Auxin Herbicides and Pesticide Mixtures in Groundwater of a Canadian Prairie Province

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Auxin Herbicides and Pesticide Mixtures in Groundwater of a Canadian Prairie Province Published September 6, 2018 Journal of Environmental Quality TECHNICAL REPORTS GROUNDWATER QUALITY Auxin Herbicides and Pesticide Mixtures in Groundwater of a Canadian Prairie Province Sirajum Munira, Annemieke Farenhorst, Kamala Sapkota, Denise Nilsson, and Claudia Sheedy* bout 83% of Canada’s cropland is located in the prairies Abstract spanning the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Groundwater samples were collected from piezometers and water Manitoba (Statistics Canada, 2016). Auxin herbicides are table wells in both dryland and irrigated agricultural regions of Awidely used in Canadian Prairie agriculture to control broadleaf Alberta, Canada, to examine the occurrence of pesticide mixtures. weeds in cereal crops and have been the focus of studies that previ- Fourteen current-use pesticides and two historical compounds were detected over a 3-yr sampling period. Pesticide mixtures ously examined the occurrence of pesticides in Canadian Prairie were detected in ?3% of the groundwater samples, and the groundwater (Miller et al., 1995a, 1995b; Hill et al., 1996). The frequency of detection increased from spring (1.5%) to summer auxin herbicides (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid [2,4-D], bro- (3.8%) and fall (4.8%). Pesticide mixtures always consisted of at moxynil, dicamba, diclofop, 2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid least one of two auxin herbicides: 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic [MCPA], and mecoprop) examined in the latter studies were all acid (2,4-D) or 2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA). 19% of all samples contained a single pesticide, with auxin herbicides detected, with bromoxynil sometimes present at levels exceeding 2,4-D (7.3%), MCPA (4.4%), and clopyralid (3.9%) being most its guideline for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Miller et al., prevalent. We detected 2,4-D predominantly in the fall (72% 1995a, 1995b). When the source of drinking water consisted of of 2,4-D detections) and less in spring and summer (28%). We surface water reservoirs integrated in Canadian Prairie agricultural detected MCPA mostly in summer (85% of MCPA detections) and landscapes, auxin herbicides were detected in both the source and less in spring and fall (15%). Clopyralid was more evenly detected across spring (30%), summer (25%), and fall (45%). Since the treated drinking water (Donald et al., 2007). auxin herbicides above are typically applied in summer, results In Alberta, >14 million kg of pesticide active ingredients suggest that each herbicide may have different mobility and are annually applied on ?10 million ha of cropland, with her- persistence characteristics in prairie soils. Guidelines for Canadian bicides accounting for 82% of such applications (AEP, 2015). Drinking Water Quality have been set for a range of individual About 90% of Alberta’s rural population relies on groundwa- pesticides, but not for pesticide mixtures. If Canada is to establish such guidelines, this study demonstrates that auxin herbicides ter for their potable water supply (AWA, 2015). Guidelines for should be prioritized. In addition, only 7 of the 16 compounds Canadian Drinking Water Quality have been set for a range of detected in this study have established maximum acceptable individual pesticides, but not for pesticide mixtures. However, concentrations (MACs), excluding clopyralid, which was detected it is well known that groundwater samples can contain more in all three sampling years. than one pesticide: a study conducted across the United States (?5000 samples collected) revealed that >50% of sampled shal- Core Ideas low groundwater wells contained pesticide mixtures (Gilliom, 2007). In Portugal, groundwater collected from 18 wells in an • Sixteen pesticides were detected in groundwater, most frequently agricultural region showed that samples collected in spring were auxin herbicides. more likely to contain pesticides mixtures, whereas samples col- • Detection of pesticide mixtures increased from spring (1.5%) to fall (4.8%). lected in summer and fall mostly contained an individual pesti- • Samples with pesticide mixtures always contained at least one cide (Silva et al., 2012). auxin herbicide. While the European Drinking Water Directive is using a cau- • In establishing water quality guidelines for mixtures, Canada tionary approach and has set the maximum total concentration must prioritize auxins. of pesticides in water at 500 ng L−1, the Canadian Drinking Water Quality guidelines are based on the potential for an individual pesticide to cause adverse health effects. Should Canada estab- lish guidelines for pesticide mixtures, it is important to know Copyright © American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America. 