" Buffalograss Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides"

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

HORTSCIENCE 27(8):898-899. 1992. bicides for grass, broadleaf, and sedge weed control. Experiments were conducted near Braden- Buffalograss Tolerance to ton, Fla., at a commercial sod production farm on a Myakka fine sand (sandy, sili- Postemergence Herbicides ceous, hyperthermic Typic Psammaquets). Buffalograss was maintained at a moderate Lambert B. McCarty and Daniel L. Colvin to high maintenance level with a mowing Department of Environmental Horticulture, University of Florida, height of 3.8 cm, N (sources varied) appli- -1 Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Fifield Hall, Box 110670, cations of 49 kg·ha every 6 to 8 weeks, Gainesville, FL 32611-0670 and irrigation to prevent drought stress. Ma- ture ‘Prairie’ and ‘Oasis’ buffalograss were Additional index words. Buchloe dactyloides, turf, weed control subjected to the herbicide treatments listed in Table 1. Experiments involving the two Abstract. Buffalograss [Buchloe dactyloides (Nutt.) Engelm.] is a turfgrass species cultivars were initiated in June 1991, and the traditionally adapted to low-rainfall areas that may incur unacceptable weed encroach- test was repeated in Aug. 1991 on an adja- ment when grown in higher rainfall areas such as Florida. An experiment was per- cent site. Herbicides were applied with a CO2- formed to evaluate the tolerance of two new buffalograss cultivars, ‘Oasis’ and ‘Prairie’, powered backpack sprayer calibrated to de- to postemergence herbicides commonly used for grass, broadleaf, and sedge weed liver 187 liters·ha-1. Crop-oil concentrate was control. Twenty to 40 days were required for each cultivar to recover from treatment added at 1.25% (v/v) to all treatments, ex- with asulam, MSMA, and sethoxydim (2.24, 2.24, and 0.56 kg-ha-l, respectively). cept for those commercial formulations with Other herbicides used for postemergence grass weed control (metsulfuron, quinclorac, -1 premixed oil. Plots measuring 3 x 3 m were and diclofop at 0.017, 0.56, and 1.12 kg·ha , respectively) did not cause unacceptable arranged in a randomized complete-block buffalograss injury. Herbicides used for postemergence broadleaf weed control, triclo- -1 design with four replicates. pyr, 2,4-D, sulfometuron, dicamba (0.56, 1.12, 0.017, and 0.56 kg·ha , respectively), Buffalograss quality following application and a three-way combination of 2,4-D + dicamba + mecoprop (1.2 + 0.54 + 0.13 -1 of herbicides was assessed visually using a kg·ha ), caused 20 to 30 days of unacceptable or marginally acceptable turfgrass 1 to 9 scale, where best turf was rated 9 and quality, while 20 days were required for ‘Prairie’ buffalograss to recover from atrazine 6.5 was considered the minimum acceptable treatments. ‘Oasis’ buffalograss did not fully recover from 2,4-D or 2,4-D + dicamba turf quality level in terms of turf color, shoot + mecoprop through 40 days after treatment. Herbicides used for postemergence sedge density, and uniformity. Data were subjected control, bentazon and imazaquin, caused slightly reduced, but acceptable, levels of to analysis of variance to test for interactions turf quality in both cultivars throughout the experiment. Chemical names used: 6- within and between experiments, cultivars, chloro-N-ethyl-N’-(1-methylethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine (atrazine); methyl[(4- and herbicide treatments. Treatment means aminophenyl)sulfonyl]carhamate (asulam); 3-(1-methylethyl)-(1H)-2,1,3-benzothiadi- were separated by Waller-Duncan’s k = 100 azin-4(3H)-one 2,2-dioxide (bentazon); 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid (dicamba); t test at P = 0.05. (±)-2-[4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenoxy]propanoic acid (diclofop); 2-[4,5-dihydro-4- Cultivar interactions were significant; methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acid (imaza- however, experiment interactions were not. quin); (±)-2-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)propanoic acid (mecoprop); 2-[[[[(4-methoxy- Therefore, data were separated by cultivar 6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acid (metsulfuron); and combined over experiments. monosodium salt of methylarsonic acid (MSMA); 2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethyl- ‘Oasis’. Unacceptable turf quality 10 days thio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-one(sethoxydim); 2-[[[[(4,6-dimethylethyl-2- after treatment (DAT) followed application pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acid (sulfometuron); [(3,5,6-trich- of asulam, dicamba, sethoxydim, sulfome- loro-2-pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid (triclopyr); (2,4-dichlorophenoxyl)acetic acid (2,4-D); turon, triclopyr, 2,4-D, and the three-way 3,7-dichloro-8-quinolinecarboxylic acid (quinclorac). combination of 2,4-D + dicamba + me- coprop (Table 1). Turf was unaffected at this Buffalograss is a warm-season, stolon- when buffalograss is maintained under man- time by bentazon, diclofop, and metsulfuron iferous turfgrass native to the Great Plains agement regimes that are more intense than treatments. Turf quality at 20 DAT was ac- of North America from Montana to Mexico the natural adaptation of the grass, problems ceptable for all treatments, except sethoxy- (Duble, 1989). Desirable buffalograss char- may occur (Duble, 1989; Riordan, 1991). If dim, sulfometuron, triclopyr, and 2,4-D + acteristics include excellent drought resis- buffalograss is overwatered, overfertilized, dicamba + mecoprop. Asulam- and 2,4-D- tance and the ability to produce acceptable or exposed to excessive traffic, stand density treated turf was marginally (6.5-6.9) ac- turf in subhumid and semiarid regions that and vigor are often reduced, leading to open ceptable at 20 DAT. Turfgrass quality at 30 received an average annual rainfall of 300 to niches where weeds can easily become es- DAT was acceptable for all treatments, ex- 560 mm. These characteristics have created tablished. Currently, extensive breeding ef- cept for 2,4-D and 2,4-D + dicamba + me- interest in the possibility of growing buffa- forts are concentrated on producing improved coprop. Although acceptable, triclopyr-treated lograss outside its native habitat, in areas varieties that tolerate intensive maintenance turf exhibited marginal phytotoxicity at 30 that are facing increasing water shortages. A practices and much traffic. ‘Prairie’ and ‘Oa- DAT. At 40 DAT, buffalograss had re- low water-requiring and aesthetically ac- sis’ are two recently released buffalograss covered to acceptable levels, except for those ceptable turfgrass would be ideal for low- cultivars that exhibit improved turf quality, plots treated with 2,4-D and 2,4-D + di- maintenance areas such as roadsides, golf recuperative potential, and extended fall camba + mecoprop. course roughs, utility rights-of-way, and greenness (Riordan, 1991). These cultivars ‘Prairie’. Buffalograss quality 10 DAT was playgrounds. likely will be used successfully outside the reduced, relative to the control, by all treat- Researchers, however, have noted that Great Plains in states east of the Mississippi ments except the bentazon, imazaquin, met- River. To our knowledge, no research has sulfuron, and quinclorac treatments (Table been conducted on buffalograss concerning 1). At 10 DAT, turf quality was unaccept- its tolerance to postemergence herbicides. able for plots treated with 2,4-D, asulam, Received for publication 13 Dec. 1991. Accepted Given the possibility of buffalograss having atrazine, dicamba, MSMA, sethoxydim, for publication 27 Mar. 1992. Florida Agr. Expt. greater weed invasion problems when grown sulfometuron, and 2,4-D + dicamba + me- Sta. J. series no. R-02045. The cost of publishing this paper was defrayed in part by the payment of outside the Great Plains, research was con- coprop. At 20 DAT, unacceptable turf qual- page charges. Under postal regulations, this paper ducted at the Univ. of Florida to determine ity was present on plots treated with asulam, therefore must be hereby marked advertisement the tolerance of ‘Prairie’ and ‘Oasis’ buffa- sethoxydim, and sulfometuron, with only solely to indicate this fact. lograss to currently used postemergence her- marginal quality exhibited by turf treated with HORTSCIENCE, VOL. 27(8), AUGUST 1992 Table 1. Quality rating of ‘Oasis’ and ‘Prairie’ buffalograss at given day after treatment (DAT) with selected herbicides. zRated visually on a scale of 1 to 9, where 9 = best turf and 6.5 = minimum acceptability. yMSD = minimum significant difference according to the Waller-Duncan k ratio t test; data are the means of two separate experiments with four observations per experiment. triclopyr, 2,4-D, dicamba, and 2,4-D + di- 2.2, and 4.5 kg·ha-1) to mature buffalograss Treatment with other herbicides used for camba + mecoprop. None of the other treat- reduced turf quality through 40 DAT. Buf- postemergence broadleaf and sedge weed ments had reduced turf quality at an unac- falograss treated with high rates of these her- control (atrazine, imazaquin, and bentazon) ceptable level 20 DAT. Turf quality 30 DAT bicides did not recover through 70 days. did not reduce turf quality to an unacceptable was acceptable for all treatments except se- In this study, herbicides used for post- level throughout the experiments with either thoxydim. By 40 DAT, buffalograss quality emergence grass weed control (MSMA, asu- cultivar. Both of them exhibited acceptable was acceptable for all treatments. Herbicide lam, and sethoxydim) induced initial moderate tolerance to metsulfuron and quinclorac, two treatments providing ratings similar to the to severe damage on ‘Prairie’ and ‘Oasis’ relatively new herbicides with postemergence untreated
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]
  • Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the WSSA
    Weed Science 2010 58:511–518 Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the Weed Science Society of America Below is the complete list of all common and chemical of herbicides as approved by the International Organization names of herbicides approved by the Weed Science Society of for Standardization (ISO). A sponsor may submit a proposal America (WSSA) and updated as of September 1, 2010. for a common name directly to the WSSA Terminology Beginning in 1996, it has been published yearly in the last Committee. issue of Weed Science with Directions for Contributors to A herbicide common name is not synonymous with Weed Science. This list is published in lieu of the selections a commercial formulation of the same herbicide, and in printed previously on the back cover of Weed Science. Only many instances, is not synonymous with the active ingredient common and chemical names included in this complete of a commercial formulation as identified on the product list should be used in WSSA publications. In the absence of label. If the herbicide is a salt or simple ester of a parent a WSSA-approved common name, the industry code number compound, the WSSA common name applies to the parent as compiled by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) with compound only. CAS systematic chemical name or the systematic chemical The chemical name used in this list is that preferred by the name alone may be used. The current approved list is also Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) according to their system of available at our web site (www.wssa.net).
    [Show full text]
  • Atrazine Active Ingredient Data Package April 1, 2015
    Active Ingredient Data Package ATRAZINE Version #5 (May 14, 2015) Long Island Pesticide Pollution Prevention Strategy Active Ingredient Assessment Bureau of Pest Management Pesticide Product Registration Section Contents 1.0 Active Ingredient General Information – Atrazine .................................................................... 3 1.1 Pesticide Type ........................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Primary Pesticide Uses .............................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Registration History .................................................................................................................. 3 1.4 Environmental Fate Properties ................................................................................................. 3 1.5 Standards, Criteria, and Guidance ............................................................................................ 4 2.0 Active Ingredient Usage Information ........................................................................................ 5 2.1 Reported Use of Atrazine in New York State ............................................................................ 5 2.2 Overall Number and Type of Products Containing the Active Ingredient ................................ 7 2.3 Critical Need of Active Ingredient to Meet the Pest Management Need of Agriculture, Industry, Residents, Agencies, and Institutions ......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Herbicide Mode of Action Table High Resistance Risk
    Herbicide Mode of Action Table High resistance risk Chemical family Active constituent (first registered trade name) GROUP 1 Inhibition of acetyl co-enzyme A carboxylase (ACC’ase inhibitors) clodinafop (Topik®), cyhalofop (Agixa®*, Barnstorm®), diclofop (Cheetah® Gold* Decision®*, Hoegrass®), Aryloxyphenoxy- fenoxaprop (Cheetah®, Gold*, Wildcat®), fluazifop propionates (FOPs) (Fusilade®), haloxyfop (Verdict®), propaquizafop (Shogun®), quizalofop (Targa®) Cyclohexanediones (DIMs) butroxydim (Factor®*), clethodim (Select®), profoxydim (Aura®), sethoxydim (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*), tralkoxydim (Achieve®) Phenylpyrazoles (DENs) pinoxaden (Axial®) GROUP 2 Inhibition of acetolactate synthase (ALS inhibitors), acetohydroxyacid synthase (AHAS) Imidazolinones (IMIs) imazamox (Intervix®*, Raptor®), imazapic (Bobcat I-Maxx®*, Flame®, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazapyr (Arsenal Xpress®*, Intervix®*, Lightning®*, Midas®* OnDuty®*), imazethapyr (Lightning®*, Spinnaker®) Pyrimidinyl–thio- bispyribac (Nominee®), pyrithiobac (Staple®) benzoates Sulfonylureas (SUs) azimsulfuron (Gulliver®), bensulfuron (Londax®), chlorsulfuron (Glean®), ethoxysulfuron (Hero®), foramsulfuron (Tribute®), halosulfuron (Sempra®), iodosulfuron (Hussar®), mesosulfuron (Atlantis®), metsulfuron (Ally®, Harmony®* M, Stinger®*, Trounce®*, Ultimate Brushweed®* Herbicide), prosulfuron (Casper®*), rimsulfuron (Titus®), sulfometuron (Oust®, Eucmix Pre Plant®*, Trimac Plus®*), sulfosulfuron (Monza®), thifensulfuron (Harmony®* M), triasulfuron (Logran®, Logran® B-Power®*), tribenuron (Express®),
