pumice, wood flour, walnut shell flour, lignin, and
the like.
[0117] It is usually desirable to incorporate one or more
surface-active agents into the compositions of the present
invention. Such surface-active agents are advantageously employed
in both solid and liquid compositions, especially those designed to
be diluted with carrier before application. The surface-active
agents can be anionic, cationic or nonionic in character and can be
employed as emulsifying agents, wetting agents, suspending agents,
or for other purposes. Typical surface-active agents include salts
of alkyl sulfates, such as diethanolammonium lauryl sulfate;
alkylarylsulfonate salts, such as calciumdodecylbenzenesulfonate;
alkylphenol-alkylene oxide addition products, such as
nonylphenol-C18 ethoxylate; alcohol-alkylene oxide addition
products, such as tridecyl alcohol-C16 ethoxylate; soaps, such as
sodium stearate; alkylnaphthalenesulfonate salts, such as sodium
dibutylnaphthalenesulfonate; dialkyl esters of sulfosuccinate
salts, such as sodium di(2-ethylhexyl)-sulfosuccinate; sorbitol
esters, such as sorbitol oleate; quaternary amines, such as lauryl
trimethylammonium chloride; polyethylene glycol esters of fatty
acids, such as polyethylene glycol stearate; block copolymers of
ethylene oxide and propylene oxide; and salts of mono and dialkyl
phosphate esters.
[0118] Other adjuvants commonly used in agricultural compositions
include compatibilizing agents, antifoam agents, sequestering
agents, neutralizing agents and buffers, corrosion inhibitors,
dyes, odorants, spreading agents, penetration aids, sticking
agents, dispersing agents, thickening agents, freezing point
depressants, antimicrobial agents, and the like. The compositions
may also contain other compatible components, for example, other
herbicides, plant growth regulators, fungicides, insecticides, and
the like and can be formulated with liquid fertilizers or solid,
particulate fertilizer carriers such as ammonium nitrate, urea and
the like.
[0119] As disclosed above, in certain aspects, methods are provided
for controlling weeds in permanent crop plants. Permanent crop
trials were conducted in California to evaluate crop safety and
efficacy of fluridone in irrigated environments. Fluridone applied
prior to emergence of weeds ("PRE") at rates from about 0.1 pounds
per acre (lb/ac) to about 0.8 lb/ac did not result in phytotoxicity
of grape or orange and only in the highest application rate was
phytotoxicity observed and only in minor amounts. In certain
preferred embodiments, application of fluridone as a PRE herbicide
delivers about 0.2 to about 0.4 lb fluridone/acre. These permanent
crops appear to be tolerant of fluridone when applied as a PRE
herbicide in amounts that provide prolonged weed control under
permanent crop irrigation conditions.
[0120] Weed control results suggest fluridone applied PRE at about
0.2 pounds per acre, about 0.4 pounds per acre, and about 0.8
pounds per acre (lb/ac) provided acceptable control of various
grass, sedge, and broadleaf weed species across a five to seven
month period. Surprisingly, there is potential for use of
fluridone--which is typically used in aqueous environments--as an
effective, long-term PRE herbicide in irrigated permanent crops. In
some embodiments of the present disclosure, fluridone can be used
with one or more additional herbicides in permanent crops, which
may be watered by irrigation.
[0121] Irrigation in permanent crop and other crop applications
herein can be achieved by any suitable method. For example,
low-flow irrigation, high-flow irrigation, surface-irrigation,
subsurface-irrigation may be used. In certain embodiments,
irrigation may be achieved by spray irrigation, microspray
irrigation, furrow, fixed spray irrigation, drip irrigation, rotor
irrigation, impact irrigation, bubbler irrigation, canals, soaker
hoses, micro-sprinkler, and/or any other method of irrigation that
provides water to a crop to be irrigated.
[0122] The quantity of applied irrigation water may vary with the
crop involved, the growing conditions in the region in which the
crop is growing, the amount of rainfall experienced, and other
factors. In permanent crop applications herein, irrigation is
commonly applied to ensure that at least a given quantity of water
per day and/or per week, on average, is delivered to the soil in
which the crop resides (through the irrigation and, if any, rain)
during a growing season of the crop plant. In certain forms, such
given quantity of water is an average of at least about 0.1 inches
(about 0.25 cm) of water per day, or an average of about 0.2 inches
(about 0.51 cm) of water per day, or an average of at least about
0.3 inches (about 0.76) of water per day, and typically this
average is in the range of about 0.05 (about 0.127 cm) to about 0.5
inches (about 1.27 cm) of water per day. In some embodiments,
irrigation is conducted as needed to ensure that the soil receives
some quantity of water (usually at least 0.001 inches, at least
0.01 inches, and/or at least 0.1 of water through irrigation,
rainfall, or otherwise) at least once every week, once every ten
days, once every two weeks, and/or once every three weeks, and/or
such that during the growing season (or during a period of control
of at least 60 days, at least 90 days, at least 120 days, or at
least 150 days), the soil does not experience any period of greater
than a week, ten days, two weeks, and/or three weeks during which
the soil fails to receive such a quantity of water. The duration of
the growing season during which irrigation is applied may vary with
the particular crop plant and conditions at hand, but in certain
embodiments such duration is at least about 60 days, at least about
90 days, at least about 120 days, or at least about 150 days, and
typically in the range of about 120 days to about 240 days.
Illustratively, in many permanent crop plants grown in the United
States, such is citrus trees and nut trees, it is common to begin
irrigation in March or April and to continue irrigation until
October or November, when harvest of the citrus fruit or nuts
occurs.
[0123] It will be understood that while average per day delivery of
water to soil is discussed above, it is common to deliver water to
the soil at intervals other than daily, for example weekly
bi-weekly, and/or once every three weeks. Generally, irrigation is
applied every 1 to 3 weeks to achieve the desired average
irrigation amounts, which may be crop specific (for example, but
not limited to, grapes may require more water than almonds).
Recitation of averages above intends inclusion of such other
delivery intervals, so long as they deliver the per-day averages
specified. As well, it will be understood that applied water levels
may vary during various periods of the growing season, for example
with more water being applied during hotter months to account for
evaporative losses and other factors, and less water being applied
during cooler months. Again, recitation of averages above intends
inclusion of such variations over time, so long as they deliver the
per-day averages specified. As well, as commonly used and
understood in the art, the recitation of delivered quantities of
water (by irrigation and/or rainfall) in inches or fractions
thereof refers to the volume of water needed to cover a given
water-impenetrable surface area to a depth of the value given.
