Not the Time to Let Up on Palmer (York)

— Written By Alan York and last updated by
en Español / em Português

El inglés es el idioma de control de esta página. En la medida en que haya algún conflicto entre la traducción al inglés y la traducción, el inglés prevalece.

Al hacer clic en el enlace de traducción se activa un servicio de traducción gratuito para convertir la página al español. Al igual que con cualquier traducción por Internet, la conversión no es sensible al contexto y puede que no traduzca el texto en su significado original. NC State Extension no garantiza la exactitud del texto traducido. Por favor, tenga en cuenta que algunas aplicaciones y/o servicios pueden no funcionar como se espera cuando se traducen.


Inglês é o idioma de controle desta página. Na medida que haja algum conflito entre o texto original em Inglês e a tradução, o Inglês prevalece.

Ao clicar no link de tradução, um serviço gratuito de tradução será ativado para converter a página para o Português. Como em qualquer tradução pela internet, a conversão não é sensivel ao contexto e pode não ocorrer a tradução para o significado orginal. O serviço de Extensão da Carolina do Norte (NC State Extension) não garante a exatidão do texto traduzido. Por favor, observe que algumas funções ou serviços podem não funcionar como esperado após a tradução.


English is the controlling language of this page. To the extent there is any conflict between the English text and the translation, English controls.

Clicking on the translation link activates a free translation service to convert the page to Spanish. As with any Internet translation, the conversion is not context-sensitive and may not translate the text to its original meaning. NC State Extension does not guarantee the accuracy of the translated text. Please note that some applications and/or services may not function as expected when translated.

Collapse ▲

Nine years ago, York wrote that glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth had the potential to become the most serious problem facing cotton producers since the boll weevil (2007 Cotton Information). That prophetic prediction has certainly come to pass.

By necessity, not choice, growers have stepped up to the plate and adopted resistance management strategies that have been promoted since discovery of glyphosate resistance in Palmer amaranth in 2005. They have made significant progress in getting resistant Palmer amaranth under control, but it has not been easy nor economical. The resistant weed has significantly increased complexity of weed management and increased herbicide input costs by $30 to $65 per acre. And that does not include the hand-weeding costs that many growers have incurred.

One of the cornerstones in programs to manage resistant Palmer amaranth has been reduction in the seed bank. This weed is a prolific seed producer; one-half million seed per plant is common. In some research during 2014 and 2015, we occasionally found plants growing in cotton that produced over one million seed. Obviously, with this magnitude of seed production, we are going backwards anytime we let a few escapes mature.

To say the least, 2015 was a less than stellar year for cotton production. Overall, we had a good crop until the fall rains set in. Yields and grades deteriorated quickly. So, we are coming out of a bad production year and starting a new year with disappointing price prospects. Growers need to reduce production costs wherever possible, and with the current costs of weed management, that is a logical place for growers to try to trim. For most growers, however, there is not much they can do to reduce weed management costs without jeopardizing the investments in previous years to reduce the seed bank.

The table below shows what we promote to manage glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and to avoid selection for further resistance. Yes, the programs are expensive, but that is what it takes to handle the problem.

Regardless of the tillage system, we encourage growers to start the season clean. Small, recently emerged Palmer is hard to see from the tractor cab or pickup window. Nevertheless, the tiny weeds present at planting will quickly become a problem. In no-till or strip-till, paraquat included with the PRE herbicide is generally a good idea.

We recommend two, or even three, herbicide active ingredients applied PRE. Each active ingredient should have activity on Palmer amaranth and each active ingredient should have a different mode of action. The mode of action of all herbicides likely to be used in cotton can be found beginning on page 106 in the 2016 Cotton Information.

The table below suggests the first POST application be made 14 days after planting. Timing of that application may be adjusted; obviously, one is not likely to make an application if no weeds are present. However, weeds escaping the PRE herbicide are often at the optimum stage to treat by 14 days after planting. It is better to be too early than too late. By the same token, timing of the second POST application may be adjusted, but target Palmer amaranth no larger than 3 inches.

A layby directed herbicide is recommended in the table below. We acknowledge that layby applications are slow and tedious. Many growers, especially once they get the Palmer amaranth seed bank reduced, have been able to forego the layby application. However, for moderate to heavy infestations, we still feel the layby application has a place. It not only burns down emerged weeds, but also gives additional residual control. In the absence of a layby, it becomes more important to include a residual herbicide in both POST applications.

Management Programs for Palmer Amaranth in Cotton 2016

Posted on Apr 20, 2016
Was the information on this page helpful? Yes check No close
Scannable QR Code to Access Electronic Version