    [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]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, RANGE STAR,01/30/2020
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, DC 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION January 30, 2020 Nathan Ehresman Registrations Manager Albaugh, LLC P.O. Box 2127 Valdosta, GA 31604-2127 Subject: Label Amendment – Add Pre-plant directions Product Name: Range Star EPA Registration Number: 42750-55 Application Date: August 17, 2017 Decision Number: 533635 Dear Mr. Ehresman: The amended label referred to above, submitted in connection with registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended, is acceptable. This approval does not affect any conditions that were previously imposed on this registration. You continue to be subject to existing conditions on your registration and any deadlines connected with them. A stamped copy of your labeling is enclosed for your records. This labeling supersedes all previously accepted labeling. You must submit one copy of the final printed labeling before you release the product for shipment with the new labeling. In accordance with 40 CFR 152.130(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. Should you wish to add/retain a reference to the company’s website on your label, then please be aware that the website becomes labeling under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and is subject to review by the Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • AP-42, CH 9.2.2: Pesticide Application
    9.2.2PesticideApplication 9.2.2.1General1-2 Pesticidesaresubstancesormixturesusedtocontrolplantandanimallifeforthepurposesof increasingandimprovingagriculturalproduction,protectingpublichealthfrompest-bornediseaseand discomfort,reducingpropertydamagecausedbypests,andimprovingtheaestheticqualityofoutdoor orindoorsurroundings.Pesticidesareusedwidelyinagriculture,byhomeowners,byindustry,andby governmentagencies.Thelargestusageofchemicalswithpesticidalactivity,byweightof"active ingredient"(AI),isinagriculture.Agriculturalpesticidesareusedforcost-effectivecontrolofweeds, insects,mites,fungi,nematodes,andotherthreatstotheyield,quality,orsafetyoffood.Theannual U.S.usageofpesticideAIs(i.e.,insecticides,herbicides,andfungicides)isover800millionpounds. AiremissionsfrompesticideusearisebecauseofthevolatilenatureofmanyAIs,solvents, andotheradditivesusedinformulations,andofthedustynatureofsomeformulations.Mostmodern pesticidesareorganiccompounds.EmissionscanresultdirectlyduringapplicationorastheAIor solventvolatilizesovertimefromsoilandvegetation.Thisdiscussionwillfocusonemissionfactors forvolatilization.Thereareinsufficientdataavailableonparticulateemissionstopermitemission factordevelopment. 9.2.2.2ProcessDescription3-6 ApplicationMethods- Pesticideapplicationmethodsvaryaccordingtothetargetpestandtothecroporothervalue tobeprotected.Insomecases,thepesticideisapplieddirectlytothepest,andinotherstothehost plant.Instillothers,itisusedonthesoilorinanenclosedairspace.Pesticidemanufacturershave developedvariousformulationsofAIstomeetboththepestcontrolneedsandthepreferred
    [Show full text]
  • Chemic~L$,·!9R~:W,Eed Control in Corn GERALD R
    n:N J 600 AGRICUL TUJ:lAL EXTENSION SERVICE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA \ \ .. _., .-·· .. -.~1~-.-~~rr-:1 AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS \ -· _.;-,< ,. •-- . FACT SHEET No. 6-Revised 1979 Chemic~l$,·!9r~:w,eed Control in Corn GERALD R. MILLER \,_,.,, .... This fact sheet is intended only as a summary of suggested alter­ Herbicide -names and formulations native chemicals for weed control in corn. Label information Common Trade Concentration and should be read and followed exactly. For further information, name name commercial formulation 1 see Extension Bulletin 400, Cultural and Chemical Weed Control in Field Crops. Alachlor Lasso 4 lb/gal L Lasso II 15%G Selection of an effective chemical or combination of chemicals Atrazine Mtrex, 80% WP, 4 lb/gal L should be based on consideration of the following factors: others 90% WDG -Clearance status of the chemical Atrazine and propachlor Mtram 20%G -Use of the crop Bentazon Basagran 4 lb/gal L -Potential for soil residues that may affect following crops Butylate and protectant Sutan+ 6.7 lb/gal L -Kinds of weeds Cyanazine Bladex 80%WP, 15%G, 4 lb/gal L -Soil texture Dicamba Banvel 4 lb/gal L -pH of soil Dicamba and 2, 4-D Banvel-K 1.25 lb/gal dicamba -Amount of organic matter in the soil 2.50 lb/gal 2,4-D -Formulation of the chemical EPTC and protectant Eradicane 6.7 lb/gal L -Application equipment available Linuron Lorox 50%WP -Potential for drift problems Metolachlor Dual 6 or 8 lb/gal L Pendimethalin Prowl 4 lb/gal L Propachlor Sexton, 65% WP, 20% G, 4 lb/gal L Ramrod 2,4-D several various ·t G = Granular, L = Liquid, WP=Wettable Powder, WDG =Water Dispers­ Effectiveness of herbicides on weeds in corn 1 sible Granule Preplanting Preemergence C Postemergence -;;;..
