CHLORIMURON-ETHYL IN CONVENTIONAL AND TRANSGENIC SOYBEAN CULTIVARS UNDER WATER DEFICIT STRESS

Gonçalves, Clebson Gomes; Silva Junior, Antonio Carlos da; Scarano, Maynumi; Pereira, Maria Renata Rocha; Martins, Dagoberto

doi:10.1590/1983-21252018v31n405rc

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

AGRONOMIA • Rev. Caatinga 31 (04) • Oct-Dec 2018 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252018v31n405rc copy

CHLORIMURON-ETHYL IN CONVENTIONAL AND TRANSGENIC SOYBEAN CULTIVARS UNDER WATER DEFICIT STRESS

PULVERIZAÇÃO DE CHLORIMURON-ETHYL EM CULTIVARES DE SOJA CONVENCIONAL E TRANSGÊNICA SOB DIFERENTES MANEJOS HÍDRICOS

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Water deficit is a limiting factor for the soybean yield; it triggers different physiological and anatomical adaptations that have deleterious effects on the plants and can affect the selectivity of herbicides, causing production losses. In this context, the objective of this work was to evaluate the action of the chlorimuron-ethyl herbicide when applied at different stages of soybean plants, using conventional and transgenic cultivars, and different soil water potentials. A rate of 20 g ha^-1 of the chlorimuron-ethyl herbicide was applied to two soybean cultivars (MG/BR46-Conquista - conventional, and BRS-Valiosa-RR - transgenic) at two phenological stages (V2 - first fully expanded trifoliate leaves, and V4 - third fully expanded trifoliate leaves), using three soil water potentials (-0.03 MPa, -0.07 MPa, and -0.5 MPa). Phytotoxicity, and plant height were evaluated at 3, 7, 14, and 21 days after the herbicide application. The shoot dry weight, root dry weight, and root system nodulation were evaluated. The soybean plants had lower phytotoxicity when subjected to application of chlorimuron-ethyl under water deficit conditions. The use of chlorimuron-ethyl reduced the growth and biomass of soybean plants and affected the plants' root system nodulation. The transgenic cultivar (BRS-Valiosa-RR) presented better performance when subjected to a moderate water deficit (-0.07 MPa), which contributes to biological nitrogen fixation.

Keywords:
Irrigation; ALS Inhibiting herbicide; Phytotoxicity; Glycine max; Selectivity.

Condition	Phytotoxicity (%)
	3 DAA		7 DAA		14 DAA		21 DAA
	Cultivar (C)
Conventional	4.08 b		5.58 b		6.75 a		3.33 a
Transgenic	5.50 a		7.50 a		4.33 b		1.50 b
	Water potential (MPa)
-0.03	8.00 a		10.00 a		9.63 a		4.13 a
-0.07	4.38 b		7.00 b		4.75 b		2.88 b
-0.5	2.00 c		2.63 c		2.25 c		0.25 c
Interaction	Cultivar
Water potential	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr
-0.03	-	-	-	-	12.00 aA	7.25 aB	5.25 aA	3.00 aB
-0.07	-	-	-	-	6.00 bA	3.50 bB	4.50 aA	1.25 bB
-0.5	-	-	-	-	2.25 cA	2.25 bA	0.25 bA	0.25 bA
F Cultivar (C)	5.67*		10.65**		36.57**		30.25**
Water potential (W)	34.37**		53.17**		117.43**		46.94**
(C) x (W)	2.72^ns		2.56^ns		11.78**		8.31**
CV (%)	30.4		22		17.7		33.8
LSD (C)	1.25		1.23		0.84		0.7
LSD (W)	1.86		1.84		1.25		1.04
LSD Interaction (C)	-		-		1.45		1.21
LSD Interaction (W)	-		-		1.77		1.47

Condition	Phytotoxicity (%)
	3 DAA		7 DAA		14 DAA		21 DAA
	Cultivar (C)
Conventional	5.83 a		12.17 a		10.33 a		5.00 b
Transgenic	4.17 b		12.33 a		11.33 a		6.50 a
	Water potential (MPa)
-0.03	9.13 a		16.63 a		18.38 a		11.00 a
-0.07	4.88 b		13.25 b		11.38 b		5.25 b
-0.5	1.00 c		6.88 c		2.75 c		1.00 c
Interaction	Cultivar
Water potential	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr
-0.03	-	-	-	-	18.50 aA	18.25 aA	11.00 aA	11.00 aA
-0.07	-	-	-	-	9.00 bB	13.75 bA	3.00 bB	7.50 bA
-0.5	-	-	-	-	3.50 cA	2.00 cA	1.00 cA	1.00 cA
F Cultivar (C)	5.94*		0.03^ns		1.76^ns		5.57*
Water potential (W)	47.09**		40.58**		143.43**		98.03**
(C) x (W)	1.17^ns		1.15^ns		6.40**		6.57**
CV (%)	33.5		17.9		17.1		24.9
LSD (C)	1.44		1.88		1.58		1.23
LSD (W)	2.14		2.81		2.36		1.83
LSD Interaction (C)	-		-		2.74		2.13
LSD Interaction (W)	-		-		3.34		2.59