[0124] When drip irrigation is used, the quantity of water used or
needed by plants is often calculated by the maximum daily potential
evapotranspiration (ET). Maximum daily potential evapotranspiration
or gallons of water needed per plant may be calculated by the
equation:
Gallons .times. .times. per .times. .times. plant = 0.623 * Plant
.times. .times. Area * Plant .times. .times. Factor * Potential
.times. .times. ET Drip .times. .times. system .times. .times.
efficiency ( Equation .times. .times. 1 ) ##EQU00001##
0.623 is a conversion factor representing the gallons of water
applied when one square foot of ground is irrigated with one inch
of water. The Plant area is measured in square feet. The Plant
Factor is a correction factor for how different plants use water
under the same conditions. 1.00 may be used for ground cover,
flower beds, evergreens, perrennials, small shrubs, and/or vines;
0.85 may be used for apple trees, cherry trees, and/or walnut
trees; 0.80 may be used for mature shade trees; 0.75 may be used
for pecans, peaches, plums, pears, apricots, and/or almonds; 0.70
may be used for ornamental plants, and/or large shrubs; 0.40 may be
used for established low-water or native or low water use plants.
Typical efficiency values are about 85% (about 0.85) to about 90%
(about 0.9). The potential evapotranspiration varies based upon
soil types. These and other similar considerations can be taken
into account when carrying out methods in accordance with the
present disclosure.
[0125] In order to promote a further understanding of the present
invention and its various embodiments, the following specific
examples are provided. It will be understood that these examples
are illustrative and not limiting of the invention.
Example 1
Greenhouse and Field Efficacy Against Palmer Amaranth and Crop
Safety
Materials and Methods:
[0126] Field and greenhouse trials were conducted to determine the
efficacy and extent of safening of fluridone on fomesafen and
flumioxazin.
[0127] Cotton was planted in fields in May. The field was then over
seeded with P. amaranth. On the same day, pre-emergent herbicides
were applied at the rates of (1) 0.2 lb/A fluridone; (2) 0.25 lb/A
fomesafen; and (3) a combination of 0.2 lb/A fluridone and 0.25
lb/A fomesafen. Within 24 hours of application of the herbicide,
0.25 inches of rain was recorded. An additional planting of cotton,
by hand, was conducted in August with multiple rates.
[0128] In addition to these field trials, greenhouse studies were
also undertaken. The greenhouse studies evaluated the use of
fluridone, fomesafen, and the combination of fluridone and
fomesafen as well as the affect of soil types, and moisture
conditions. Four soil types were examined: a predominantly clay
soil, a sandy loam soil, a loamy peat soil, and a sandy soil. The
moisture conditions evaluated were at 0.2 inches of water, and 1.5
inches of water.
Results:
[0129] All the treatments in the May planting displayed significant
control of P. amaranth and other weeds compared to the untreated
control, however there was no significant difference between the
treatments at various concentrations. The weather conditions
observed during this trial were ideal for both cotton growth and
optimal herbicide efficacy.
[0130] In the August planting, the various concentrations of
herbicides were tested for phytotoxicity to emerging cotton in a
sandy loam soil. Only at the ratio of 0.4 lbs/A of fluridone to 0.4
lbs/A of fomesafen was any phytotoxicity seen, and the
phytotoxicity observed at this ratio was minimal. The weather
conditions observed during this trial were ideal for both cotton
growth and optimal herbicide efficacy. Table 1 describes the
conditions used during the greenhouse trials.
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Rates used in greenhouse trial examining
cotton response across soil types and 2 moisture conditions.
Product went out at ratios listed and cotton was examined for
phytotoxicity. Fomesafen treatments at a rate of 0.15 lb/A and
above exhibited stunting to the cotyledon and first 3 true leaves.
Herbicide solution Application Ratio of Plot concentration Rate
Fluridone to Number Herbicide (lb/gal) (lb/A) fomesafen 1 n/a n/a
n/a n/a 2 fluridone 2 0.1 1:0 3 fluridone 2 0.15 1:0 4 fluridone 2
0.175 1:0 5 fluridone 2 0.2 1:0 6 fluridone/ 2 0.1 1:0.625
fomesafen 7 fluridone/ 2 0.15 1:0.625 fomesafen 8 fluridone/ 2
0.175 1:0.625 fomesafen 9 fluridone/ 2 0.2 1:0.625 fomesafen 10
fomesafen 2 0.1 0:1 11 fomesafen 2 0.15 0:1 12 fomesafen 2 0.175
0:1 13 fomesafen 2 0.2 0:1
[0131] There was some variation in weed control which depended on
the soil types. For example, under low moisture conditions across
some soil types, fomesafen alone was not able to provide complete
P. amaranth control. Additionally, some stunting was observed in
the fomesafen treatments as compared to the fluridone and
fluridone/fomesafen combination of treatments, which indicates that
the fluridone is able to safen fomesafen under less than ideal
growing conditions. Under ideal growing conditions in the
greenhouse, all herbicidal applications worked similarly in that no
phytotoxicity was observed in the various soil types. However there
was some variation in weed control which depended on the soil
types. For example, under low moisture conditions across some soil
types, fomesafen alone was not able to provide complete P. Amaranth
control. Additionally, some stunting was observed in the fomesafen
treatments as compared to the fluridone and fluridone/fomesafen
combination of treatments, which indicates that the fluridone is
able to safe and fomesafen under less than ideal growing
conditions.
[0132] FIG. 1 shows a digital image of the May planting field
trials 1 week post treatment and 9 weeks post treatment. Brake is a
formulation of fluridone. Brake F2.TM. is a formulation of
fluridone and fomesafen. Fomesafen treatment is also shown. Each
treatment showed control of P. amaranth and no phytotoxicity was
observed in any treatment.
[0133] FIG. 2 shows a digital image of the August planting taken 7
weeks post treatment using an application ratio of 0.2 lbs/acre:0.2
lbs/acre fluridone:fomesafen and 0.4 lbs/acre:0.4 lbs/acre
fluridone:fomesafen. P. amaranth was controlled in both treatment
rates and minimal to no phytotoxicity was observed in either
application rate. Table 2 summarizes the conditions used during the
August field trials.
