Effect of dose and application site on quinclorac absorption by barnyardgrass biotypes

• Autor(a) principal: Concenço,G.
• Data de Publicação: 2009
• Outros Autores: Silva,A.F., Ferreira,E.A., Galon,L., Noldin,J.A., Aspiazú,I., Ferreira,F.A., Silva,A.A.
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Planta daninha (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-83582009000300015
• topic: herbicide; resistance mechanism; Echinochloa crusgalli

This work aimed to evaluate the uptake and translocation of quinclorac in function of application sites (shoot or roots) by Echinochloa crusgalli biotypes resistant and susceptible to this herbicide. The treatments consisted of quinclorac doses (0; 0.5; 1; 2; 4; 16 and 64 ppm), applied on the shoot or roots of seedlings of barnyardgrass biotypes. The experimental units consisted of plastic cups containing 250 cm³ of sand. The treatments were applied 10 days after emergence, when barnyardgrass plants reached a 2- to 3- leaf growth stage. The barnyardgrass biotypes were irrigated with nutritive solution weekly and maintained for 40 days after emergence, when length, fresh and dry matter of shoot and roots were evaluated. Variance analysis was carried out using the F test at 5% probability, and in case of significance, a non-linear regression analysis was also carried out using a three-parameter logistic model. In the susceptible biotype, quinclorac was more absorbed by the roots than by the shoot. Comparing dry mass production of the different plant parts of the susceptible biotype per application site, it was verified that quinclorac action is higher when applied to the plant roots. However, for the resistant biotype, it was not possible to determine the dose causing 50% reduction in dry mass accumulation (GR50) and in the resistance index (RI) between both biotypes, due to its high resistance to quinclorac (128 times the recommended dosage). The results showed that quinclorac resistance by the evaluated biotype is not due to differences in the absorption site, strongly suggesting that the resistance acquired by the biotype may result from alteration in the target site.