5585 Guilford Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA. All rights reserved. S. Munira, A. Farenhorst, and K. Sapkota, Dep. of Soil Science, Faculty of J. Environ. Qual. 47:1462–1467 (2018) Agricultural & Food Sciences, Univ. of Manitoba, 362 Ellis Building, Winnipeg, MB, doi:10.2134/jeq2018.05.0202 Canada, R3T 2N2; D. Nilsson and C. Sheedy, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND Lethbridge Research and Development Centre, 5403 1st Ave. South, Lethbridge, license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). AB, Canada, T1J 4B1. Assigned to Associate Editor Qingli Ma. Supplemental material is available online for this article. Received 23 May 2018. Abbreviations: b-HCH, b-hexachlorocyclohexane; MAC, maximum Accepted 7 Aug. 2018. acceptable concentration; MCPA, 2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid; 2,4-D, *Corresponding author ([email protected]). 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. 1462 the types of pesticide mixtures present in Canadian groundwa- and 2010 and situated in an area with fine- to coarse-textured ter. Current use pesticides such as auxins and chloroacetamide soils. Twenty-one wells and 11 piezometers were sampled in this herbicides have reported half-lives (days to 50% degradation) of region ranging in depth from 4.8 to 19.5 m. The mean depth of 0.5 to 5 yr in groundwater (Cavalier et al., 1991). Some histori- groundwater wells was 7 ± 0.8 m, and that of piezometers was cal pesticides that were used in agricultural production decades 15 ± 3.5 m. Groundwater samples were collected in the spring, ago have been detected in drinking water wells long after these summer, and fall periods of 2013, 2014, and 2015, except that pesticides were banned (Burow et al., 2008). In this study, we central Alberta was not sampled in spring 2013. The spring sam- screened groundwater samples from Alberta for 42 active ingre- pling period from late April to early June corresponded to the dients of pesticide products currently registered for agricultural period when preplant and preemergent herbicides are typically use in Canada, and for 63 compounds that were active ingredi- applied in Alberta. The summer sampling in August reflected ents, metabolites, or byproducts of pesticide products no longer the timing of preharvest applications in Alberta, with other in- registered or currently not registered (Supplemental Table S1). crop applications having been completed in June and July. The The objective of the study was to examine the detection fre- fall sampling period from late September to late October corre- quency, types, and concentrations of pesticide mixtures occur- sponded to the preharvest period to initial soil freeze up during ring in samples collected from piezometers and wells in both which preharvest and burn-off herbicides are applied. dryland and irrigated agricultural regions of Alberta. Sample Analysis Materials and Methods The analytical suite included 42 active ingredients that are in Site Locations and Sampling Times pesticide products registered for agricultural use in Canada and 63 other compounds that were active ingredients, metabolites, A total of 436 groundwater samples were collected from or byproducts in pesticide products no longer registered or cur- piezometers and wells in two representative agricultural regions rently not registered (Supplemental Table S1). These compounds of Alberta. The region in southern Alberta is the Battersea drain- were herbicides (44.8%), insecticides (42.9%), fungicides (7.6%), age basin near Lethbridge (49°52¢ N, 112°46¢ W; population and others such as nematicides and algicides (4.7%) and included ? 93,000), located in the moist mixed grassland ecoregion and all pesticides previously detected in surface drinking water and dominated by dark brown Chernozemic soils. The southern groundwater in Alberta such as 2,4-D, MCPA, bromoxynil, clopy- Alberta region has a mean (1981–2010) annual precipitation of ralid, and dicamba (Hill et al., 1996; Donald et al., 2007). 380 mm and a mean annual temperature of 5.9 ± 1.1°C (ECCC, Water samples were analyzed within 3 (minimum) to 7 d 2018). This region includes? 6% of the crop land in Alberta that (maximum), including collection in the field, transportation to receives irrigation ranging from 300 to 450 mm yr−1 and contrib- the laboratory, extraction, and analysis. Water samples were col- uting to >19% of the net worth of primary agricultural produc- lected in an amber glass bottle (1 L) using a polyethylene bailing tion in the province (AAF, 2015a). The region in central Alberta tube and transported to the laboratory in ice-packed coolers for near Red Deer (52°28¢ N, 113°44¢ W; population ? 100,000) storage in the fridge (4°C) prior to extractions. Water samples is located in the aspen parkland ecoregion, dominated by black were filtered through glass wool, acidified with concentrated Chernozemic soils and dryland farming (no irrigation). The H SO (pH 2), and extracted by liquid–liquid partitioning using region has a mean (1981–2010) annual precipitation of 486 mm 2 4 CH Cl . After phase separation, CH Cl extracts were dried and a mean annual temperature of 3.7 ± 1.1°C (ECCC, 2018). 2 2 2 2 with acidified Na SO , methylated using CH Cl , and added to Cereal, oilseed, and forage crops dominate crop production in 2 4 2 2 hexane (40 mL). Nitrogen gas was used to remove the remain- the two regions, with potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) also ing CH Cl and adjust the final volume to 10 mL.