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Field rates applied of fluridone and
fomesafen in August to cotton. Treatment was applied as a
pre-emergent application. Amaranthus palmeri was overseeded onto
the area. Plots were evaluated for any phytotoxicity to cotton and
weed control was evaluated. Herbicide solution Ratio of
concentration Application Rate Fluridone to Plot Number Herbicide
(lb/gal) (lb/A) fomesafen 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 Fluridone 2 0.2 1:0 3
Fomesafen 2 0.2 0:1 4 Fluridone 2 0.1 1:0.5 Fomesafen 2 0.05 5
Fluridone 2 0.1 1:0.75 Fomesafen 2 0.075 6 Fluridone 2 0.1 1:1
Fomesafen 2 0.1 7 Fluridone 2 0.15 1:0.8 Fomesafen 2 0.125 8
Fluridone 2 0.15 1:1 Fomesafen 2 0.15 9 Fluridone 2 0.15 1:1.7
Fomesafen 2 0.175 10 Fluridone 2 0.2 1:3.75 Fomesafen 2 0.75 11
Fluridone 2 0.2 1:0.75 Fomesafen 2 0.15 12 Fluridone 2 0.2 1:1
Fomesafen 2 0.2 13 Fluridone 2 0.4 1:1 Fomesafen 2 0.4
Example 2
Safening of Fluridone by Flumioxazin in Soybeans when Applied
Pre-Plant
Materials and Methods:
[0134] A climate-regulated greenhouse trial was conducted to
determine the efficacy and extent of safening of herbicidal
compositions of fluridone and flumioxazin applied to soybeans.
[0135] In this trial, soybeans were treated with various herbicidal
compositions. The quantity of fluridone applied was maintained
constant at a rate of 0.2 lb/A and 0.1 lb/A fluridone and the
quantity of flumioxazin was varied from 0.008 lb/A to 0.17 lb/A
flumioxazin. One gallon pots with sandy loam soil were treated with
a herbicidal composition, and three soybeans were planted in each
pot 7 days after application of the herbicide (i.e., the herbicide
was applied 7 days pre-plant) Three pots were prepared and treated
for each herbicide composition. Approximately 0.15 inches of water
was applied to each pot four hours after application. Irrigation
was applied as the plants emerged through the soil 4 days after
treatment (DAT) after the first visible signs of soil cracking due
to plant emergence was observed. Irrigation comprised application
of 0.5 inches of water for 2 days followed by 0.25 inches of water
for 2 days, followed by 0.15 inches of water per day for the
remainder of the trial. The greenhouse was maintained at
26.+-.5.degree. C. during the day and 11.+-.1.degree. C. during the
night.
TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Herbicidal compositions applied to soybean
plants of EXAMPLE 2. EXAMPLE 2: Soybean Pre-plant using flumioxazin
and fluridone. Pre-emergent and Pre Plant Applications of fluridone
in combination with flumioxazin on Soybean Trial ID: 20140117.1 BH
Protocol ID: 20140117.1 BH De- Trt Treatment Form Form Form scrip-
Rate No. Name Conc Unit Type tion Rate Unit 1 Flumioxazin 51.00 %
WG 7 Day 8 oz/a 2 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.05 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.255 lb ai/a 3 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC
7 Day 0.10 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.255 lb ai/a 4
Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.20 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7
Day 0.255 lb ai/a 5 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.03 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.255 lb ai/a 6 Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG
7 Day 0.17 lb ai/a 7 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.05 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.17 lb ai/a 8 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7
Day 0.10 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.17 lb ai/a 9
Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.20 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7
Day 0.17 lb ai/a 10 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.03 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.17 lb ai/a 11 Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG
7 Day 0.128 lb ai/a 12 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.05 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.128 lb ai/a 13 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC
7 Day 0.10 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.128 lb ai/a 14
Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.20 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7
Day 0.128 lb ai/a 15 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.03 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.128 lb ai/a 16 Flumioxazin 51.00 %
WG 7 Day 0.016 lb ai/a 17 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.10 lb ai/a
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.016 lb ai/a 18 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC
7 Day 0.20 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.016 lb ai/a 19
Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.008 lb ai/a 20 Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC
7 Day 0.10 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7 Day 0.008 lb ai/a 21
Fluridone 2 LB/GAL EC 7 Day 0.20 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51.00 % WG 7
Day 0.008 lb ai/a 22 UTC 7 Day
Results:
[0136] FIG. 6 shows a series of five digital images of soybeans
planted during the trial. In the first image from the left, a
herbicidal composition comprising 0.2 lb/A fluridone and 0.008 lb/A
of flumioxazin was applied to the plant; in the second digital
image 0.2 lb/A fluridone and 0.016 lb/A flumioxazin was applied; in
the third digital image 0.2 lb/A fluridone and 0.128 lb/A
flumioxazin was applied; in the fourth digital image, 0.2 lb/A
fluridone and 0.17 lb/A flumioxazin was applied; in the fifth
digital image, no herbicidal compositions were applied and used an
untreated control.
[0137] FIG. 7 shows a graph of the percent chlorosis (PHYBLE)
observed on the soybean plants of the present trial. The untreated
control soybean plants exhibited 0% chlorosis. Soybeans treated
with 0.2 lb/A fluridone in combination with the smallest rate of
flumioxazin, 0.008 lb/A flumioxazin, exhibited 100% chlorosis and
was fatal to the soybean plants. Chlorosis decreased as the rate of
flumioxazin increased. Soybeans treated with 0.2 lb/A fluridone in
combination with the largest rate of flumioxazin, 0.17 lb/A
flumioxazin, exhibited 0% chlorosis. These data evidences that
flumioxazin safens soybeans against the application of fluridone
when applied pre-plant.
[0138] A similar trend is observed in FIG. 8. The untreated control
soybean plants exhibited 0% chlorosis. Soybeans treated with 0.1
lb/A fluridone in combination with the smallest rate of
flumioxazin, 0.008 lb/A flumioxazin, exhibited 48.3% chlorosis.
Chlorosis generally decreased as the rate of flumioxazin increased.
Soybeans treated with 0.1 lb/A fluridone in combination with the
largest does of flumioxazin, 0.17 lb/A flumioxazin, exhibited only
3.3% chlorosis. These data also evidence that flumioxazin safens
soybeans against the application of fluridone when applied
pre-plant.
Example 3
Pre-Emergent Application of Combinations of Fluridone with
Flumioxazin or Fomesafe in Cotton and Soybeans
[0139] A trial was conducted in a climate-controlled growth chamber
to determine the efficacy and extent of safening of combinations of
fluridone with flumioxazin or fluridone with fomesafen on soybeans
and cotton.
