Table 1. Planting, treatment, and harvest dates for group IV, V, and VI soybean cultivars sprayed with theoretical drift rates of quinclorac and triclopyr in 1990, 1991, and 1992.

Cultivar

Maturity group

Planting date

Growth stage

Treatment date

Days from planting

Harvest date

Avery

IV

04-17-90

V1

05-07-90

20

09-17-90

V5

05-30-90

43

R1

06-07-90

51

04-19-91

V1

05-01-91

12

09-11-91

V5

05-22-91

33

R1

06-05-91

47

04-16-92

V1

05-04-92

16

09-08-92

V5

05-22-92

36

R1

06-04-92

49

Epps

V

05-02-90

V1

05-17-90

15

10-02-90

V5

06-07-90

40

R1

06-24-90

53

05-16-91

V1

05-29-91

13

10-03-91

V5

06-18-91

33

R1

07-09-91

47

05-28-92

V1

06-11-92

14

10-07-92

V5

06-24-92

27

R1

07-17-92

50

TV 626

VI

05-02-90

V1

05-17-90

15

10-25-90

V5

06-07-90

40

R1

07-10-90

69

05-16-91

V1

05-29-91

13

10-22-91

V5

06-18-91

33

R1

07-18-91

56

05-28-92

V1

06-11-92

14

10-20-92

V5

06-24-92

27

R1

07-21-92

54

Table 2. Percent visible injury to 'Avery' soybean in response to theoretical drift rates of quinclorac applied at the V1, V5, and R1 growth stages in 1990, 1991, and 1992.a

Treatment

Visible injury 2 WAT

Visible injury 5 WAT

Stageb

Rate

1990

1991

1992

1990

1991

1992

 

lb ai/A

--------------------------------------------- % -----------------------------------------

Untreated

 
0     
 0 g 
 0 f 
 0 g 
 0 c 
 0 b 
 0 d

V1

 
0.0117
 
27 de
 
 8 ef
 
13 ef
 
 2 c 
 0 b 
 0 d 
0.0234
 
35 bc
 
15 e 
17 de
 
 0 c 
 0 b 
 0 d 
0.0469
 
38 b 
25 d 
20 d 
 5 c 
 0 b 
 0 d

V5

 
0.0117
 
 7 f 
28 cd
 
20 d 
 0 c 
 0 b 
 0 cd
 
0.0234
 
29 cd
 
41 ab
 
35 c 
 0 c 
 3 b 
 4 bc
 
0.0469
 
38 b 
47 a 
53 a 
 0 c 
14 a 
 8 a

R1

 
0.0117
 
21 e 
 0 f 
11 f 
15 b 
 3 b 
15 ab
 
0.0234
 
33 bc
 
28 cd
 
21 d 
17 b 
 2 b 
15 a 
0.0469
 
46 a 
35 bc
 
40 b 
26 a 
 2 b 
15 a
aMeans within a column followed by the same letter(s) do not differ at P = 0.05 according to DMRT.
bV1 = unifoliate; V5 = 4 trifoliolates; R1 = bloom.

Table 3. Percent visible injury to 'Epps' soybean in response to theoretical drift rates of quinclorac applied at the V1, V5, and R1 growth stages in 1990, 1991, and 1992.a

Treatment

Visible injury 2 WAT

Visible injury 5 WAT

Stageb

Rate

1990

1991

1992

1990

1991

1992

 

lb ai/A

--------------------------------------------- % -----------------------------------------

Untreated

 
0     
 0 c  
 0 e  
 0 f  
 0 a  
 0 f  
 0 b

V1

 
0.0117
 
 0 c  
 6 de 
14 cde
 
 0 a  
 0 f  
 0 b  
0.0234
 
 0 c  
16 cd 
12 def
 
 0 a  
 3 f  
 0 b  
0.0469
 
 5 c  
20 c  
24 a-d
 
 0 a  
 6 ef 
 3 b

V5

 
0.0117
 
 3 c  
26 bc 
23 a-e
 
 2 a  
13 de 
 8 a  
0.0234
 
 7 c  
34 b  
16 b-e
 
 3 a  
16 cd 
10 a  
0.0469
 
20 b  
48 a  
35 a  
 8 a  
23 bc 
11 a

R1

 
0.0117
 
18 b  
35 b  
10 ef 
11 a  
21 c  
 0 b  
0.0234
 
23 b  
33 b  
26 abc
 
 8 a  
30 ab 
 9 a  
0.0469
 
45 a  
46 a  
28 ab 
11 a  
33 a  
11 a
aMeans within a column followed by the same letter(s) do not differ at P = 0.05 according to DMRT.
bV1 = unifoliate; V5 = 4 trifoliolates; R1 = bloom.

Table 4. Percent visible injury to 'TV 626' soybean in response to theoretical drift rates of quinclorac applied at the V1, V5, and R1 growth stages in 1990, 1991, and 1992.a

Treatment

Visible injury 2 WAT

Visible injury 5 WAT

Stageb

Rate

1990

1991

1992

1990

1991

1992

 

lb ai/A

--------------------------------------------- % -----------------------------------------

Untreated

 
0     
 0 c  
 0 f  
 0 f  
 0 d  
 0 c  
 0 b

V1

 
0.0117
 
 0 c  
 1 ef 
11 c-f
 
 0 d  
 0 c  
 4 b  
0.0234
 
 0 c  
 6 def
 
 8 ef 
 0 d  
 0 c  
 0 b  
0.0469
 
 3 c  
11 cd 
20 bcd
 
 0 d  
 0 c  
10 ab

V5

 
0.0117
 
34 a  
18 c  
20 bcd
 
 8 bc 
 1 bc 
 9 ab 
0.0234
 
25 ab 
30 b  
23 abc
 
10 bc 
 4 ab 
18 a  
0.0469
 
34 a  
43 a  
29 ab 
16 a  
 6 a  
18 a

R1

 
0.0117
 
 5 c  
 9 de 
11 c-f
 
 1 d  
 0 c  
 0 b  
0.0234
 
12 bc 
 9 de  
16 cde
 
 5 cd 
 1 c  
 0 b  
0.0469
 
21 ab 
10 cd 
34 a  
12 ab 
 4 ab 
10 ab
aMeans within a column followed by the same letter(s) do not differ at P = 0.05 according to DMRT.
bV1 = unifoliate; V5 = 4 trifoliolates; R1 = bloom.