Recommended publications
  • 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid
    2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid IUPAC (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid name 2,4-D Other hedonal names trinoxol Identifiers CAS [94-75-7] number SMILES OC(COC1=CC=C(Cl)C=C1Cl)=O ChemSpider 1441 ID Properties Molecular C H Cl O formula 8 6 2 3 Molar mass 221.04 g mol−1 Appearance white to yellow powder Melting point 140.5 °C (413.5 K) Boiling 160 °C (0.4 mm Hg) point Solubility in 900 mg/L (25 °C) water Related compounds Related 2,4,5-T, Dichlorprop compounds Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C, 100 kPa) 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is a common systemic herbicide used in the control of broadleaf weeds. It is the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the third most commonly used in North America.[1] 2,4-D is also an important synthetic auxin, often used in laboratories for plant research and as a supplement in plant cell culture media such as MS medium. History 2,4-D was developed during World War II by a British team at Rothamsted Experimental Station, under the leadership of Judah Hirsch Quastel, aiming to increase crop yields for a nation at war.[citation needed] When it was commercially released in 1946, it became the first successful selective herbicide and allowed for greatly enhanced weed control in wheat, maize (corn), rice, and similar cereal grass crop, because it only kills dicots, leaving behind monocots. Mechanism of herbicide action 2,4-D is a synthetic auxin, which is a class of plant growth regulators.
    [Show full text]
  • Exposure to Herbicides in House Dust and Risk of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
    Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2013) 23, 363–370 & 2013 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved 1559-0631/13 www.nature.com/jes ORIGINAL ARTICLE Exposure to herbicides in house dust and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia Catherine Metayer1, Joanne S. Colt2, Patricia A. Buffler1, Helen D. Reed3, Steve Selvin1, Vonda Crouse4 and Mary H. Ward2 We examine the association between exposure to herbicides and childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Dust samples were collected from homes of 269 ALL cases and 333 healthy controls (o8 years of age at diagnosis/reference date and residing in same home since diagnosis/reference date) in California, using a high-volume surface sampler or household vacuum bags. Amounts of agricultural or professional herbicides (alachlor, metolachlor, bromoxynil, bromoxynil octanoate, pebulate, butylate, prometryn, simazine, ethalfluralin, and pendimethalin) and residential herbicides (cyanazine, trifluralin, 2-methyl-4- chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA), mecoprop, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), chlorthal, and dicamba) were measured. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by logistic regression. Models included the herbicide of interest, age, sex, race/ethnicity, household income, year and season of dust sampling, neighborhood type, and residence type. The risk of childhood ALL was associated with dust levels of chlorthal; compared to homes with no detections, ORs for the first, second, and third tertiles were 1.49 (95% CI: 0.82–2.72), 1.49 (95% CI: 0.83–2.67), and 1.57 (95% CI: 0.90–2.73), respectively (P-value for linear trend ¼ 0.05). The magnitude of this association appeared to be higher in the presence of alachlor.