[0140] 0.1 L conical assay tubes were planted with a cotton or
soybean seed in a sample of sandy loam soil. Seven tubes were
prepared for each herbicide application rate. Application of a
herbicide composition was performed after planting the seed and
prior to the plant's emergence from the soil (i.e., pre-emergent or
PRE). Approximately 0.15 inches of water was applied to each pot
four hours after application. Irrigation was applied as the plants
emerged through the soil 4 days after treatment (DAT) after the
first visible signs of soil cracking due to plant emergence was
observed. Irrigation comprised application of 0.5 inches of water
for 2 days followed by 0.25 inches of water for 2 days, followed by
0.15 inches of water per day for the remainder of the trial. The
greenhouse was maintained at 26.+-.5.degree. C. during the day and
11.+-.1.degree. C. during the night. Table 4 shows the herbicidal
compositions applied to soybean plants of the present example.
TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Herbicidal compositions applied to soybean
plants of EXAMPLE 3. EXAMPLE 3: Pre-emergent Applications of Brake,
Reflex, and Valor on Soybean to Evaluate Injury Under Cool and
Moist Conditions Trial ID: 20140203.2 Protocol ID: 20140203.2 Trt
Treatment Form Form Form Rate No. Name Conc Unit Type Rate Unit 1
Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.025 lb ai/a 2 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.05
lb ai/a 3 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 lb ai/a 4 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL
EC 0.2 lb ai/a 5 Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.125 lb ai/a 6 Fomesafen 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.25 lb ai/a 7 Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.375 lb ai/a 8
Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.5 lb ai/a 9 Flumioxazin 51 % WG 1.5 oz/a
10 Flumioxazine 51 % WG 3 oz/a 11 Flumioxazine 51 % WG 6 oz/a 12
Flumioxazin 51 % WG 9 oz/a 13 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.025 lb ai/a
Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.5 lb ai/a 14 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.05
lb ai/a Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.5 lb ai/a 15 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL
EC 0.1 lb ai/a Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.5 lb ai/a 16 Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.1 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51 % WG 1.5 oz/a 17 Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.1 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51 % WG 3 oz/a 18 UTC
[0141] Table 5 shows the herbicidal compositions applied to cotton
plants of the present example.
TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Herbicidal compositions applied to cotton
plants of EXAMPLE 3. EXAMPLE 3: Pre-emergent Applications of Brake,
Reflex, and Valor on Cotton to Evaluate Injury Under Cool and Moist
Conditions Trial ID: 20140203.1 Protocol ID: 20140203.1 Trt
Treatment Form Form Form Rate No. Name Conc Unit Type Rate Unit 1
Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.05 lb ai/a 2 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 lb
ai/a 3 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 lb ai/a 4 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC
0.4 lb ai/a 5 Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.125 lb ai/a 6 Fomesafen 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.25 lb ai/a 7 Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.375 lb ai/a 8
Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.5 lb ai/a 9 Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.0125
oz/a 10 Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.025 oz/a 11 Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.075
oz/a 12 Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.1 oz/a 13 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1
lb ai/a Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.25 lb ai/a 14 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL
EC 0.2 lb ai/a Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.25 lb ai/a 15 Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.4 lb ai/a Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.25 lb ai/a 16
Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.075 oz/a
17 Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.4 lb ai/a Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.075
oz/a 18 UTC
Soybeans:
[0142] FIG. 9 shows the height of soybean plants 9 days after
treatment with a herbicide compositions comprising fluridone;
flumioxazin; and various ratios of fluridone and flumioxazin.
[0143] FIG. 10 shows the percentage of chlorosis observed in
soybean plants treated with various herbicidal compositions. For
example, when soybean plants were treated with fluridone, 80%
chlorosis was observed. When a herbicidal composition comprising
fluridone and flumioxazin was applied, the percentage chlorosis
observed decreased. These data evidence that when fluridone and
flumioxazin are used in combination, increasing rates of
flumioxazin decreases the quantity of chlorosis observed on
soybeans.
[0144] FIG. 11 shows the percentage of chlorosis observed in
soybean plants treated with various herbicidal compositions. For
example, when soybean plants were treated with fluridone and
fomesafen a decrease in chlorosis was not observed in contrast to
the decrease of chlorosis observed with fluridone and flumioxazin
are used in combination.
[0145] These data evidence that when fluridone and flumioxazin are
used in combination, a safening affect is observed on soybean
plants as measured by percent chlorosis observed. When fluridone
and fomesafen are used in combination a safening affect is not
observed on soybean plants as measured by percent chlorosis
observed.
Cotton:
[0146] FIG. 12 show digital images of cotton plants 16 days after
treatment with herbicidal compositions comprising fluriodone and
fomesafen. Generally speaking, the crop phytotoxicity and growth
inhibition caused by fomesafen alone was improved by the use of a
combination of fluridone and fomesafen. Starting from the left, the
first plant is a cotton plant that was not treated with a
herbicidal composition. The middle plant is a cotton plant treated
with 0.25 lb/A of fomesafen. The plant on the right is a cotton
plant treated with 0.25 lb/A of fomesafen in combination with
fluridone.
[0147] FIG. 13 shows the height of cotton plants 16 days after
treatment with a herbicidal composition. Shown are untreated
control plants, plants treated with 0.25 lb/A fomesafen, and plants
treated with a combination of 0.1 lb/A fluridone and 0.25 lb/A
fomesafen.
[0148] FIG. 14 shows the height of cotton plants 29 days after
treatment with a herbicidal composition. Shown are untreated
control plants, plants treated with 0.25 lb/A fomesafen, and plants
treated with a combination of 0.1 lb/A fluridone and 0.25 lb/A
fomesafen.
[0149] These data evidence that cotton plants treated with a
combination of fluridone and fomesafen exhibit less phytotoxicity
and growth inhibition than plants treated only with fluridone.
[0150] FIG. 15 shows the height of cotton plants treated with
various rates of flumioxazin. As can be seen from the bar graph, as
the rate of flumioxazin is increased, the height of cotton plants
decrease. At the highest rates, flumioxazin was fatal to cotton
plants. At application rates greater than 0.025 lb/A flumioxazin,
cotton plants were significantly injured.
[0151] FIG. 16 shows digital images of cotton plants treated with
flumioxazin. As the rate of flumioxazin increases, the height of
the cotton plants decreases.
[0152] FIG. 17 shows the crop stand, which is the number of viable
plants, for cotton plants treated with 0.5 lb/A flumioxazin, 0.2
lb/A fluridone plus 0.05 lb/A flumioxazin, as well as plants that
went untreated as a control. The crop stand was one surviving
plants out of seven for cotton plants treated with 0.05 lb/A
flumioxazin. The crop stand was four surviving plants out of seven
cotton plants treated with 0.2 lb/A fluridone.
