Sensitivity of common bean plants to the herbicide dicamba applied at pre-sowing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5965/22381171e27864Keywords:
Auxin herbicides, Phytotoxicity, Residual activity, BurndownAbstract
Dicamba is an herbicide with residual activity in the soil and may affect crops sown after its application, mainly eudicotyledon species, as common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Thus, this work was developed with the objective of evaluating the sensitivity of common bean plants (Carioca cultivar BRS Estilo) to the herbicide dicamba applied at pre-sowing, based on different herbicide rates and different intervals between application and sowing. Three experiments were carried out, two under greenhouse and one under field (experimental beds) conditions. One of the greenhouse experiments was carried out to assess the correlation between different dicamba rates (720, 480, 240, 120, and 60 g ha-1) and the sensitivity of common bean plants, with checkplots without herbicide. The other two experiments, one in greenhouse and other in field conditions, were carried out to evaluate the different intervals between dicamba application and common bean sowing. The evaluated intervals were 28, 21, 14, 7 and zero days, including checkplots without herbicide. Considering these intervals, lower symptoms were found under greenhouse conditions. In this environment, 14 days were sufficient to ensure the emergence and initial development of common bean plants. In the field experiment, 28 days were needed for a satisfactory emergence and initial development of common bean plants. On average, 14 days were sufficient for dissipation of more than 90% of the herbicide applied. A 28-day interval after dicamba application is recommended for a safe sowing of common bean crops.
Downloads
References
AGUIAR ACM et al. 2020. Seleção de espécies indicadoras de resíduos de dicamba no solo. Agrarian 13: 187-194.
AGUIAR ACM et al. 2023. Sorption, leaching, and degradation of dicamba in two Brazilian soils: a study into soil layers. Crop Protection 174: 106393.
ALVARENGA CB et al. 2023. Normalized difference vegetation index for desiccation evaluation with glyphosate + 2,4-D in magnetized spray solution. Brazilian Journal of Biology 83: e246579.
BARARPOUR T & TSENG TM. 2023. Effect of low rate of dicamba on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) at different growth stages. Journal of Agricultural Science 15: 9-19.
BORNELLI BR et al. 2022. Herbicide mixtures for post-emergence control of horseweed in coffee interrow. Revista Agrogeoambiental 14: e20221656.
BRAZ GBP et al. 2017. Sumatran fleabane (Conyza sumatrensis) control in no-tillage soybean with diclosulam plus halauxifen-methyl. Weed Tecnology 31: 1-9.
CANTU RM et al. 2021. Herbicide alternative for Conyza sumatrensis control in pre-planting in no-till soybeans. Advances in Weed Science 39: e2021000025.
CARVALHO SJP et al. 2010. Adição simultânea de sulfato de amônio e ureia à calda de pulverização do herbicida glyphosate. Planta Daninha 28: 575-584.
CARVALHO SJP et al. 2022. Fitotoxicidade de subdoses do herbicida dicamba quando aplicado em pré-emergência da cultura da soja não-tolerante. Revista de Ciências Agroveterinárias 21: 85-95.
CARVALHO SJP et al. 2023. Susceptibility of non-tolerant soybean to low rates of dicamba. Weed Control Journal 22: e202300824.
CASSOL M et al. 2019. Efficiency of isolated and associated herbicides to control glyphosate-resistant sourgrass. Planta Daninha 37: e019190671.
COMFORT SD et al. 1992. Degradation and transport of dicamba in clay soil. Journal of Environmental Quality 21: 653-658.
CORREIA NM & DURIGAN JC. 2009. Manejo químico de plantas adultas de Digitaria insularis com glyphosate isolado e em mistura com chlorimuron-ethyl ou quizalofop-p-tefuril em área de plantio direto. Bragantia 68: 689-697.
CUNHA JPAR et al. 2022. Use of ultra coarse droplets at different spray volumes to control weeds with dicamba and glyphosate herbicides. Engenharia Agrícola 42: e20220004.
FRIESEN HA. 1965. The movement and persistence of dicamba in soil. Weeds 13: 30-33.
GAZZIERO DLP et al. 2015. Manual de identificação de plantas daninhas da cultura da soja. 2. ed. Londrina: Embrapa Soja.
GILREATH JP et al. 2006. Influence of soil fumigation on 2,4-D and dicamba carryover in fresh market tomato. Crop Protection 25: 1095-1100.
GROVER R. 1977. Mobility of dicamba, picloram and 2,4-D in soil colums. Weed Science 25: 159-162.
HEAP IM. 2024. International survey of herbicide-resistant weeds. Available at: www.weedscience.org. Acess on: Feb. 12, 2024.
INOUE MH et al. 2003. Critérios para avaliação do potencial de lixiviação dos herbicidas comercializados no estado do Paraná. Planta Daninha 21: 313-323.
KAH M et al. 2007. Factors influencing degradation of pesticides in soil. Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry 55: 4487-4492.
MENASSERI S et al. 2003. Sorption of aged dicamba residues in soil. Pest Management Science 60: 297-304.
MENDES RR et al. 2021. Monitoring glyphosate- and chlorimuron-resistant Conyza spp. populations in Brazil. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências 93: e20190425.
MOHSENI-MOGHADAM M et al. 2016. Response of wine grape cultivars to simulated drift rates of 2,4-D, dicamba, and glyphosate, and 2,4-D or dicamba plus glyphosate. Weed Technology 30: 807-814.
OLIVEIRA JUNIOR RS. 2011. Mecanismos de ação de herbicidas. In: OLIVEIRA JUNIOR RS et al. (Ed.). Biologia e manejo de plantas daninhas. Curitiba: Omnipax. pp. 144-148.
OSIPE JB et al. 2017. Spectrum of weed control with 2,4-D and dicamba herbicides associated to glyphosate or not. Planta Daninha 35: e017160815.
PUBCHEM. 2025. Dicamba herbicide. Available at: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Dicamba#section=Solubility Acessed at: Dez. 18, 2025.
SANSOM M et al. 2013. Control of Conyza spp. with glyphosate – a review of the situation in Europe. Plant Protection Science 49: 44-53.
SBCPD. 1995. SOCIEDADE BRASILEIRA DA CIÊNCIA DAS PLANTAS DANINHAS. Procedimentos para instalação, avaliação e análise de experimentos com herbicidas. Londrina: SBCPD. 42p.
SCOTT AJ & KNOTT MA. 1974. A cluster analysis method for grouping means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics 30: 507-512.
SILVA DRO et al. 2020. Simulated rainfall following the preplant application of 2,4-D and dicamba in soybean. Pesquisa Agropecuária Tropical 50: e62780.
SOARES DJ et al. 2012. Control of glyphosate resistant hairy fleabane (Conyza bonariensis) with dicamba and 2,4-D. Planta Daninha 30: 401-406.
VOOS G & GROFFMAN PM. 1997. Dissipation of 2,4-D and dicamba in a heterogenous landscape. Applied Soil Ecology 5: 181-187.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Authors & Revista de Ciências Agroveterinárias

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors publishing in this journal are in agreement with the following terms:
a) Authors maintain the copyrights and concede to the journal the copyright for the first publication, according to Creative Commons Attribution Licence.
b) Authors have the authority to assume additional contracts with the content of the manuscript.
c) Authors may supply and distribute the manuscript published by this journal.