    [Show full text]
  • INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES
    US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES Note: Pesticide tolerance information is updated in the Code of Federal Regulations on a weekly basis. EPA plans to update these indexes biannually. These indexes are current as of the date indicated in the pdf file. For the latest information on pesticide tolerances, please check the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/40cfrv23_07.html 1 40 CFR Type Family Common name CAS Number PC code 180.163 Acaricide bridged diphenyl Dicofol (1,1-Bis(chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichloroethanol) 115-32-2 10501 180.198 Acaricide phosphonate Trichlorfon 52-68-6 57901 180.259 Acaricide sulfite ester Propargite 2312-35-8 97601 180.446 Acaricide tetrazine Clofentezine 74115-24-5 125501 180.448 Acaricide thiazolidine Hexythiazox 78587-05-0 128849 180.517 Acaricide phenylpyrazole Fipronil 120068-37-3 129121 180.566 Acaricide pyrazole Fenpyroximate 134098-61-6 129131 180.572 Acaricide carbazate Bifenazate 149877-41-8 586 180.593 Acaricide unclassified Etoxazole 153233-91-1 107091 180.599 Acaricide unclassified Acequinocyl 57960-19-7 6329 180.341 Acaricide, fungicide dinitrophenol Dinocap (2, 4-Dinitro-6-octylphenyl crotonate and 2,6-dinitro-4- 39300-45-3 36001 octylphenyl crotonate} 180.111 Acaricide, insecticide organophosphorus Malathion 121-75-5 57701 180.182 Acaricide, insecticide cyclodiene Endosulfan 115-29-7 79401
    [Show full text]
  • New Herbicides for Weeds in Seedling Alfalfa
    NEW HERBICIDES FOR WEEDS IN SEEDLING ALFALFA 1 Harold M. Kempen and Joe Voth Abstract: Research suggests that "better mousetraps" for control of seedling weeds in seedling alfalfa are awaiting EPA & CDFA registrations. .Buctril in combination with Poast has been effective in Kern County tests. Until registered, Butyrac in combination with Poast, seems a good option: Pursuit appears to offer the best program because it controls chickweed along with most winter weeds and may suppress yellow nutsedge and johnsongrass. Keywords: Seedling alfalfa, herbicides, grass weeds, broadleaf weeds. INTRODUCTION Poast was recently registered for use in alfalfa. Perhaps that is an omen that something else ~/il1 be registered in the near future as well. It is still possibl~! When I accepted this speaking engagement, I had high hopes that Buctril would be registered by this summer. But that date has passed and the prognosis for labelling of it by next spring is poor. Yes, it is registered in the United States of America, but it isn't registered in sovereign California. This report will focus on three promising treatments: 1. Buctril ME-4 + Poast, Fusilade 2000 or Select; 2. Butyrac Amine + Poast, Fusilade or Select; 3. Pursuit. HERBICIDES MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT Buctril bromoxynil Brominal bromoxynil Butyrac 2,4-DB Butoxone 2,4-DB Poast sethoxydim Fusilade 2000 fluazifop-P-butyl Assure quizalofop Select clethodim Whip fenoxyprop-ethyl Verdict haloxyfop Pursuit imazethapyr Gramoxone Super paraquat BUCTRIL + SELECTIVE GRASS HERBICIDES In Kern County, where we grow almost 90,000 acres and are 4th in alfalfa marketincr in California, we have studied bromoxynil for several years, alone and in combination with the selective grass herbicides: Poast, Fusilade, Assure, Select and Verdict.