[0153] FIG. 18 shows a digital image where cotton plants were
various treatments were applied to cotton plants. One set of cotton
plants were treated with flumioxazin at the rate of 0.05 lb/A, one
set of plants was treated with a combination of flumioxazin at 0.05
lb/A and fluridone at 0.2 lb/A, and one set was left untreated as
an untreated control (UTC).
[0154] FIG. 19 shows the percentage of cotyledons with excessive
wrinkling and brown spotting due to herbicide injury measured 26
days after treatment. As shown here, when flumioxazin is used alone
at the rate of 0.05 lb/A all of the cotyledons show brown spotting.
When fluridone is added at the rate of 0.2 lb/A or 0.4 lb/A, the
number of cotyledons that have brown spots decreases by 75%.
[0155] FIG. 20 shows the growth stage of cotton plants 26 days
after treatment. Growth stage is measured using the following
scale:
[0156] 0=non-emerged plant
[0157] 1=emerged plant with open cotyledons
[0158] 2=first true leaf stage
[0159] 3=second true leaf stage
[0160] As can be seen in the graph, cotton plants treated with
flumioxazin at the rate of 0.05 lb/A experience the most growth
stunting as compared to the untreated control plants. Growth
stunting decreases as the rate of fluridone increases when used in
combination with flumioxazin.
[0161] When evaluated, these data evidence that the chlorosis
caused by fluridone decreased as the rate of flumioxazin increased
in soybeans. It was also observed that fomesafen did not decrease
the chlorosis caused by fluridone in soybean plants. In cotton, the
phytotoxicity and growth inhibition caused by fomesafen was
improved by the addition of fluridone to fomesafen. In cotton, the
use of flumioxazin in combination with fluridone decreased crop
injury as compared to when flumioxazin is used by itself.
Example 4
Pre-Emergent Application of Combinations of Fluridone with
Flumioxazin or Fomesafe in Cotton and Soybeans
[0162] The trial of EXAMPLE 3 was repeated using 21 replicated
samples for each herbicidal application instead of 7 for each
herbicidal application.
[0163] Table 6 shows the herbicide compositions applied to soybean
plants of EXAMPLE 4.
TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Herbicide compositions applied to
pre-emergent soybean plants. EXAMPLE 4: Soybean Pre-emergent
Applications of fluridone, fomesafen, and flumioxazin on Soybean to
Evaluate Injury Under Cool and Moist Conditions Trial ID: 20140304
Protocol ID: 20140304.2 Trt Treatment Form Form Form Rate Appl Appl
No. Type Name Conc Unit Type Rate Unit Code Description 1 CHK UTC A
Pre-Emergent 2 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.075 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 3 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 4 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.15 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 5 HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.05 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent
6 HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 7 HERB
Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.15 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 8 HERB Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.075 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG
0.05 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 9 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.075 LB
AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 10 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.075 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.15 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent
11 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB
Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.05 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 12 HERB Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.1
LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 13 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.15 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent
14 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.15 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB
Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.05 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 15 HERB Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.15 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.1
LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 16 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.15 LB AI/A
A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.15 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent
17 HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.5 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 18 HERB
Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 19 HERB Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC
0.5 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 20 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB
AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent
[0164] Table 7 shows the herbicide compositions applied to cotton
plants of EXAMPLE 4.
TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Herbicide compositions applied to
pre-emergent cotton plants. EXAMPLE 4: Cotton Pre-emergent
Applications of fluridone, fomesafen, and flumioxazin on Cotton to
Evaluate Injury Under Cool and Moist Conditions Trt Treatment Form
Form Form Rate Appl Appl No. Type Name Conc Unit Type Rate Unit
Code Description 1 CHK UTC A Pre-Emergent 2 HERB Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 3 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC
0.2 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 4 HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.025 LB AI/A
A Pre-Emergent 5 HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.033 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 6 HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.05 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent
7 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB
Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.025 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 8 HERB Fluridone 2
LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG
0.033 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 9 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB
AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.05 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 10 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.025 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent
11 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB
Flumioxazin 51 % WG 0.033 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 12 HERB Fluridone
2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent HERB Flumioxazin 51 % WG
0.05 LB AI/A A Pre-Emergent 13 HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.125 LB
AI/A A Pre-Emergent 14 HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.25 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 15 HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.375 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 16 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.125 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 17 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.25 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 18 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.1 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.375 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 19 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.125 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 20 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.25 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent 21 HERB Fluridone 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.2 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent HERB Fomesafen 2 LBA/GAL EC 0.375 LB AI/A A
Pre-Emergent
Soybeans:
[0165] FIG. 24 shows the percent chlorosis observed 21 days after
treatment of soybean plants with various herbicidal compositions. A
decrease in chlorosis is observed as the rate of flumioxazin is
increased when used with fluridone.
[0166] FIG. 25 shows a series of digital images of soybean plants
treated with various herbicide compositions including 0.1 lb/A
fluridone; 0.1 lb/A fluridone and 0.05 lb/A flumioxazin; 0.1 lb/A
fluridone and 0.1 lb/A flumioxazin; and 0.1 lb/A fluridone and 0.15
lb/A flumioxazin.
[0167] These data evidence that in soybean plants, flumioxazin
safens fluridone by decreasing the chlorosis observed.
Cotton:
[0168] FIG. 21 and FIG. 22 show the damage to cotton plants 16 days
after treatment and 21 days after treatment with various herbicidal
compositions as measured by the percentage of cotyledons with
excessive wrinkling and brown spotting due to herbicide injury.
These data evidence that fluridone is safening fomesafen as the
damage observed decreases when the application rate of fomesafen is
increased when used in conjunction with fluridone.
[0169] FIG. 23 shows a series of three digital images of cotton
plants treated with fomesafen alone, fomesafen applied with
fluridone, and an untreated control group.
[0170] These data evidence that in cotton plants, fluridone safens
fomesafen by reducing the injury to plants observed as the number
of cotyledons with excessive wrinkling or brown spotting and that
fluridone safens flumioxazin by reducing the injury to plants
observed as the number of cotyledons with excessive wrinkling or
brown spotting.
Example 5
Pre-Emergent Application of Combinations of Fluridone with
Flumioxazin in Corn
Materials and Methods:
[0171] A greenhouse trial was conducted to determine if fluridone
and flumioxazin have a safening effect on the other when applied to
corn plants prior to emergence from the soil. Ten compositions were
applied to corn plants after corn seed had been planted, but prior
to the corn plants emergence from the soil, and each application
was repeated seven times. The herbicidal compositions applied are
described in Table 8, where there is an untreated control
(Application No. 1), fluridone applied alone (Applications Nos.
