DOCSLIB.ORG

The Case of Aclonifen

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Case of Aclonifen Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 3(6): 472-477, 2015 Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology www.agrifoodscience.com, Turkish Science and Technology The Symptoms of Herbicidal Action: The Case of Aclonifen Özgür Kılınç* Department of Plant Production and Technologies, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technologies, Niğde University, 51240 Niğde, Turkey A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T The symptoms which were directly bound to the biochemical mode of action of an Article history: herbicide, other symptoms result from an indirect consequence of this action. The Received 20 March 2015 symptoms of herbicidal action deeply differed and that the climatic factors during the two Accepted 01 April 2015 first weeks after treatment could change definitely the result of the selective herbicide Available online, ISSN: 2148-127X action. The repetitive observation of symptoms allows to inform the farmer about the tolerance or resistance of certain plant species, including the culture, for instance through Keywords: the appearance of symptoms on the first leaves of the seedlings and their absence in the Aclonifen following leaves. As a whole, the accurate observation of herbicidal symptoms on plants Selectivity is the essential, rapid and non-expensive analysis of treatment effectiveness at the field Herbicide scale. The purpose of the current report is to describe the symptoms of a very complex Treatment herbicidal action, that of aclonifen involving two modes of action for the same molecule, Carotenoids approximately at the same concentration, and to compare these symptoms under field conditions and under controlled conditions, for a better understanding. * Corresponding Author: E-mail: [email protected] Introduction Selectively killed weed close to cultivated plants was founded on the structural analogy of the concerned which do have to remain unaffected, is the necessary herbicidal family with indol-3-acetic acid (I.A.A.) and on condition for using herbicides in agronomy (Tissut et al., the fact that these herbicides were chemically and 2006) biologically stable in marked contrast with I.A.A. This challenge is generally not a simple one and (Grossmann, 2000; PerrotRechenmann et al., 2005.) farmers do have to pay much attention to the effectiveness The observation of such symptoms by the farmers and selectivity of such a chemical operation which teached them that the herbicidal action may be rapid or depends on several factors, especially climatic slow, depending on the type of biochemical mode of (temperature, rain, hygrometry) and agronomic factors action, that the effectiveness of a herbicide is tightly (soil nature, development stage of the culture, weed bound to the development stage of the target-plant, that, species and nature of the planted cultivars). That is why in the two main strategies of treatment (pre-emergence the careful observation of the symptoms of the herbicidal and post-emergence), the symptoms of herbicidal action action on the culture and on the weeds is a precious deeply differed and that the climatic factors during the source of information (Scalla, 1991; Gauvrit, 1996) two first weeks after treatment could change definitely the Before the sixties, two main types of symptoms of result of the selective herbicide action. herbicidal actions were commonly observed which were Beside the symptoms which were directly bound to due to either membrane disruption (H2SO4, the biochemical mode of action of an herbicide, other dinitrophenols) or synthetic phytohormones (2, 4-D, 2, 4, symptoms result from an indirect consequence of this 5-T, etc.). Membrane disruption obtained through the action. For instance, the inhibition of cell division often structural change in the polar fatty acids induced rapid induces an increase in leaf chlorophyll concentration, water loss, oxidations and cell death on the places where probably due to a higher nitrogen disponibility (Devine et droplets of the herbicide solution are in close contact with al., 1993; Tissut et al., 2006). In the same way, the cells of the aerial parts. The major symptom is that of inhibition of protein synthesis may induce a strong dark spots suggesting a burning effect. (Fedtke, 1982; anthocyanin synthesis or the accumulation of the Bourdin, 1983; Cabanette, 1986; Hascoet and Bourdin, secondary pigments, as it is the case for glyposate (Franz 1988). et al., 1997) The main symptom of phytohormones action was the All these symptoms contribute to evaluate in the field disorganization of the stem elongation process which the