    [Show full text]
  • Corn Herbicides to Control Glyphsoate-Resistant Canola Volunteers
    AGRONOMY SCIENCES RESEARCHRESEARCH UPDAUPDATETE Corn Herbicides to Control Glyphosate-Resistant Canola Volunteers 2013 Background Table 1. Herbicide treatments. • With the rapid adoption of glyphosate-resistant corn in Western Treatment Application Rate/Acre Canada, glyphosate-resistant canola volunteers have become a major weed concern to corn producers in the region. 1 Gly Only (Check) 1 L/acre (360g ae) • The Pest Management Regulatory Agency now allows 2 Gly + Dicamba 1 L/acre + 0.243 L/acre herbicides to be tank-mixed if they have individual registrations 3 Gly + 2,4-D 1 L/acre + 0.4 L/acre (600g/L) on the crop and have a common application timing. 4 Gly + MCPA Amine 1 L/acre + 0.45L/acre • Several herbicide options are available to control glyphosate 5 Gly + Bromoxynil 1 L/acre + 0.48 L/acre tolerant canola volunteers in corn; however, some herbicides may have undesirable effects on corn. Gly / Bromoxynil 6 1 L/acre + 0.48 L/acre (Split Application*) Objectives * Glyphosate and bromoxynil applied separately at V3 stage. • Assess crop injury and yield effects of various herbicides tank- mixed with glyphosate to control glyphosate-resistant canola • Herbicide injury scores were recorded at: volunteers in glyphosate-resistant corn. • 3-5 days after treatment • 7-10 days after treatment • Identify the most suitable post-emergence strategy for • 21-24 days after treatment managing glyphosate-resistant canola volunteers in glyphosate-resistant corn. • Other recorded observations include: • Brittle snap counts Study Description • Yield (bu/acre) & moisture (%) • Test weight (lbs/bu) • The study compared the crop response of four industry leading hybrids (Pioneer® brand and competitive) with five different Results herbicide treatments (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Control Guide for Ohio, Indiana and Illinois
    Pub# WS16 / Bulletin 789 / IL15 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION Tables Table 1. Weed Response to “Burndown” Herbicides .............................................................................................19 Table 2. Application Intervals for Early Preplant Herbicides ............................................................................... 20 Table 3. Weed Response to Preplant/Preemergence Herbicides in Corn—Grasses ....................................30 WEED Table 4. Weed Response to Preplant/Preemergence Herbicides in Corn—Broadleaf Weeds ....................31 Table 5. Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides in Corn—Grasses ...................................................32 Table 6. Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides in Corn—Broadleaf Weeds ..................................33 2015 CONTROL Table 7. Grazing and Forage (Silage, Hay, etc.) Intervals for Herbicide-Treated Corn ................................. 66 OHIO, INDIANA Table 8. Rainfast Intervals, Spray Additives, and Maximum Crop Size for Postemergence Corn Herbicides .........................................................................................................................................................68 AND ILLINOIS Table 9. Herbicides Labeled for Use on Field Corn, Seed Corn, Popcorn, and Sweet Corn ..................... 69 GUIDE Table 10. Herbicide and Soil Insecticide Use Precautions ......................................................................................71 Table 11. Weed Response to Herbicides in Popcorn and Sweet Corn—Grasses
    [Show full text]
  • List of Herbicide Groups
    List of herbicides Group Scientific name Trade name clodinafop (Topik®), cyhalofop (Barnstorm®), diclofop (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*, Hoegrass®), fenoxaprop (Cheetah® Gold* , Wildcat®), A Aryloxyphenoxypropionates fluazifop (Fusilade®, Fusion®*), haloxyfop (Verdict®), propaquizafop (Shogun®), quizalofop (Targa®) butroxydim (Falcon®, Fusion®*), clethodim (Select®), profoxydim A Cyclohexanediones (Aura®), sethoxydim (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*), tralkoxydim (Achieve®) A Phenylpyrazoles pinoxaden (Axial®) azimsulfuron (Gulliver®), bensulfuron (Londax®), chlorsulfuron (Glean®), ethoxysulfuron (Hero®), foramsulfuron (Tribute®), halosulfuron (Sempra®), iodosulfuron (Hussar®), mesosulfuron (Atlantis®), metsulfuron (Ally®, Harmony®* M, Stinger®*, Trounce®*, B Sulfonylureas Ultimate Brushweed®* Herbicide), prosulfuron (Casper®*), rimsulfuron (Titus®), sulfometuron (Oust®, Eucmix Pre Plant®*), sulfosulfuron (Monza®), thifensulfuron (Harmony®* M), triasulfuron, (Logran®, Logran® B Power®*), tribenuron (Express®), trifloxysulfuron (Envoke®, Krismat®*) florasulam (Paradigm®*, Vortex®*, X-Pand®*), flumetsulam B Triazolopyrimidines (Broadstrike®), metosulam (Eclipse®), pyroxsulam (Crusader®Rexade®*) imazamox (Intervix®*, Raptor®,), imazapic (Bobcat I-Maxx®*, Flame®, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazapyr (Arsenal Xpress®*, Intervix®*, B Imidazolinones Lightning®*, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazethapyr (Lightning®*, Spinnaker®) B Pyrimidinylthiobenzoates bispyribac (Nominee®), pyrithiobac (Staple®) C Amides: propanil (Stam®) C Benzothiadiazinones: bentazone (Basagran®,