5-7), flumioxazin applied alone (Application Nos. 2-4), and
combinations of fluridone and flumioxazin (Application Nos.
8-10).
TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Applications of herbicidal compositions to
corn plants applied pre-emergent to the plants. Application Rate
Fluridone Rate Flumioxazin No. Applied Applied Units 1 0 0 lb/A 2 0
0.05 lb/A 3 0 0.1 lb/A 4 0 0.15 lb/A 5 0.05 0 lb/A 6 0.1 0 lb/A 7
0.15 0 lb/A 8 0.05 0.05 lb/A 9 0.1 0.1 lb/A 10 0.15 0.15 lb/A
Results:
[0172] FIG. 26 shows the percentage of leaves with visible
bleaching injury measured 12 days after application (% PHYBLE) when
various herbicidal compositions are applied to corn plants. As can
be seen from this bar graph, the percentage of leaves with visible
bleaching damage, a measure of chlorosis, decreases when a
combination of fluridone and flumioxazin is used as compared to
when fluridone is used alone. These data evidence that flumioxazin
is safening fluridone on cotton plants as measured by the
percentage of leaves with visible bleaching injury.
[0173] FIG. 27 shows a digital image of corn plants when various
herbicidal compositions are applied. The image was taken 12 days
after treatment.
[0174] FIG. 28 shows the percentage of cotyledons with excessive
wrinkling and brown spotting due to herbicide injury observed on
cotton plants when various herbicidal compositions are applied (%
PHYGEN) measured 12 days after application. These data show, in
particular, that when fluridone is applied at a rate of 0.1 lb/A
and flumioxazin is applied at the rate of 0.1 lb/A the percentage
of cotyledons with excessive wrinkling and brown spotting due to
herbicide injury is decreased as compared to when flumioxazin is
applied alone.
[0175] FIG. 29 shows digital images of corn plants when various
herbicidal compositions are applied. The image was captured 12 days
after treatment.
Example 6
Crop Safety and Weed Control in Almond
Materials and Methods:
[0176] Field trials were conducted in California to determine sweet
almond (Prunus dulcis) tolerance to fluridone and efficacy of
fluridone in an irrigated orchard environment. Trial locations
included a two-year old almond stand in Kerman, Calif. and a
six-year old stand in Shafter, Calif. The soil in both locations is
classified as a sandy loam. Applications prior to emergence of
weeds (PRE) of herbicides were made in the month of January in
Kerman and in the month of January in Shafter. Herbicide treatments
in both locations included fluridone applied at 0.1 lb/ac (about
11.25 kg/km.sup.2), 0.2 lb/ac (about 22.5 kg/km.sup.2), 0.4 lb/ac
(about 45 kg/km.sup.2), and 0.8 lb/ac (about 90 kg/km.sup.2) and
flumioxazin at 0.38 lb/ac (about 42.75 kg/km.sup.2)(Table 9).
Rainfall (0.32 in (about 0.813 cm)) and irrigation (1.5 in (about
3.81 cm)) one day after PRE applications were used to incorporate
herbicides into the soil at the Kerman and Shafter locations,
respectively. Both sites were irrigated as needed during the
growing season to avoid drought conditions. Visual evaluations of
crop injury and weed control were made monthly on a 0 to 100%
scale. Postemergent (POST) broadcast applications of a
non-selective, contact herbicide was broadcast across all
treatments in Kerman prior to the 90 days after treatment and 119
days after treatment (DAT) ratings. Thus, data from those ratings
dates was not evaluated. No POST applications were made in
Shafter.
Results:
[0177] The data from both locations suggest that almond is tolerant
to PRE applications of fluridone and flumioxazin. The greatest
phytotoxicity (8.3%) was observed in Shafter 158 and 180 DAT in
areas treated with 0.8 lb fluridone/ac. Phytotoxicity was not
observed following any PRE herbicide application in Kerman.
[0178] Weed control provided by PRE applications of fluridone was
effective in both locations across the trial period. In Kerman,
fluridone applied at 0.4 lb/ac (about 45 kg/km.sup.2) and 0.8 lb/ac
(about 90 kg/km.sup.2) provided greater control than other
fluridone rates but not it was not significantly different than
flumioxazin at any rating date. Evaluations 184 DAT suggest 0.4 and
0.8 lb fluridone/ac provided 10 percent greater crabgrass control
(Digitaria spp.) and similar yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus
L.) control to flumioxazin (FIG. 30). However, hairy fleabane
(Conyza bonariensis) control was 20 to 33 percent less than
flumioxazin.
[0179] The yellow nutsedge and hairy fleabane results provided
different results. Those results indicate similar hairy fleabane
control (94-100%) between 0.4 lb fluridone/ac (about 45
kg/km.sup.2), 0.8 lb fluridone/ac (about 90 kg/km.sup.2), and
flumioxazin 180 DAT (FIG. 31). Additionally, yellow nutsedge
control following fluridone applied at every rate was significantly
greater than flumioxazin (FIG. 32). Such differences may be due to
weed population variability at the Kerman site.
[0180] Final evaluations were taken 211 DAT at the Shafter site.
Results indicate fluridone applied 0.4 and 0.8 lb/ac provided
significantly greater control of hairy fleabane, spotted spurge
(Euphorbia maculate), and yellow nutsedge than the 0.1 lb/ac (about
11.25 kg/km.sup.2) and 0.2 lb fluridone/ac (about 22.5 kg/km.sup.2)
(FIG. 33). Further, fluridone appears to have high herbicidal
activity on sprangletop (Leptochloa sp.) as control 211 DAT was 88
to 98 percent across the three highest rates of fluridone (FIG.
34). All three rates provided significantly greater control than
flumioxazin. This observation was unexpected and surprising, in
that among other things, weed control was observed so far after
application (DAT) under continuous irrigation conditions.
TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Preemergent herbicides, application rates,
trial locations, and crops used to evaluate efficacy and crop
safety during the growing season. Preemergent Application Rate
Trial Location Herbicide (lb ai/ac) (CA) Crop untreated n/a
Elderwood orange Kerman almond, grape Kingsburg grape Shafter
almond fluridone 0.1 Elderwood orange Kerman almond, grape
Kingsburg grape Shafter almond fluridone 0.2 Elderwood orange
Kerman almond, grape Kingsburg grape Shafter almond fluridone 0.4
Elderwood orange Kerman almond, grape Kingsburg grape Shafter
almond fluridone 0.8 Elderwood orange Kerman almond, grape
Kingsburg grape Shafter almond flumioxazin 0.38 Kerman almond,
grape Kingsburg grape Shafter almond indaziflam 0.065 Kerman grape
Kingsburg grape indaziflam 0.085 Elderwood orange
Example 7
Crop Safety and Weed Control in Grape
Materials and Methods:
[0181] Field trials were conducted in California to evaluate
tolerance of established `Thompson` grape (Vitis vinifera) to
fluridone and the efficacy of fluridone in an irrigated vineyard
environment. Trials were placed in grape vineyards located in
Kerman and Kingsburg, Calif. The soil in both locations is
classified as a sandy loam. Preemergent herbicide applications were
made in the month of January in Kerman and in the month of March in
Kingsburg. Herbicide treatments in both locations included
fluridone applied at 0.1 lb/ac (about 11.25 kg/km.sup.2), 0.2 lb/ac
(about 22.5 kg/km.sup.2), 0.4 lb/ac (about 45 kg/km.sup.2), and 0.8
lb/ac (about 90 kg/km.sup.2) and flumioxazin at 0.38 lb/ac (about
42.75 kg/km.sup.2) (Table 9, supra). Additionally, indaziflam
applied at 0.065 lb/ac was included at the Kingsburg site. Rainfall
(0.32 in. (about 0.813 cm) in Kerman and 1.5 in. (about 3.81 cm) in
Kingsburg) was observed in the first week following PRE application
incorporated the herbicides into the soil. Both sites were
irrigated as needed during the growing season to avoid drought
conditions. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were
made monthly on a 0 to 100% scale. Cultivation occurred in the row
centers at the Kerman location following the 58 DAT evaluations,
and therefore, the Kerman results following 58 DAT were not
evaluated. No cultivation occurred in Kingsburg during the trial
period.
Results:
[0182] Phytotoxicity was not observed following any PRE herbicide
application in either location. Weed control following applications
of fluridone at rates from 0.2 to 0.8 lb/ac was similar to
flumioxazin and indaziflam across all rating dates. In Kerman, no
significant weed control differences occurred between the three
highest rates of fluridone and flumioxazin. Fiddleneck (Amsinckia
Lehm.) control 58 DAT was 98 to 100 percent despite the PRE
herbicide applied (FIG. 35). Fluridone applied at 0.2, 0.4, and 0.8
lb/ac provided 13.5 percent greater redmaids (Calandrinia sp.)
control than flumioxazin. Canadian horseweed (Conyza canadensis L.)
data at the same evaluation date was highly variable (CV=114%).
Thus, control differences between fluridone and flumioxazin ranged
from 0 to 50 percent depending on rates.
[0183] Kingsburg results indicate fluridone at rates from 0.2 to
0.8 lb/ac, flumioxazin, and indaziflam were all effective in
controlling barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.),
common purslane (Portulaca oleracea L.), and prickly lettuce
(Latuca serriola L.) during the 155-day study period. Control of
each specie was 94 to 100 percent across all PRE herbicides (FIG.
36).
Example 8
Crop Safety and Weed Control in Orange
Materials and Methods:
[0184] A field trial was conducted in California to evaluate
tolerance of non-bearing "Cara Cara" orange (Citrus sinensis) to
fluridone and the efficacy of fluridone in an irrigated orchard
environment. The trial was initiated in the month of January in
Elderwood, Calif. The soil on the trial site was classified as a
clay. Herbicide treatments included fluridone applied at 0.1, 0.2,
0.4, and 0.8 lb/ac and indaziflam applied at 0.085 lb/ac (about 9.6
kg/km.sup.2). Rainfall (0.44 in. (about 1.12 cm)) that occurred in
the first week following PRE application incorporated the
herbicides into the soil. The site was irrigated as needed during
the growing season to avoid drought conditions. Visual evaluations
of crop injury and weed density were made on a 0 to 100% scale.
Additionally, plant counts per plot of weed species present were
conducted for each evaluation period.
Results:
[0185] The PRE herbicides applied did not contribute to
phytotoxicity during the trial period. Weed control following
applications of fluridone at rates from 0.2 to 0.8 lb/ac observed.
The two most prevalent weeds on the trial site were witchgrass
(Panicum capillare L.) and prostrate spurge (Euphorbia supine
Raf.). The three highest fluridone rates and indaziflam resulted in
100 percent control of witchgrass 168 DAT (FIG. 37). Prostrate
spurge density decreased as fluridone rate increased resulting in
control from 58 to 84 percent. Indaziflam provided 95 percent
prostrate spurge control at the same evaluation period. However, no
significant control differences for either species occurred between
fluridone rates from 0.2 to 0.8 lb/ac and indaziflam during the
238-day trial period (FIG. 38).
[0186] Other weeds present on the site included tumbleweed amaranth
(Amaranthus albus L.), junglerice (Echinochloa colona L.), and
hairy fleabane. Control of tumbleweed amaranth and junglerice
increased as fluridone rate increased. The 168 DAT evaluation
resulted in 75 to 100 percent control of tumbleweed amaranth and 57
to 100 percent control of junglerice. Neither fluridone nor
indaziflam effectively controlled hairy fleabane. Percent weed
density was collected 121 and 231 DAT. (FIG. 39).
Example 9
Materials and Methods:
[0187] An experiment was conducted beginning in the month of August
in a greenhouse. The greenhouse was arranged as a randomized
complete block with four replicates. A coarse sand soil was used to
fill four inch diameter pots. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)
seed (100 seed by weight) was evenly dispersed on the soil surface
prior to treatment with Fluridone. Fluridone was applied as a
surface broadcast spray to each pot at 0.2 lb/ac. Irrigation
treatments (0 inches, 0.125 inches (about 0.3175 cm), 0.25 inches
(about 0.635 cm), 0.5 inches (about 1.27 cm), and 1.0 inch (about
2.54 cm)) were applied using a sprinkler can immediately following
the fluridone application. Overhead irrigation occurred eight and
10 days after treatment, applying an additional 0.25 inch (about
0.635 cm) of water to each pot. Palmer amaranth control was
determined by counting seedlings in each pot weekly.
Results:
[0188] The results of this experiment are shown in FIG. 40.
Surprisingly, these data evidence that increasing the amount of
irrigation increases preemergent control provided by fluridone.
