DOCSLIB.ORG

A Pilot Nursery Study of the Missouri Gravel Bed System On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Pilot Nursery Study of the Missouri Gravel Bed System On SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry Digital Commons @ ESF Dissertations and Theses Winter 12-11-2017 A PILOT NURSERY STUDY OF THE MISSOURI GRAVEL BED SYSTEM ON PHYTOREMEDIATION TREE SPECIES, POPULUS DELTOIDES X POPULUS NIGRA DN34 AND PINUS NIGRA, FOR POTENTIAL GROWTH ENHANCEMENT OVER SOIL GROWN TREES Thomas Frontera [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/etds Recommended Citation Frontera, Thomas, "A PILOT NURSERY STUDY OF THE MISSOURI GRAVEL BED SYSTEM ON PHYTOREMEDIATION TREE SPECIES, POPULUS DELTOIDES X POPULUS NIGRA DN34 AND PINUS NIGRA, FOR POTENTIAL GROWTH ENHANCEMENT OVER SOIL GROWN TREES" (2017). Dissertations and Theses. 45. https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/etds/45 This Open Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ ESF. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ ESF. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. A PILOT NURSERY STUDY OF THE MISSOURI GRAVEL BED SYSTEM ON PHYTOREMEDIATION TREE SPECIES, POPULUS DELTOIDES X POPULUS NIGRA DN34 AND PINUS NIGRA, FOR POTENTIAL GROWTH ENHANCEMENT OVER SOIL GROWN TREES by Thomas John Frontera II A thesis submitted in partial fulfillent of the requirements for the Master of Science Degree State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry Syracuse, New York May 2018 Department of Landscape Architecture Approved by: Tim Toland, Major Professor Dr. Lee Newman, Steering Committee Member Dr. Doug Johnston, Steering Committee Member and Department Chair Terry Ettinger, Thesis Examiner Dr. Jose Giner, Examining Committee Chair S. Scott Shannon, Dean, The Graduate School © 2018 Copyright T.J. Frontera II All rights reserved Acknowledgements I would like to thank my thesis committee, Dave and Jeanne Ryan of Rare Earth Nursery without whom this thesis would not have been possible, and my family especially my father who endured my countless thesis drafts. Lastly, I dedicate this thesis to my mother Ann Marie Frontera. Rest in Peace Mom. Frontera iii Table of Contents Abstract: ........................................................................................................................................ vii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1: Background and Literature Review ..................................................................................... 1 1.1.1: Root Forms Available in the Nursery Industry ............................................................. 1 1.1.2 Missouri Gravel Bed System (MGBS) ........................................................................... 9 1.1.3: Rational for Study Plant Species Selection ................................................................. 12 Chapter 2: Materials and Methods ................................................................................................ 14 2.1: Experiment Set-Up ............................................................................................................. 14 2.2: Measuring Success of the Trees ......................................................................................... 19 2.3: Study and Research Questions ........................................................................................... 25 Chapter 3: Results ......................................................................................................................... 26 3.1: Statistical Analysis: ............................................................................................................ 26 3.2: Populus nigra x Populus deltoides (Hybrid Poplar) .......................................................... 27 3.2.1: Average Percent Growth by Total Wet Weight Analysis ........................................... 28 3.2.2: Average Leaf and Petiole Growth by Dry Weight Analysis ....................................... 29 3.2.3: Average Leaf Surface Area by Wet Weight Analysis ................................................. 30 3.2.4: Average Branch Length of 3 Longest Branches Analysis ........................................... 32 3.2.5: Average Main Stem Growth Analysis ......................................................................... 33 3.2.6: B&B Process Potential Root Loss ............................................................................... 34 3.2.7: Average Root Growth by Dry Weight......................................................................... 35 3.2.8: Root/Shoot Ratio Analysis .......................................................................................... 36 3.3: Pinus nigra (Austrian Pine) ............................................................................................... 38 Chapter 4: Discussion ................................................................................................................... 38 4.1: Answers to Study and Research Questions ........................................................................ 38 4.2: Future Studies and Potential Applications ......................................................................... 42 4.2.1: Sites Prime for Phytoremediation ................................................................................ 42 4.2.2: Other Trees to Experiment with the MGBS ................................................................ 42 Chapter 5: Conclusion................................................................................................................... 