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 134/Wednesday, July 14, 1999/Notices
    37968 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 1999 / Notices of the official record without prior Briefings may not be held for chemicals September 13, 1999 at the addresses notice. If you have any questions about that have limited use patterns or low given under the ``ADDRESSES'' section. CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, levels of risk concern. Ethion's use Comments and proposals will become please consult the person listed in the pattern is predominately citrus, part of the Agency record for the ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION therefore, no Technical Briefing is organophosphate specified in this CONTACT'' section. planned. In cases where no Technical notice. Briefing is held, the Agency will make IV. What Action Is EPA Taking In This List of Subjects Notice? a special effort to communicate with interested stakeholders in order to better Environmental protection, Chemicals, EPA is making available for public ensure their understanding of the Pesticides and pests. viewing the revised risk assessments revised assessments and how they can Dated: July 8, 1999. and related documents for one participate in the organophosphate pilot organophosphate, ethion. These public participation process. EPA has a Lois A. Rossi, documents have been developed as part good familiarity with the stakeholder of the pilot public participation process groups associated with the use of ethion Director, Special Review and Reregistration that EPA and the U.S. Department of who may be interested in participating Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Agriculture (USDA) are now using for in the risk assessment/risk management [FR Doc. 99±17945 Filed 7-13-99; 8:45 am] involving the public in the reassessment process, and will contact them BILLING CODE 6560±50±F of pesticide tolerances under the Food individually to inform them that no Quality Protection Act (FQPA), and the Technical Briefing will be held.
    [Show full text]
  • Bromoxynil Label E
    BROMOXYNIL 225 Reg. No.: L 6212 Act /Wet No. 36 of/van 1947 Emulsifiable concentrate. A herbicide for the Emulgeerbare konsentraat. Onkruiddoder vir die selective control of certain broadleaf weeds in selektiewe beheer van sekere breëblaaronkruide wheat, barley, oats, lucerne, maize and grain in koring, gars, hawer, lusern, mielies en sorghum. graansorghum. HRAC HERBICIDE GROUP CODE: C3 HRAC ONKRUIDDODERGROEP KODE: ACTIVE INGREDIENT/AKTIEWE BESTANDDEEL: Bromoxynil (nitrile) (octanoate) / bromoksinil (nitriel) (oktanoaat) …………………… 225 g/ℓ Registration holder / Registrasiehouer: Tsunami Plant Protection (Pty) Ltd trading as ARYSTA LifeScience South Africa (Pty) Ltd Contents/Inhoud Co. Reg. No./Mpy. Reg. Nr.: 2009/019713/07 7 Sunbury Office Park, (ℓ) Off Douglas Saunders Drive, La Lucia Ridge, South Africa, 4019 Tel: 031 514 5600 Batch No. / Lot Nr.: Date of manufacture: / Datum van vervaardiging: U.N. No. 2903 READ THE LABEL IN DETAIL BEFORE OPENING THE CONTAINER. / LEES DIE ETIKET VOLLEDIG VOORDAT DIE HOUER OOPGEMAAK WORD. For full particulars, see enclosed leaflet. / Vir volledige besonderhede, sien ingeslote pamflet. BROMOXYNIL 225/03/01/2011.1 1 BROMOXYNIL 225 Reg. No.: L 6212 Act/Wet No. 36 of/van 1947 Emulsifiable concentrate. A herbicide for the selective control of Emulgeerbare konsentraat. Onkruiddoder vir die selektiewe beheer certain broadleaf weeds in wheat, barley, oats, lucerne, maize and van sekere breëblaaronkruide in koring, gars, hawer, lusern, mielies grain sorghum. en graansorghum . HRAC HERBICIDE GROUP CODE / H/RAC
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Weed Control