Condition	Plant Height (cm)
	3 DAA	7 DAA	14 DAA	21 DAA
	Cultivar (C)
Conventional	10.52 a	11.79 a	14.85 a	17.27 a
Transgenic	10.38 a	11.92 a	15.23 a	17.92 a
	Water potential (MPa)
-0.03	11.22 a	13.13 a	18.03 a	22.72 a
-0.07	10.34 b	12.16 b	15.34 b	17.59 b
-0.5	9.78 b	10.28 c	11.75 c	12.47 c
	Herbicide Application (H)
Yes	10.27 a	11.67 a	14.63 b	16.94 b
No	10.63 a	12.04 a	15.46 a	18.25 a
F Cultivar (C)	0.37^ns	0.20^ns	1.17^ns	2.11^ns
Water potential (W)	12.18^**	35.67**	110.02^**	176.82**
Herbicide Application (H)	2.18^ns	1.80^ns	5.77*	8.70**
(C) x (W)	0.76^ns	0.05^ns	1.05^ns	1.09^ns
(C) x (H)	2.18^ns	1.80^ns	0.13^ns	1.16^ns
(W) x (H)	2.29^ns	1.22^ns	0.72^ns	2.63^ns
(C) x (W) x (H)	2.21^ns	1.02^ns	1.31^ns	0.14^ns
CV (%)	8	8.2	8	8.8
LSD (C)/(H)	0.49	0.57	0.7	0.9
LSD (W)	0.72	0.84	1.04	1.33

Condition	Plant Height (cm)
	3 DAA	7 DAA	14 DAA	21 DAA
	Cultivar
Conventional	15.73 b	17.94 a	21.56 a	27.13 a
Transgenic	16.71 a	18.85 a	22.10 a	27.65 a
	Water potential (MPa)
-0.03	18.91 a	21.50 a	26.00 a	33.41 a
-0.07	16.41 b	19.16 b	23.13 b	28.63 b
-0.5	13.34 c	14.93 c	16.38 c	20.13 c
	Herbicide Application
Yes	15.79 a	17.42 b	20.13 b	24.59 b
No	16.65 a	19.28 a	23.54 a	30.19 a
F Cultivar (C)	4.36*	2.92^ns	0.56^ns	0.54^ns
Water potential (W)	47.03**	58.18**	62.32**	122.68**
Herbicide Application (H)	3.31^ns	13.31**	22.35**	63.68**
(C) x (W)	0.39^ns	0.46^ns	0.44^ns	2.09^ns
(C) x (H)	0.05^ns	0.02^ns	1.20^ns	0.46^ns
(W) x (H)	1.52^ns	4.27*	8.78**	17.56**
(C) x (W) x (H)	0.48^ns	0.46^ns	1.65^ns	2.61^ns
CV (%)	10	8.2	11.5	8.9
LSD (C)/(H)	0.95	1.09	1.47	1.42
LSD (W)	1.40	1.61	2.16	2.10

Interaction	Plant Height (cm)
	3 DAA		7 DAA		14 DAA		21 DAA
Water potential	Herbicide Application
	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
-0.03	-	-	19.50 aB	23.50 aA	22.19 aB	29.81 aA	27.81 aB	39.00 aA
-0.07	-	-	19.06 aA	19.25 bA	22.13 aA	24.13 bA	26.44 aB	30.81 bA
-0.5	-	-	13.69 bA	15.38 cA	16.06 bA	16.69 cA	19.51 bA	20.75 cA
LSD (Row)	-		1.89		2.54		2.46
LSD (Column)	-		2.27		3.06		2.96

Condition	Phenological stage
	V2		V4
	SDW (g)	RDW (g)	SDW (g)	RDW (g)
	Cultivar (C)
Conventional	0.86 a	0.39 a	2.45 b	1.21 a
Transgenic	0.91 a	0.39 a	2.96 a	1.02 b
	Water potential (MPa) (W)
-0.03	1.42 a	0.58 a	4.66 a	2.09 a
-0.07	0.85 b	0.40 b	2.60 b	0.92 b
-0.5	0.38 c	0.19 c	0.86 c	0.34 c
	Herbicide Application (H)
Yes	0.78 b	0.35 b	2.49 b	2.84 b
No	0.99 a	0.43 a	2.92 a	1.39 a
F Cultivar (C)	0.31^ns	0.01^ns	23.36**	9.45**
Water potential (W)	54.85**	62.04**	434.84**	275.80**
Herbicide Application (H)	7.21*	7.63**	16.66**	78.56**
(C) x (W)	0.30^ns	0.31^ns	4.94*	15.78**
(C) x (H)	2.04^ns	1.07^ns	2.73^ns	32.49**
(W) x (H)	3.23^ns	3.48*	6.75**	48.50**
(C) x (W) x (H)	0.11^ns	0.03^ns	1.34^ns	19.01**
CV (%)	31.7	25.6	13.5	19.3
LSD (C)/(H)	0.16	0.06	0.21	0.13
LSD (W)	0.24	0.09	0.31	0.19