Example 10
Materials and Methods:
[0189] An experiment with cotton was conducted during the months of
April to the month of June in Jackson, Tenn. Plots were arranged as
a randomized complete block with four replicates. Plots were 6.3 ft
by 30 ft (about 1.92 meters by about 9.114 meters). The soil on the
site was classified as a silt loam soil. Cotton (Gossypium
hirsutum) was planted and fluridone was applied as a surface
broadcast spray immediately after planting at rates of 0 lb/ac (0
kg/km.sup.2), 0.1 lb/ac (about 11.25 kg/km.sup.2), 0.2 lb/ac (about
22.5 kg/km.sup.2), 0.3 lb/ac (about 33.75 kg/km.sup.2), 0.4 lb/ac
(about 45 kg/km.sup.2), and 0.5 lb/ac (about 56.25 kg/km.sup.2).
The site received approximately four inches (about 10.16 cm) of
rainfall in the first 35 days after treatment (DAT). Visually
evaluations of Palmer amaranth control were made twice a month on a
0 to 100% scale.
[0190] An experiment with walnut was conducted during the months of
December to the month of June the following year in Stockton,
Calif. Plots were arranged as a randomized complete block with
three replicates. Plots were 8 ft.times.8 ft (about 2.43 meters by
meters)(1 tree/plot). The soil on the site is classified as a clay
loam. Fluridone was applied as a surface broadcast spray at rates
of 0 lb/ac (0 kg/km.sup.2), 0.2 lb/ac (about 22.5 kg/km.sup.2), 0.3
lb/ac (about 33.75 kg/km.sup.2), and 0.4 lb/ac (about 45
kg/km.sup.2). The site received approximately four inches (about
10.16 cm) of rainfall in the first 35 DAT, and an additional 2.9
inches (about 7.366 cm) rainfall and 6.5 inches (about 16.51 cm)
irrigation the next 124 days thereafter. Visually evaluations of
weed control were made monthly on a 0 to 100% scale.
Results:
[0191] The results of this experiment are shown in FIG. 41. These
data suggest good control of Palmer amaranth in dryland cotton and
good total weed control in irrigated walnut.
Example 11
Control of Weeds in English Walnut
Materials and Methods:
[0192] A field trial was performed in a dormant 4th year walnut
orchard (Chandler variety) located near Stockton, Calif. The trial
was initiated in December for weed efficacy studies and crop
tolerance studies. Plots were about 8 feet by about 18 feet (about
2.43 meters by about 5.49 meters) with one tree per plot arranged
in a randomized complete block design with three replications.
Fluridone, flumioxazin, Roundup, and glufosinate ammonium were
tested.
[0193] Rainfall and Irrigation data for this trial is summarized in
Table 10 below.
TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Rainfall and Irrigation data summary. R =
Rainfall, I = Irrigation, Irrigation rate was 2 inches of water per
24 hours. Date Inches of water Rainfall or Irrigation December 11
2.21 R December 12 0.52 R December 15 1.20 R December 20 0.75 R
February 8 1.06 R March 11 0.15 R April 7 0.51 R May 1 3.5 I May 15
3.0 I May 27 3.0 I June 7 3.0 I June 20 2.5 I
Results:
[0194] At 19 days after treatment (DAT), all herbicide treatment
plots showed 100% weed control, and only the untreated control
(UTC) showed any weed population.
[0195] At 43 DAT, all herbicide treatment plots showed 100% weed
control. Chickweed and Sowthistle were observed germinating in the
UTC.
[0196] At 88 DAT, field bindweed and annual sowthistle were
observed germinating in a plot of the Roundup plus glufosinate
ammonium plot and an untreated control plot. All other treatment
plots were providing weed control/suppression at >95%.
[0197] At 129 DAT, scattered populations of Malva, bindweed,
spotted spurge, sowthistle and hairy fleabane were beginning to
emerge in certain plots. Some weeds were observed in the plots
where the lower rates of fluridone and flumioxazin were applied.
Other treatments showed greater than about 90 percent
control/suppression.
[0198] At 159 DAT, lamb squarter, bindweed, spurge and knotweed
were observed in the plots where fluridone was applied at lower
rates.
[0199] These data show that walnut trees were tolerant to fluridone
with no visual leaf symptoms or retarded tree growth with weed
control and/or weed suppression.
Example 12
Efficacy and Safety to Stone Fruit Crops
Materials and Methods:
[0200] A field trial was conducted in northern California for weed
control and safety in one peach orchand and two almond orchards.
The herbicide applications were made between January and February
when the tree crops were dormant.
Results:
[0201] Arbuckle, Calif.; Almond orchard:
[0202] Weed control and crop safety were evaluated at approximately
1, 2, and 3 months after treatment. Weed pressure was fairly heavy,
and uniform over the trial site. Populations of hare barley, annual
sowthistle, black medic, chickweed, and redstem filaree were
recorded.
[0203] Treatment with fluridone provided excellent weed control,
nearly 100% control of all weeds present. Fluridone appeared safe
to nonpareil almond, and no phytotoxicity symptoms were observed in
the plots at any application rates.
[0204] UC Davis, Calif.; Almond Orchard:
[0205] Weed control and crop safety were evaluated approximately 1,
2, 3, 4, and 5 months after treatment with fluridone. All treatment
rates provided good weed control. Fluridone was safe to nonpareil
almond, and no phytotoxicity symptoms were observed.
[0206] Marysville, Calif.; Peach Orchard.:
[0207] Crop safety was evaluated approximately 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5
months after treatment with fluridone. No phytotoxicitity symptoms
were observed in the plots treated with fluridone.
[0208] The uses of the terms "a" and "an" and "the" and similar
references in the context of describing the invention (especially
in the context of the following claims) are to be construed to
cover both the singular and the plural unless otherwise indicated
herein or clearly contradicted by context. Recitation of ranges of
values herein are merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of
referring individually to each separate value falling within the
range, unless otherwise indicated herein, and each separate value
is incorporated into the specification as if it were individually
recited herein. All methods described herein can be performed in
any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise
clearly contradicted by context. The use of any and all examples,
or exemplary language (e.g., "such as") provided herein, is
intended merely to better illuminate the invention and does not
pose a limitation on the scope of the invention unless otherwise
claimed. No language in the specification should be construed as
indicating any non-claimed element as essential to the practice of
the invention.
[0209] While the invention has been illustrated and described in
detail in the drawings and the foregoing description, the same is
to be considered as illustrative and not restrictive in character,
it being understood that only the preferred embodiment has been
shown and described and that all changes and modifications that
come within the spirit of the invention are desired to be
protected. In addition, all references cited herein are indicative
of the level of skill in the art and are hereby incorporated by
reference in their entirety.
* * * * *