effectiveness of a herbicide strategy and, often, to affected selectively dicotyledonous plants. This symptom deduce the type of herbicide which was used. Kılınç / Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 3(6): 472-477, 2015 Furthermore, the repetitive observation of symptoms Materials and Methods allows to inform the farmer about the tolerance or Plant culture: Six plant species including Zea mays L. resistance of certain plant species, including the culture, var Furio, Triticum aestivum L., Alopecurus myosuroides for instance through the appearance of symptoms on the Hudson, Cucumis sativus L., Sinapis arvensis L. and first leaves of the seedlings and their absence in the Vicia faba L. were concurrently cultivated. The weed following leaves. seeds were supplied by Arbiotech, 35590 Saint Gilles, As a whole, the accurate observation of herbicidal France. The pre-emergent treatments were comparatively symptoms on plants is the essential, rapid and non- carried out either with pure aclonifen dispersed in water + expensive analysis of treatment effectiveness at the field 2% dimethylsulfoxide or with the formulated preparation scale. Challenge 600 dispersed in water (30 ml.m-2). The purpose of the current report is to describe the Plants (Alopecurus myosuroides and Brassica napus) symptoms of a very complex herbicidal action, that of were grown in a greenhouse with an electric heating aclonifen involving two modes of action for the same supply when temperature was lower than 10°C. A 150 molecule, approximately at the same concentration, and to µE.m-2.s-1.PAR light supply was added for 16 hours/day. compare these symptoms under field conditions and under In other experiments, plants (Zea mays, Cucumis sativus controlled conditions, for a better understanding. L. and Triticum aestivum) were grown in culture chamber Aclonifen (2-chloro-6-nitro-3-phenoxyaniline) is an (day: 16 h, 25°C; night: 8 h, 18°C R.H. 80%) and Vicia herbicide having the typical diphenylether structure faba and Sinapis arvensis were cultivated in the fields. (Figure 1). Among this chemical family numerous The formulated preparation Challenge 600 (with derivatives are known herbicides inhibiting one enzyme surfactant and other formulating agents) was used as a protoporphyrinogen oxidase (EC 1.3.3.4) in the preplant treatment at different doses, among which 2.7 kg biochemical pathway leading to chlorophyll or a.i/ha in 300 l water which is the conventional cytochromes biosynthesis (Matringe et al., 1989, Witkowski concentration for agronomic uses in France. and Halling, 1989; Arnould and Camadro, 1998). 14C labelling:14C aclonifen (1167 Bq.nmol-1) was a Several of these diphenylether derivatives were generous gift from Bayer CropScience AG Wuppertal authorized for agronomic uses (acifluorfen, lactofen, Germany. Unlabelled aclonifen was extracted from the oxyfluorfen, etc.) in different countries. One of them, commercial product “Challenge 600” (Bayer nitrofen has been forbidden since the end of the XXth CropScience) containing 600g/l of a.i. The acetonic century (Tomlin, 2006; Tissut et al, 2006) extract was fractionated with petrol ether 40-60°C. The As shown in Figure 1, aclonifen has a specific latter solution was evaporated to dryness, dissolved in the substitution allowing a good inhibitory activity on the minimal amount of acetone and stored at 4°C until chlorophyll synthesis pathway but, at the same crystallization. This process was repeated three times and concentration, it has also a noticeable inhibitory activity gave pure aclonifen as controlled by TLC on carotenoid biosynthesis. These two modes of action chromatography and spectrophotometry. determine a target space inside the plants (Figure 2) Critical concentration measurement: Plants were which is limited to the aerial parts (Kilinc et al, 2009). treated by 14C aclonifen at different concentration. Plant Furthermore, these two modes of action seem fresh samples (aerial and underground parts separately) complementary or even synergistic as they contribute were submitted to three successive extractions with together to induce membrane disruption through; acetone. The acetonic solutions were evaporated to 1 The emission of toxic O2 resulting from plastidial dryness and redissolved in 70% EtOH. An aliquot of the protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibition (Matrige et dry residual pellet was dissolved with 10 mL of al., 1989; Dayan et al., 2001). mineralization mixture, H2O2/perchloric acid/H2O (1/1/1, The suppression of the carotenoid plastidial v/v/v), in closed polyethylene flasks. After 2-3 days of accumulation playing the role of ROS scavengers mineralization at 25°C, the radioactivity of the for the