    2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual The 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual is published by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, N.C. State University, Raleigh, N.C. These recommendations apply only to North Carolina. They may not be appropriate for conditions in other states and may not comply with laws and regulations outside North Carolina. These recommendations are current as of November 2013. Individuals who use agricultural chemicals are responsible for ensuring that the intended use complies with current regulations and conforms to the product label. Be sure to obtain current information about usage regulations and examine a current product label before applying any chemical. For assistance, contact your county Cooperative Extension agent. The use of brand names and any mention or listing of commercial products or services in this document does not imply endorsement by the North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service nor discrimination against similar products or services not mentioned. VII — CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual VII — CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL Chemical Weed Control in Field Corn ...................................................................................................... 224 Weed Response to Preemergence Herbicides — Corn ........................................................................... 231 Weed Response to Postemergence Herbicides — Corn ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA-Pesticides; Pyrasulfotole
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 JUL 0 5 2007 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Evaluation of Public Interest Documentation for the Conditional Registration of Pyrasulfotole on Wheat, Barley, Oats, and Triticale (D340011; D340014) FROM: Nicole Zinn, Biologist Biological Analysis Branch Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) THRU: Arnet Jones, Chief Biological Analysis Branch Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) TO: Tracy White Joanne Miller Registration Division (7505P) PEER REVIEW PANEL: June 27,2007 SUMMARY Pyrasulfotole is a 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibitor, which is a new mode of action for small grains. HPPD-inhibitors are currently available for use in other crops but not in small grains. BEAD has reviewed the efficacy information which indicates that pyrasulfotole will provide control of redroot pigweed, common lambsquarters, wild buckwheat and volunteer canola. To control a broader spectrum of weeds, a combination product with bromoxynil is proposed for use in the United States. BEAD reviewed the documentation submitted by the registrant to determine whether one of two criteria have been met: there is a need for the new pesticide that is not being met by currently registered pesticides or the benefits from the new pesticide are greater than those from currently registered pesticides or non-chemical control measures. Although the information submitted focused on the pyrasulfotole + bromoxynil product, BEAD focused its review on the benefits of pyrasulfotole since bromoxynil is currently registered. BEAD believes that by providing a new mode of action for control of certain weeds, pyrasulfotole meets a need that is not being met by currently registered pesticides.
    [Show full text]
  • Negative Cross-Resistance of Acetolactate Synthase Inhibitor–Resistant Kochia (Kochia Scoparia) to Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase
    Weed Technology 2012 26:570–574 Negative Cross-Resistance of Acetolactate Synthase Inhibitor–Resistant Kochia (Kochia scoparia) to Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase– and Hydroxyphenylpyruvate Dioxygenase–Inhibiting Herbicides Hugh J. Beckie, Eric N. Johnson, and Anne Le´ge`re* This greenhouse experiment examined the response of homozygous susceptible and acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitor– resistant plants from six Canadian kochia accessions with the Pro197 or Trp574 mutation to six alternative herbicides of different sites of action. The null hypothesis was ALS-inhibitor–resistant and –susceptible plants from within and across accessions would respond similarly to herbicides of different sites of action. This hypothesis was accepted for all accessions except that of MBK2 with the Trp574 mutation. Resistant plants of that accession were 80, 60, and 50% more sensitive than susceptible plants to pyrasulfotole, mesotrione (hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase [HPPD] inhibitors), and carfentrazone (protoporphyrinogen oxidase [PPO] inhibitor), respectively. However, no differential dose response between resistant and susceptible plants of this kochia accession to bromoxynil, fluroxypyr, or glyphosate was observed. A previous study had found marked differences in growth and development between resistant and susceptible plants of this accession, but not of the other accessions examined in this experiment. Negative cross-resistance exhibited by resistant plants of accession MBK2 to PPO and HPPD inhibitors in this experiment may be a pleiotropic effect
    [Show full text]