44 Resume:......................................................................................................................................... 46 Bibliography: ................................................................................................................................ 47 Frontera iv List of Tables: Table 1: Fertilizers ........................................................................................................................ 18 Table 2: Percent Growth by Total Wet Weight Statistical Information ....................................... 28 Table 3: Leaf and Petiole Growth by Dry Weight Statistical Information ................................... 30 Table 4: Leaf Area (In.2) by Wet Weight Statistical Information ................................................. 31 Table 5: Branch Length of 3 Longest Branches Statistical Information ...................................... 33 Table 6: B&B Potential Root Loss Statistical Information .......................................................... 35 Table 7: Root Growth by Dry Weight Statistical Information ..................................................... 36 Table 8: Root/Shoot Ratio by Dry Weight Statistical Information............................................... 37 Frontera v List of Figures*: Figure 1: B&B Root Loss ............................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Root/Shoot Ratio ............................................................................................................. 5 Figure 3: BR Harvesting ................................................................................................................. 8 Figure 4: MGBS Bed .................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 5: MGBS Fine Roots ......................................................................................................... 11 Figure 6: Pre-Experiment Image ................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: MGBS Test Bed ............................................................................................................ 15 Figure 8: Soil................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 9: Soil W/ Fert. Test Bed ................................................................................................... 17 Figure 10: AutoCAD Analysis of Poplar ...................................................................................... 19 Figure 11: AutoCAD Analysis of Pine ......................................................................................... 20 Figure 12: Surface Area Per Gram................................................................................................ 20 Figure 13: Poplar Leaf Harvest ..................................................................................................... 21 Figure 14: Taylor Digital Food Scale ........................................................................................... 22 Figure 15: MGBS Harvester ......................................................................................................... 23 Figure 16: Soil Group Harvesting ................................................................................................. 23 Figure 17: Measuring B&B Root Loss ......................................................................................... 24 Figure 18: Plant Material Drying .................................................................................................. 24 Figure 19: Percent Growth by Total Wet Weight ......................................................................... 27 Figure 20: Leaf and Petiole Growth by Dry Weight....................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • HPLC for Food Analysis
    HPLC for Food Analysis A Primer © Copyright Agilent Technologies Company, 1996-2001. All rights reserved. Reproduction, adaption, or translation without prior written permission is prohibited, except as allowed under the copyright laws. Printed in Germany www.agilent.com/chem September 01, 2001 Publication Number 5988-3294EN HPLC for Food Analysis A Primer The fundamentals of an alternative approach to solving tomorrow’s measurement challenges Angelika Gratzfeld-Hüsgen and Rainer Schuster Acknowledgements We would like to thank Christine Miller and John Jaskowiak for their contributions to this primer. Mrs. Miller is an application chemist with Agilent Technologies and is responsible for the material contained in chapter 5. Mr. Jaskowiak, who wrote chapter 7, is a product manager for liquid chromatography products at Agilent Technologies. © Copyright Agilent Technologies Company 1996-2001. All rights reserved. Reproduction, adaption, or translation without prior written permission is prohibited, except as allowed under the copyright laws. Printed in Germany, September 1, 2001. Publication Number 5988-3294EN Preface Modern agriculture and food processing often involve the use of chemicals. Some of these chemicals and their func- tions are listed below: • Fertilizers: increase production of agricultural plants • Pesticides: protect crops against weeds and pests • Antibiotics: prevent bacteria growth in animals during breeding • Hormones: accelerate animal growth • Colorants: increase acceptability and appeal of food • Preservatives and antioxidants: extend product life • Natural and artificial sweeteners and flavors: improve the taste of food • Natural and synthetic vitamins: increase the nutritive value of food • Carbohydrates: act as food binders Such chemicals improve productivity and thus increase competitiveness and profit margins. However, if the amounts consumed exceed certain limits, some of these chemicals may prove harmful to humans.