biological membranes (Böger and mineralization mixture as well as that of ethanol 70% Sandmann, 1992; Edge et al., 1997; Kilinc et al., solutions were measured through scintillation counting 2011). (1414 Winspectral EG&G Wallac), using PerkinElmer ULTIMA GOLD AB liquid. During the mineralization Such a double complementary mode of action 14 step, the absence of CO2 leaching from the flasks was expressed with its highest effectiveness in young plants controlled using a KOH trap. The critical concentration leads to choose the pre-emergence treatment as the best was the lower concentration inducing lethal symptom. agronomic strategy. This requires to treatment of the Autoradiography: TLC chromatography was carried superficial soil layer just after planting the seeds of the out on silica gel thin layer plates (Macherey-Nagel TLC culture. Afterwards, aclonifen has to be absorbed by the plates SIL G-25 0.25 mm silica gel).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Acifluorfen Sorption, Degradation, and Mobility in a Mississippi Delta Soil
    Acifluorfen Sorption, Degradation, and Mobility in a Mississippi Delta Soil L. A. Gaston* and M. A. Locke ABSTRACT repulsion effects, acifluorfen is sorbed by soil or soil Potential surface water and groundwater contaminants include her- constituents (Pusino et al., 1991; Ruggiero et al., 1992; bicides that are applied postemergence. Although applied to the plant Pusino et al., 1993; Gennari et al., 1994b; NeÁgre et al., canopy, a portion of any application reaches the soil either directly 1995; Locke et al., 1997). Although the extent of sorp- or via subsequent foliar washoff. This study examined sorption, degra- tion in soil is generally proportional to OC content dation, and mobility of the postemergence herbicide acifluorfen (5-[2- (Gennari et al., 1994b; NeÁgre et al., 1995; Locke et al., chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid) in Dundee 1997), sorption likely involves processes other than par- silty clay loam (fine-silty, mixed, thermic, Aeric Ochraqualf) taken titioning between aqueous and organic matter phases. from conventional till (CT) and no-till (NT) field plots. Homogeneous In particular, acifluorfen forms complexes with divalent surface and subsurface samples were used in the sorption and degrada- tion studies; intact soil columns (30 cm long and 10 cm diam.) were and trivalent cations (Pusino et al., 1991; Pusino et al., used in the mobility study. Batch sorption isotherms were nonlinear 1993) that may be sorbed or precipitated. Complex for- (Freundlich model) and sorption paralleled organic C (OC) content. mation and subsequent sorption may partially account All tillage by depth combinations of soil exhibited a time-dependent for increased acifluorfen sorption with decreasing soil approach to sorption equilibrium that was well described by a two- pH or increasing cation exchange capacity (Pusino et site equilibrium±kinetic model.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Risk Assessment for Saflufenacil
    TEXT SEARCHABLE DCOUMENT 2011 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION PC Code: 118203 DP Barcode: 380638 and 381293 Thursday, April 07, 2011 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Ecological Risk Assessment for Saflufenacil Section 3 New Chemical Uses as a harvest aid on dry edible beans, dry peas, soybean, oilseeds "sunflower subgroup 20B", oilseeds "cotton subgroup 20C", and oilseeds canola "subgroup 20A". TO: Kathryn Montague, M.S., Product Manager 23 Herbicide Branch Registration Division (RD) (7505P) FROM: ~ Mohammed Ruhman, Ph.D., Agronomist 2 :4- . ""=- ........ 04!tJt! (I neith Sappington, Senior Biologist/Science Adviso~.... Vd- Environmental Risk Branch V O'f/ .../ II Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) THROUGH: Mah Shamim, Ph.D., Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch VI Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) This ecological risk assessment for saflufenacil new uses is relying on the attached previous assessment (Attachment 1). As shown in the usage summary (Table 1), the single and seasonal rate, for all the crops range from 0.045 to 0.089 lbs a.i/A are within the range application rates used in exposure modeling for the 2009 Section 3 New Chemical Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment (DP Barcode 349855). Therefore, risk findings determined for the 2009 assessment may be used in the assessment for this submittal. Specifically, the 2009 assessment found no chronic risks to avian and mammalian species at an agricultural use rate 0 0.134 lb a.i.lA. Acute risks were not determined for birds and mammals since saflufenacil was not acutely toxic at the highest doses tested.