    [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]
  • 2019 Minnesota Chemicals of High Concern List
    Minnesota Department of Health, Chemicals of High Concern List, 2019 Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic (PBT) or very Persistent, very High Production CAS Bioaccumulative Use Example(s) and/or Volume (HPV) Number Chemical Name Health Endpoint(s) (vPvB) Source(s) Chemical Class Chemical1 Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP Wood and textiles finishes, Cancer, Respiratory 11th ROC); WA Appen1; WA CHCC; disinfection, tissue 50-00-0 Formaldehyde x system, Eye irritant Minnesota HRV; Minnesota RAA preservative Gastrointestinal Minnesota HRL Contaminant 50-00-0 Formaldehyde (in water) system EU Category 1 Endocrine disruptor pesticide 50-29-3 DDT, technical, p,p'DDT Endocrine system Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP PAH (chem-class) 11th ROC; OSPAR Chemicals of Concern; EuC Endocrine Disruptor Cancer, Endocrine Priority List; EPA Final PBT Rule for 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene x x system TRI; EPA Priority PBT); Oregon P3 List; WA Appen1; Minnesota HRV WA Appen1; Minnesota HRL Dyes and diaminophenol mfg, wood preservation, 51-28-5 2,4-Dinitrophenol Eyes pesticide, pharmaceutical Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; NTP 11th Preparation of amino resins, 51-79-6 Urethane (Ethyl carbamate) Cancer, Development ROC); WA Appen1 solubilizer, chemical intermediate Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP Research; PAH (chem-class) 11th ROC; EPA Final PBT Rule for 53-70-3 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Cancer x TRI; WA PBT List; OSPAR Chemicals of Concern); WA Appen1; Oregon P3 List Maine (CA Prop 65; NTP 11th ROC); Research 53-96-3 2-Acetylaminofluorene Cancer WA Appen1 Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP Lubricant, antioxidant, 55-18-5 N-Nitrosodiethylamine Cancer 11th ROC); WA Appen1 plastics stabilizer Maine (CA Prop 65; IRIS; NTP 11th Pesticide (EPA reg.
    [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]
  • PESTICIDES Criteria for a Recommended Standard
    CRITERIA FOR A RECOMMENDED STANDARD OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE DURING THE MANUFACTURE AND FORMULATION OF PESTICIDES criteria for a recommended standard... OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE DURING THE MANUFACTURE AND FORMULATION OF PESTICIDES * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE Public Health Service Center for Disease Control National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health July 1978 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 DISCLAIMER Mention of company names or products does not constitute endorsement by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. DHEW (NIOSH) Publication No. 78-174 PREFACE The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 emphasizes the need for standards to protect the health and provide for the safety of workers occupationally exposed to an ever-increasing number of potential hazards. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has implemented a formal system of research, with priorities determined on the basis of specified indices, to provide relevant data from which valid criteria for effective standards can be derived. Recommended standards for occupational exposure, which are the result of this work, are based on the effects of exposure on health. The Secretary of Labor will weigh these recommendations along with other considerations, such as feasibility and means of implementation, in developing regulatory standards. Successive reports will be presented as research and epideiriologic studies are completed and as sampling and analytical methods are developed. Criteria and standards will be reviewed periodically to ensure continuing protection of workers. The contributions to this document on pesticide manufacturing and formulating industries by NIOSH staff members, the review consultants, the reviewer selected by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), other Federal agencies, and by Robert B.
    [Show full text]