    [Show full text]
  • Laboratory Study of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Contamination and Mitigation in Buildings Part 4. Evaluation of the Activate
    EPA/600/R-11/156C November 2012 Laboratory Study of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Contamination and Mitigation in Buildings Part 4. Evaluation of the Activated Metal Treatment System (AMTS) for On-site Destruction of PCBs Xiaoyu Liu and Zhishi Guo U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 and Corey A. Mocka, R. Andy Stinson, Nancy F. Roache, and Joshua A. Nardin ARCADIS, US Inc. 4915 Prospectus Dr., Suite F Durham, NC 27709 NOTICE This document has been reviewed internally and externally in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Executive Summary E.1 Background Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were once used as a plasticizer in certain building materials such as caulking, sealants, and paints from the 1950s through the late 1970s. Because PCBs have a variety of adverse health effects in animals and human, federal regulations have specific requirements for use and disposal of PCB-containing materials (U.S. EPA, 2005; 2009). Briefly, building materials that contain 50 ppm or more PCBs are not authorized for use and must be disposed of as PCB bulk product waste according the Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR §761.3 and §761.62. If PCBs have contaminated either the surrounding building materials or adjacent soil, these materials are considered PCB remediation waste, which is subject to the cleanup and disposal requirements according 40 CFR §761.61.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Factors Affecting the Level and Persistence of Diphenyl Residues in Citrus Fruits
    HAYWARD AND EDWARDS: DIPHENYL RESIDUES 315 Using a drum dryer, temperatures as high as ing the adaptation and use of the double-drum 70° C can be used for densifying orange and dryer. grapefruit powders without discoloration. Mono- glyceride derivatives are effective as release LITERATURE CITED agents during the densifying operation. Recon- 1. Berry, R. E., O. W. Bissett, C. J. Wagner, Jr., and stitution time is increased somewhat by the densi M. K. Veldhuis 1964. Foam-mat dried grapefruit powders. Food Technol. In press. fying operation. 2. Bissett, O. W., J. H. Tatum, C. J. Wagner, Jr., M. K. Veldhuis, R. P. Graham and A. I. Morgan, Jr. 1963. Foam-mat dried orange juice. I. Time-temperature drying studies. Food Technol. 17:92-95. Acknowledgment 3. Graham, R. P., M. R. Hart and A. I. Morgan, Jr. 1964. Foam-mat drying citrus juices. Abstracts of 24th An The authors would like to thank Dr. A. I. nual Meeting of Institute of Food Technologists, No. 29. 4. Graham, R. P., L. F. Ginnette and A. I. Morgan, Jr. Morgan, Jr., and Mr. R. P. Graham of the West 1963. U. S. Patent No. 3,093,488 Preparation of stable de hydrated products. ern Regional Research Laboratory, Albany, Cali 6. Lawler, Frank K. 1962. Foam-mat drying goes to fornia, for their advice and suggestions concern work. Food Eng. 34:68-69. 6. Sjogren, C. N. 1962. Practical facts of foam-mat. Food Eng. 34:44-47. SOME FACTORS AFFECTING THE LEVEL AND PERSISTENCE OF DIPHENYL RESIDUES IN CITRUS FRUITS F.
    [Show full text]
  • Total Diet Study Market Baskets 2004-1 Through 2005-4
    U.S Food and Drug Administration – Total Diet Study Market Baskets 2004-1 through 2005-4 The data that follow are summaries of pesticide analytical results by food or by residue from the Food and Drug Administration’s Total Diet Study Program. The information covers Total Diet Study Market Baskets 2004-1 through 2005-4 (8 Market Baskets). The Market Baskets were collected between October 2003 and August 2005. Notes: Food #: FDA assigned Total Diet Study Food number. Number of Analyses: Number of times the food was analyzed for this report (i.e., the number of Market Baskets analyzed containing the food item). Number Equal /> LQ: Number of results for the residue that were greater than or equal to the method’s limit of quantitation. Number of Traces: Number of results for the residue that were equal to or greater than the method’s limit of detection, but less than the method’s limit of quantitation. Statistics were calculated using a value of 0 for results below the method’s limit of detection, and at the measured value for findings recorded as trace. Some values may have been rounded. BF: Baby Food RTF: Ready to Feed The data presented in this report were compiled by FDA’s Kansas City District Laboratory located in Lenexa, KS, with special thanks to Pesticide Expert Chris Sack. Inquiries regarding the data may be referred to: FDA/Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Office of Food Safety 5100 Paint Branch Parkway College Park, MD 20740 Attention: Ronald R. Roy email: [email protected] phone: 240-402-2061 2004-2005 Summary
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, PRISTINE FUNGICIDE, 07/08/2014
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION Ms. Christine M. Keating Product Registration Manager mi np 26 Davis Drive JUL U 9 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3528 Subject: Pristine Fungicide EPA Reg. No. 7969-199 EPA Decision Number: 492621 Your master and globe artichoke supplemental label submitted on June 17, 2014 to update tank mix instructions; add citrus black spot to citrus diseases; remove California restrictions; and roll in the radicchio supplemental label Dear Ms. Keating: The master label and supplemental label referred to above, submitted in connection with registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended are acceptable. A stamped copy of your labeling is enclosed for your records. This labeling supersedes all previously accepted labeling. You must submit one (1) copy of the final printed labeling before you release the product for shipment with the new labeling. In accordance with 40 CFR 152.r30(c), you may distribute or sell this product under the previously approved labeling for 18 months from the date of this letter. After 18 months, you may only distribute or sell this product if it bears this new revised labeling or subsequently approved labeling. "To distribute or sell" is defined under FIFRA section 2(gg) and its implementing regulation at 40 CFR 152.3. If these conditions are not complied with, the registration will be subject to cancellation in accordance with FIFRA §6(e). Your release for shipment of the product constitutes acceptance of these conditions. One copy of the labels stamped "Accepted" are enclosed for your records.