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SAMPLING PLAN for Contaminants with a Vermont Health Advisory – May 2020
    PROPOSED PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SAMPLING PLAN For Contaminants with a Vermont Health Advisory – May 2020 Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Drinking Water & Groundwater Protection Division A Plan to Sample for Chemicals with a Vermont Health Advisory As required by Act 21 (2019), Section 10(b), the Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources, on or before January 1, 2020, must publish for public review and comment a plan to collect data for contaminants in drinking water from public community water systems and all non-transient non-community water systems, for which a health advisory has been established, but no Maximum Contaminant Level has been adopted. These health advisories are referred to as Vermont Health Advisories (VHAs) in this document. 1 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………..Page 3 II. Background ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… Page 4 III. Determining the VHA contaminants for sampling at public water systems ………..Page 6 IV. Sampling Considerations …..…………………………………………………………………………….. Page 10 V. Proposed Sampling Plan ………………………………………………………………………….………..Page 12 Attachments Table 1 Complete List of Vermont Health Advisories (VHAs) …………………………………………..Page 13 Table 2 Proposed List of VHAs with Potential Concern ……………………………………………………Page 18 2 | P a g e I. Executive Summary The Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources was tasked with developing a sampling plan for public review, for certain drinking water contaminants that have an established health advisory, also known as the Vermont Health Advisory (VHA) but have no Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL). This Sampling Plan (Plan) is targeted to public community and public non- transient non-community water systems. To provide context for public water system regulation, and standards that apply, a discussion of how VHAs and MCLs are determined is given.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Reregistration of Sodium Acifluorfen (PC Code 114402 / Company: 007969 BASF Corporation) for Uses on Soybeans, Peanuts and Rice (D252561)
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVISION OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS June 8, 2000 SUBJECT: Reregistration of sodium acifluorfen (PC Code 114402 / Company: 007969 BASF Corporation) for uses on soybeans, peanuts and rice (D252561). FROM: James J. Goodyear, Ph.D. Biologist (7507C) James Wolf, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist Environmental Risk Branch III/EFED THRU: Daniel Rieder, Branch Chief (7507C) Environmental Risk Branch III/EFED TO: Betty Shackleford: Branch Chief (7508C) Christina Scheltema: Chemical Review Manager Reregistration Branch III/SRRD SUMMARY Attached is EFED’s ecological risk assessment and drinking water assessment for sodium acifluorfen. The present review considers: peanuts, soybeans and rice. Lawn uses are for spot treatment and are considered a minimal risk. In addition to being a registered herbicide, acifluorfen is also the primary degradate of the herbicide lactofen (Chemical Code 128888). Acifluorfen accounted for approximately 52 percent of the applied lactofen in an aerobic metabolism soil study. Sodium acifluorfen and lactofen also both share the common degradate amino acifluorfen. This memo highlights EFED’s concerns and provides suggestions for product labeling. It also identifies data requirements to reduce uncertainties in the assessment. DATA REQUIREMENTS Environmental Fate Data Requirements: Even though all guideline data requirements have been fulfilled, the characterization of the environmental fate of acifluorfen and the other degradates may not be as straight forward as would be indicated by the basic fate properties (e.g., half-life and Koc). Thus, our ability to predict the fate or concentrations of acifluorfen in soil or water has considerable uncertainty. Additional studies are needed to better define the variability of the persistence and mobility of acifluorfen, amino acifluorfen, and desnitroacifluorfen and what site factors may be able to better predict behavior of the acifluorfen residues in the environment.