Table 5. Percent visible injury to 'Avery' soybean in response to theoretical drift rates of triclopyr applied at the V1, V5, and R1 growth stages in 1990, 1991, and 1992.a

Treatment

Visible injury 2 WAT

Visible injury 5 WAT

Stageb

Rate

1990

1991

1992

1990

1991

1992

 

lb ai/A

--------------------------------------------- % -----------------------------------------

Untreated

 
0     
 0 f  
 0 e  
 0 f  
 0 e  
 0 d  
 0 g

V1

 
0.0117
 
18 e  
 8 de 
 1 f  
 0 e  
 5 d  
 0 g  
0.0234
 
42 c  
14 d 
 5 ef 
 0 e  
 0 d  
 0 g  
0.0469
 
58 b  
34 c  
13 de 
27 bc  
19 bc  
 8 ef

V5

 
0.0117
 
 0 f  
36 c  
20 d  
 0 e  
 7 cd 
 1 fg 
0.0234
 
19 e  
55 b  
42 c  
 4 e  
22 b  
10 e  
0.0469
 
58 b  
70 a  
49 c  
23 c  
56 a  
44 c

R1

 
0.0117
 
33 d  
29 c  
45 c  
14 d  
 4 d  
30 d  
0.0234
 
58 b  
55 b  
61 b  
29 b  
18 bc 
55 b  
0.0469
 
73 a  
73 a  
75 a  
53 a  
48 a  
73 a
aMeans within a column followed by the same letter(s) do not differ at P = 0.05 according to DMRT.
bV1 = unifoliate; V5 = 4 trifoliolates; R1 = bloom.

Table 6. Percent visible injury to 'Epps' soybean in response to theoretical drift rates of triclopyr applied at the V1, V5, and R1 growth stages in 1990, 1991, and 1992.a

Treatment

Visible injury 2 WAT

Visible injury 5 WAT

Stageb

Rate

1990

1991

1992

1990

1991

1992

 

lb ai/A

--------------------------------------------- % -----------------------------------------

Untreated

 
0     
 0 b  
 0 g  
 0 g  
 0 c  
 0 e  
 0 e

V1

 
0.0117
 
10 b  
 4 g 
 0 g  
 1 c  
 3 de 
 0 e  
0.0234
 
 8 b  
10 fg 
15 f  
 4 bc 
 4 de  
 1 e  
0.0469
 
29 a  
41 e  
44 d  
18 a  
21 c  
23 b

V5

 
0.0117
 
 2 b  
19 f  
46 cd 
 0 c  
 1 e  
14 cd 
0.0234
 
 0 b  
45 de 
55 bc 
 3 bc 
 9 d  
21 bc 
0.0469
 
 0 b  
65 b  
51 bcd
 
 5 bc 
21 c  
23 b

R1

 
0.0117
 
 5 b  
52 cd 
33 e  
 1 c  
27 c  
 6 de 
0.0234
 
25 a  
58 bc 
58 b  
 5 bc 
45 b  
25 b  
0.0469
 
24 a  
78 a  
73 a  
11 ab 
66 a  
46 a
aMeans within a column followed by the same letter(s) do not differ at P = 0.05 according to DMRT.
bV1 = unifoliate; V5 = 4 trifoliolates; R1 = bloom.

Table 7. Percent visible injury to 'TV 626' soybean in response to theoretical drift rates of triclopyr applied at the V1, V5, and R1 growth stages in 1990, 1991, and 1992.a

Treatment

Visible injury 2 WAT

Visible injury 5 WAT

Stageb

Rate

1990

1991

1992

1990

1991

1992

 

lb ai/A

--------------------------------------------- % -----------------------------------------

Untreated

 
0     
 0 e  
 0 d  
 0 f  
 0 e  
 0 b  
 0 d

V1

 
0.0117
 
 0 e  
 3 d  
 0 f  
 0 e  
 0 b  
 0 d  
0.0234
 
 0 e  
13 cd 
 6 f  
 0 e  
14 ab 
 0 d  
0.0469
 
 0 e  
26 bc 
20 e  
 0 e  
11 ab 
14 bc

V5

 
0.0117
 
15 cd 
15 cd 
34 cd 
 2 de 
 1 b  
10 cd 
0.0234
 
33 b  
38 b  
49 b  
 9 cd 
 5 ab 
38 a  
0.0469
 
57 a  
56 a  
44 bc 
22 b  
20 ab 
43 a

R1

 
0.0117
 
 4 e  
11 cd 
29 de 
 3 de 
 4 b  
 1 d  
0.0234
 
11 d  
26 bc 
43 bc 
14 bc 
13 ab 
11 cd 
0.0469
 
19 c  
38 b  
64 a  
40 a  
26 a  
25 b
aMeans within a column followed by the same letter(s) do not differ at P = 0.05 according to DMRT.
bV1 = unifoliate; V5 = 4 trifoliolates; R1 = bloom.