    [Show full text]
  • Insecticide/Miticide ACTIVE INGREDIENT: by WT. Bifenthrin
    RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDE Toxic to fish and aquatic organisms. For retail sale to and use only by certified applicators, or persons under their direct supervision and only for the uses covered by the certified applicator's certification. Insecticide/Miticide ACTIVE INGREDIENT: BY WT. Bifenthrin: (2 methyl[1, 1'-biphenyl]-3-yl) methyl 3- (2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoro-1-propenyl)-2,2-dimethyl-cyclopropanecarboxylate* . 25.0% OTHER INGREDIENTS**: . 75.0% TOTAL 100.0% *Cis isomers 97% minimum, trans isomers 3% maximum. **Contains petroleum distillates. This product contains 2 pounds active ingredient per gallon. Bifentrhin U.S. Patent No. 4,238,505 KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN WARNING—AVISO Si usted no entiende la etiqueta, busque a siguien para que se la explique a usted en detalle. (If you do not understand this label, find someone to explain it to you in detail.) FIRST AID If Swallowed: • Immediately call a poison control center or doctor. • Do not induce vomiting unless told to do so by the poison control center or doctor. • Do not give any liquids to the person. • Do not give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. If In Eyes: • Hold eye open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15-20 minutes. • Remove contact lenses, if present, after the first 5 minutes, then continue rinsing eye. • Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice. If on Skin • Take off contaminated clothing. or Clothing: • Rinse skin immediately with plenty of water for 15-20 minutes. • Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Biphenyl Synthase from Gentian and Pear
    Biphenyl Synthase from Gentian and Pear Von der Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften der Technischen Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina zu Braunschweig zur Erlangung des Grades einer Doktorin der Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.) genehmigte Dissertation Von Asya Khemaj Swiddan aus Tripoli / Libyen 1. Referent: Prof. Dr. Ludger Beerhues 2. Referent: Prof. Dr. Thilo C. Fischer Eingereicht am: 12.05.2010 mündliche Prüfung (Disputation) am: 08.07.2010 Druckjahr 2010 Vorveröffentlichungen der Dissertation Teilergebnisse aus dieser Arbeit wurden mit Genehmigung der Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften, vertreten durch den Mentor der Arbeit, in folgenden Beiträgen vorab veröffentlicht: Tagungsbeiträge Swiddan, K. A., Liu, B., Fischer, T.C. & Beerhues, L.: Biphenyl synthase from pear (Poster) 37. Botanikertagung: Plants for the future. Leipzig, Germany (2009). Abstract Gentiana lutea (Gentianaceae) is a herbaceous medicinal plant containing amarogentin, while pears (Pyrus sp., Rosaceae) are important fruit trees and cultivated in all temperate-zone countries. Despite their high economic value, their disease resistance mechanisms are poorly understood. Following fungal infection, biphenyls and dibenzofurans are formed as phytoalexins. Biphenylcarboxylate synthase (BICS) from gentian and biphenyl synthase (BIS) from pear are related plant-specific PKSs that are the key enzymes of the biosynthetic pathways of amarogentin and Maloideae-specific phytoalexins, respectively. Two cDNA fragments were obtained from G. lutea. The clones were 1343 and 741 bp long and shared 60.8, 51.8 % identity, respectively with chalcone synthase (Ms, CHS) but lacked appreciable identity with BIS and benzophenone synthase (BPS). In addition, two BIS cDNAs cloned from young leaves of P. communis were functionally characterized. Both enzymes preferred benzoyl-CoA (Km 1.6 for BIS1 and 1.7 for BIS2).