    [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]
  • Literature Review of Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation With
    Eurasian watermilfoil in Christmas Lake, 2011 Literature Review on Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation with Aquatic Herbicides Compared to Other Control Methods: Effectiveness, Impacts, and Costs Prepared for: Prepared by: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Steve McComas Blue Water Science St. Paul, MN 55116 September 2011 1 Literature Review on Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation with Aquatic Herbicides Compared to Other Control Methods: Effectiveness, Impacts, and Costs Steve McComas, Blue Water Science Table of Contents page number Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Use of Herbicides as an Aquatic Plant Control Technique ...................................................................................... 2 How Herbicides Work and Their Mode of Action ....................................................................................................... 3 Aquatic Herbicide Impacts on Humans and the Ecosystem ....................................................................................... 8 Where to Find Sources of Specific Information on herbicide Products and Their Active Ingredients ....................... 16 Harvesting, Drawdown, and Biocontrol as Aquatic Plant Control Techniques ................................................... 17 Summary of Control Techniques for Non-Native Curlyleaf Pondweed and Eurasian Watermilfoil ................... 25 Control Techniques for Other
    [Show full text]
  • Removal Rate of Herbicide Aclonifen with Isolated Bacteria and Fungi - 351
    Erguven et al.: Removal rate of herbicide aclonifen with isolated bacteria and fungi - 351 - REMOVAL RATE OF HERBICIDE ACLONIFEN WITH ISOLATED BACTERIA AND FUNGI ERGUVEN, G. O.1* ‒ BAYHAN, H.2 ‒ IKIZOGLU, B.2,3 ‒ KANAT, G.2 ‒ DEMİR, G.4 1Tunceli Univesity, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering, 62000, Tunceli-TURKEY 2Yildiz Technical University, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering, 34220, Istanbul-TURKEY 3Suleyman Demirel University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Emvironmental Engineering, 32260, Isparta-TURKEY 4Kirklareli University, Faculty of Architechture, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, 39100, Kirklareli-TURKEY *corresponding author e-mail:[email protected] (Received 5th Nov 2015; accepted 5th Mar 2016) Abstract. In this research the microbial biodegradation of aclonifen was investigated using liquid and soil experiments with identified cultures and mixed consortia. Isolated fungi and bacteria consortia showed the highest degradation at 93% of the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) parameter over five days. Bacteria mix and fungi mix performed 90% and 91% degradation in five days, as COD, while 71% and 91% were active ingredients. For Total Organic Carbon (TOC) experimental results, bacteria mix, fungi mix, and bacteria and fungi mix, showed 86%, 88% and 88% respectively. Soil studies with mixed cultures of bacteria and fungi performed the most efficient degradation, at 97% after five weeks. The degradation of aclonifen by 2 ml mixed cultures showed about 63% of degradation in five weeks and 5 ml of mixed cultures showed about 90% in six weeks. Keywords: microbial biodegradation, aclonifen, mixed consortia, chemical oxygen demand, total organic carbon Introduction One of the main factors of environmental pollution is the excessive use of chemicals and pesticides, used on a global scale, to increase production and for the protection of crops.
    [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]
  • Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 Theinternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) Was Established in 1980
    The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 cation Hazard of Pesticides by and Guidelines to Classi The WHO Recommended Classi The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 TheInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) was established in 1980. The overall objectives of the IPCS are to establish the scientific basis for assessment of the risk to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals, through international peer review processes, as a prerequisite for the promotion of chemical safety, and to provide technical assistance in strengthening national capacities for the sound management of chemicals. This publication was developed in the IOMC context. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or stated policies of individual IOMC Participating Organizations. The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) was established in 1995 following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase international coordination in the field of chemical safety. The Participating Organizations are: FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNITAR, WHO, World Bank and OECD. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment. WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification, 2019 edition ISBN 978-92-4-000566-2 (electronic version) ISBN 978-92-4-000567-9 (print version) ISSN 1684-1042 © World Health Organization 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]