Interaction	Phenological stage
	V2				V4
	SDW (g)		RDW (g)		SDW (g)		RDW (g)
	Cultivar
Water potential (MPa)	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr
-0.03	-	-	-	-	4.28 aB	5.04 aA	2.43 aA	1.75 aB
-0.07	-	-	-	-	2.23 bB	2.96 bA	0.86 bA	0.99 bA
-0.5	-	-	-	-	0.84 cA	0.88 cA	0.35 cA	0.32 cA
LSD (Row)	-		-		0.45		0.26
LSD (Column)	-		-		0.37		0.22
Cultivar	Herbicide Application
	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
Conventional	-	-	-	-	-	-	0.76 aB	1.66 aA
Transgenic	-	-	-	-	-	-	0.92 aB	1.12 bA
LSD (Row)/(Column)							0.18
Water potential	Herbicide Application
	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
-0.03	-	-	0.49 aB	0.68 aA	4.17 aB	5.14 aA	1.39 aB	2.80 aA
-0.07	-	-	0.38 aA	0.43 bA	2.48bA	2.71 bA	0.81 bB	1.04 bA
-0.5	-	-	0.18 bA	0.19 cA	0.82 cA	0.91 cA	0.33 cA	0.35 cA
LSD (Row)	-		0.102		0.37		0.22
LSD (Column)	-		0.122		0.45		0.26

Condition	Phenological stage
	V2		V4
	NN	NDW (g)	NN	NDW (g)
	Cultivar
Conventional	0.83 a	0.019 a	4.67 b	0.22 b
Transgenic	0.53 b	0.009 b	5.25 a	0.25 a
	Water potential (MPa)
-0.03	2.04 a	0.042 a	9.27 a	0.52 a
-0.07	0.00 b	0.00 b	3.78 b	0.14 b
-0.5	0.00 b	0.00 b	1.83 c	0.04 c
	Herbicide Application
Yes	0.12 b	0.003 b	3.99 b	0.17 b
No	1.24 a	0.025 a	5.92 a	0.30 a
F Cultivar (C)	5.40*	13.91**	4.67*	7.90**
Water potential (W)	115.12**	97.38**	276.63**	497.13**
Herbicide Application (H)	78.64**	62.26**	52.18**	85.13**
(C) x (W)	5.40**	13.91**	3.29*	7.42**
(C) x (H)	5.40*	13.91**	1.45^ns	1.75^ns
(W) x (H)	78.64**	62.26**	11.87**	33.85**
(C) x (W) x (H)	5.40**	13.91	3.58*	4.80*
CV (%)	64.6	71.3	18.7	19.5
LSD (C)/(H)	0.26	0.006	0.54	0.03
LSD (W)	0.38	0.009	0.80	0.04

Interaction	Phenological stage
	V2				V4
	NN		NDW (g)		NM		NDW (g)
	Cultivar
Water potential (MPa)	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr	Co	Tr
-0.03	2.48 aA	1.60 aB	0.06 aA	0.03 aB	9.23 aA	9.30 aA	0.52 aA	0.52 aA
-0.07	0.00 bA	0.00 bA	0.00 bA	0.00 bA	3.00 bB	4.55 bA	0.09 bB	0.20 bA
-0.5	0.00 bA	0.00 bA	0.00 bA	0.00 bA	1.78 cA	1.88 cA	0.04bA	0.04 cA
LSD (Row)	0.54		0.01		1.13		0.06
LSD (Column)	0.45		0.01		0.94		0.05
Cultivar	Herbicide Application
	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
Conventional	0.12 aB	1.54 aA	0.003 aB	0.04 aA	-	-	-
Transgenic	0.12 aB	0.95 bA	0.003 aB	0.01 bA	-	-	-
LSD (Row)/(Column)	0.36		0.008		-		-
Water potential	Herbicide Application
	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
-0.03	0.35 aB	3.72 aA	0.008 aB	0.076 aA	7.76 aB	10.77 aA	0.39 aB	0.66 aA
-0.07	0.00 aA	0.00 bA	0.00 aA	0.00 bA	2.44 bB	5.12 bA	0.09 bB	0.19 bA
-0.5	0.00 aA	0.00bA	0.00 aA	0.00 bA	1.78 bA	1.88 cA	0.04 cA	0.04 cA
LSD (Row)	0.45		0.01		0.94		0.046
LSD (Column)	0.54		0.01		1.13		0.056

Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido Avenida Francisco Mota, número 572, Bairro Presidente Costa e Silva, Cep: 5962-5900, Telefone: 55 (84) 3317-8297 - Mossoró - RN - Brazil
E-mail: caatinga@ufersa.edu.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author.