    [Show full text]
  • List of Designated Food Additives
    The Japan Food chemical Research Faundation List of Designated Food Additives The substances below are the designated food additives appearing in Appended Table 1, as mentioned in Article 12 of the Enforcement Regulations under the Food Sanitation Law. These additives are listed here in alphabetical order. They are 472 in total as of January 15, 2021. The number preceding the name of each additive is the sequence number given to the corresponding additive in the original Japanese table.The names of the substances are translated by the Foundation from the Japanese original. 16 Acesulfame Potassium（Acesulfame K） 20 Acetaldehyde 332 Glacial Acetic Acid 23 Acetone 22 Acetophenone 17 Acetylated Distarch Adipate 19 Acetylated Distarch Phosphate 18 Acetylated Oxidized Starch 5 Adipic Acid 26 Advantame 32 DL-Alanine 196 Aliphatic Higher Alcohols 197 Aliphatic Higher Aldehydes (except those generally recognized as highly toxic) 198 Aliphatic Higher Hydrocarbons (except those generally recognized as highly toxic) 183 Allyl Cyclohexylpropionate 377 Allyl Hexanoate (Allyl Caproate) 55 Allyl Isothiocyanate (Volatile Oil of Mustard) 446 Aluminum Ammonium Sulfate (Crystal: Ammonium Alum, Dried: Burnt Ammonium Alum) 447 Aluminum Potassium Sulfate (Crystal: Alum or Potassium Alum, Dried: Burnt Alum) 29 (3-Amino-3-carboxypropyl)dimethylsulfonium Chloride 45 Ammonia 36 Ammonium Alginate 248 Ammonium Bicarbonate (Ammonium Hydrogen Carbonate) 245 Ammonium Carbonate 85 Ammonium Chloride 463 Ammonium Dihydrogen Phosphate (Ammonium Phosphate, Monobasic) 33 Ammonium
    [Show full text]
  • Nitration Reactions and HPLC Analysis By: Justin Dancer Mentor: Dr. Valerie Burke
    Nitration Reactions and HPLC Analysis By: Justin Dancer Mentor: Dr. Valerie Burke Abstract: In this project, twenty-one monosubstituted benzene derivatives were nitrated under the same general set of conditions1 in order to design a new organic chemistry laboratory experiment. Ten of the reactions were further investigated using HPLC analysis in order to determine how much of three potential isomeric products were made. Six of those ten starting materials have been separated on at least one type of column. Once the last four reactions are run on HPLC, the reactions can be quantified so that students can determine themselves what percentage of products are made from different nitration reactions. Introduction: + An aromatic nitration is a reaction where a positively charged nitronium ion (NO2 ) reacts with the electron rich pi system of an aromatic ring. A hydrogen atom is then pulled off of the ring to restore the pi system of the aromatic compound as shown below. Figure 1: General Nitration Reaction + / NO2 ! !!!!!"#$$!#%!&'()#*+,!-.& 0!! ! !12,3+)!4! ! When there is a functional group, also known as a substituent, on the aromatic ring, the rate of the reaction and the location where the nitronium ion adds to the ring are both affected depending on the substituent on the ring. There are two main categories of substituents: electron withdrawing groups and electron releasing groups. Electron withdrawing groups pull electron density away from the ring, making the already unstable carbocation intermediate even more unstable. This leads to the reaction progressing slower than that of an unsubstituted aromatic ring. Electron releasing groups donate electron density to the ring which stabilizes the carbocation making the reaction progress faster than an unsubstituted aromatic ring.
    [Show full text]
  • Diseases and Their Control Measures Were Developed by CES Scientists in the 1930S
    of the disease was demonstrated and preventive Diseases and their control measures were developed by CES scientists in the 1930s. Clean planting stock was found essential to Edmond C. Calavan, Professor, Emeritus, prevention. Department of Plant Pathology; Seymour D. Van Gundy, Professor, Tristeza, exocortis, and stubborn Department of Nematology; Joseph W. Eckert, Professor, A mysterious malady called “quick decline” Department of Plant Pathology; and began killing orange trees in southern California in Edward L. V. Johnson, Staff Research Associate, 1939. Within 25 years it caused the loss of three Department of Plant Pathology million trees, mostly sweet orange on gummosis- resistant sour orange rootstock. Some trees wilted quickly, others declined slowly and lost foliage. everal times in the past 75 years, California’s CES began a crash research program in the early S citrus industry faced catastrophic losses from 1940s. J.M. Wallace and H.S. Fawcett showed that fruit and tree diseases. In every case, timely tristeza virus caused the disease, and R.C. Dickson research greatly reduced the damage. and colleagues found that it was transmitted in California by the melon aphid. Further research Gummosis and psorosis, old maladies determined that Troyer and Carrizo citranges were Heavy losses of trees from gummosis (foot rot) in tolerant to tristeza, so these rootstocks were used 1900-15 alarmed citrus growers and stimulated extensively for replants and new orchards. their interest in research, thus providing impetus Tristeza was, for a time at least, brought under to the new Citrus Experiment Station (CES). substantial control. Recent spread of new strains Gummosis-affected trees turn yellow, decline, and of tristeza virus that cause severe damage to sweet die if the trunk or primary roots are girdled.
    [Show full text]
  • NEWS 01 2019 ENG:Layout 1
    Weight reduction Clear view in wet conditions Less expensive and easy New testing methodology Polarizing sunglasses block the Analysis of dioxins in foods for composite material glare from wet surfaces and feeds using GC-MS/MS CONTENT APPLICATION Clear view in wet conditions – UV-Vis spectroscopy: Polarizing sunglasses block the glare from wet surfaces 2 What’s in the water? – Water analysis of humic acid with fluorescence spectroscopy 6 Quality control of zeolites for washing powder with EDX-8000P 9 Purification made easy – Prepara- tive purification of Ibuprofen and its related substances 12 New anti-doping method for equestrian sports 14 Less expensive with easier handling – Analysis of dioxins in foods and feeds using GC-MS/MS 16 Organic plastic in beverage bottles 22 Automotive industry – New testing methodology for weight reduction 24 Ethanol as a blending component for petrol – Determination of higher alcohols and volatile impurities by gas chromatogra- phic method 26 PRODUCTS Speeding up with Velox Core Shell – The new “Velox Core Shell“ LC columns offer more application possibilities 20 LATEST NEWS Mission for a good cause – Social Day 2018: Shimadzu Europe plants 1,500 new trees 5 Pyrolysis GC-MS user meeting – March 28, 2019 at Shimadzu’s Laboratory World Clear view in wet Duisburg, Germany 28 conditions MARKETS UV-Vis spectroscopy: Polarizing sunglasses block the Chemical, Petrochemical, Biofuel and Energy glare from wet surfaces Clinical s the days become longer, sunglasses are a common Environment A sight again. Today, there are no limits to design and color Food, Beverages, Agriculture of frame and glasses. Pharmaceutical But not all design choices are purely aesthetic: Yellow glasses Plastics and Rubber for example enhance contrast while the advantage of green Figure 1: Investigated sunglasses.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplemental Label
    Group 7 Fungicide Supplemental Label For use in citrus fruit This supplemental label expires December 31, 2020, and must not be used or distributed after this date. Active Ingredient: boscalid*: 3-pyridinecarboxamide, 2-chloro-N-(4'-chloro(1,1'-biphenyl)-2-yl)- ................................................... 70.00% Other Ingredients: ............................................................................................................................................. 30.00% Total: .................................................................................................................................................................. 100.00% * 0.7 oz [0.044 lb ai] of boscalid in 1 oz of product EPA Reg. No. 7969-197 WARNING/AVISO Directions For Use • It is a violation of federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling. • The supplemental labeling and the entire Endura® fungicide container label, EPA Reg. No. 7969-197, must be in possession of the user at the time of application. • Read the label affixed to the container for Endura before applying. • Use of Endura according to this labeling is subject to the use precautions and limitations imposed by the label affixed to the container for Endura. BASF Corporation 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Table 1. Endura® fungicide Crop-specific Requirements Minimum Product Use Maximum Maximum Time from Rate per Number of Product Rate Crop Target Disease Application Application Applications per Year to Harvest (ozs/A) per Year (ozs/A) (PHI)
    [Show full text]