DOCSLIB.ORG

Diagnosing and Preventing Herbicide Injury to Trees Bruce R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Diagnosing and Preventing Herbicide Injury to Trees Bruce R Diagnosing and Preventing Herbicide Injury to Trees Bruce R. Fraedrich, Ph. D., Plant Pathologist Herbicides have become an integral part of TYPES OF HERBICIDES landscape maintenance because chemical weed control often is more economical and Pre-Emergence Herbicides For Turf - This efficient than hand or mechanical group of herbicides is widely used in lawns to cultivation. Chemical weed control also is prevent growth of annual grasses, such as crabgrasses and certain annual broadleaf a primary method of vegetation weeds. The principal herbicides included in this management in industrial areas, utility group are: DCPA (Dacthal), benslide rights-of-way, along highways and other (Betasan), siduron (Tupesan) and benefin non-cropland areas. This increased (Balan). These herbicides also are mixed with dependence on herbicides in landscape fertilizers to form the so-called "weed and feed" maintenance has caused concern and products for turf. Since pre-emergence confusion among arborists regarding the herbicides for turf have little or no root activity, effects of herbicides on non-target woody they are not phytotoxic to woody plants when plants. Much of this confusion stems from properly applied. the multitude of herbicides, formulations Pre-Emergence Herbicides For Landscape and products presently on the market. Plantings - The following herbicides are Herbicide injury also is difficult to diagnose registered for pre-emergent control of annual based on symptoms alone because other weeds around woody ornamentals in the environmental or cultural adversities, as landscape and in commercial nurseries: well as infectious diseases and insects, can produce similar symptoms. Detection of Chloramben (Ornamental Weedar) herbicide residues by chemical analysis is oxyzalin (Surflan) expensive and often unfeasible. dichlobenil (Casoron) pronamide (Kerb) This report presents a listing of herbicides diphenamide (Enide) simazine (Prenceep) (low rates) frequently used in the landscape and their napropamide (Devrionol) potential toxicity (or lack thereof) to woody trifluralin (Treflan) plants. A description of herbicide injury oxadizon (Ronstar) symptoms is presented along with suggestions to aid diagnosis and The herbicides generally are not absorbed by recommendations for remedial treatment of roots of woody plants and are safe around most herbicide-injured plants. species. Exceptions exist and labels of specific 2 pre-emergence herbicides should be consulted 2,4-D may volatilize and cause minor leaf injury concerning precautions. Drift contacting the when applied near desirable woody plants. foliage may cause injury on some ornamental Using amine formulations of 2,4-D minimizes species especially if leaves are wet. Some pre- the possibility of injury from volatilization. At emergence herbicides may cause injury on high rates, the hormone herbicides are tolerant woody ornamentals if mis-applied at absorbed through the roots of woody plants, exceptionally high rates. Injury is usually which can cause severe injury. Shallow-rooted evident as foliage chlorosis followed by leaf species and deciduous hardwoods are most browning and defoliation. Plants usually sensitive to high rates of the hormone recover from injury from these herbicides. herbicides while conifers are more resistant. Post-Emergence Grass Killers - This group of Dicamba and picloram have a different herbicides is composed of arsonates such as chemistry than the hormone herbicides, but MSMA and DSMA which are applied to turf for they produce similar injury symptoms. Dicamba post-emergent control of crabgrass and other is used for controlling hard-to-kill broadleaf annual grasses. Arsonates are not root- weeds in turf and to control woody vegetation in absorbed and are safe around woody rights-of-way, woodlots, fence lines, and other vegetation. Drift contacting the foliage of non-cropland areas. Dicamba is absorbed desirable woody plants may cause leaf burn, through the roots of woody plants and can but injury is confined only to treated foliage. severely injure or kill ornamentals if applied Plants usually refoliate and recover from injury within their root zone. This herbicide is caused by drift from arsenate herbicides. persistent in soil for three months or more and will leach downward in most soil types. The Post-Emergence Broadleaf Herbicides - The persistence and mobility of dicamba increases following herbicides selectively kill broadleaf the likelihood of the herbicide contacting plants but are safe on most grass species: 2, 4- absorption roots of trees. Injury on woody D 2, 4-DP (dichlorprop), MCPP (mecoprop), plants can range from leaf distortion and dicamba (Banvel) and picloram (Tordon). defoliation to branch dieback and complete 2,4-D, 2,4-DP and MCPP commonly are death, depending on the rate and frequency of referred to as growth regulator or hormonal type application and the species, age and vigor of herbicides because their chemistry resembles the plant. naturally occurring growth regulators in plants. The hormone herbicides are the most widely Picloram (Tordon) is applied primarily for used chemicals for broadleaf weed control in broadleaf weed and brush control in non- turf and are the principal herbicides that are cropland such as utility rights-of-way. Picloram mixed with turf fertilizers to form the "weed and is absorbed through the foliage and roots of feed" products. plants and will severely injure or kill trees if applied within their root zone. At rates applied At rates recommended for broadleaf weed for brush control, picloram may have a residual control in turf, the hormone herbicides are not effectiveness of a year or more in most soils. root active and their persistence in soil is less than one month. Subsequently, 2,4-D, 2,4-DP, Post-Emergence, Non-Selective (foliar and MCPP seldom will injure woody plants absorbed) Herbicides - This group of herbicides when applied at their labeled rates for weed which includes paraquat, glyphosphate control in turf. Granular formulations are safest (Round-Up), aminotriazole (Amitrole), and near trees because there is less likelihood of cacodylic acid controls both broadleaf weeds drift than from spray formulations. and grasses. These herbicides are absorbed through the foliage of plants and have little or Drift from these herbicides, which contacts the no root activity. These materials are safe foliage of desirable plants, will cause leaf around woody plants as long as drift does not distortion and browning; however, most woody contact the foliage, green bark or suckers of plants will tolerate the injury and recover. On desirable species. warm days certain forms (ester formulations) of BTRL TR-43 3 Non-Selective Soil Sterilant Herbicides - Soil sterilants are used for total vegetation control in Hormonal (Growth Regulator) Herbicides - (2,4- rights-of-way, pipelines, industrial facilities and D, 2,4-DP, MCPP, dicamba, picloram.) other non-cropland areas. Symptoms are most pronounced on new growth. Leaf distortion including cupping, curling, abnormal elongation of leaf margins (epinasty) and parallel leaf venation are key Herbicides included in this group are: symptoms. Current year's shoots may be twisted and flattened rather than round or linuron (Lorox) angular. Leaf necrosis, dieback and mortality hexazinone (Velpar) may be evident in severe instances especially bromacil (Hyvar) with dicamba and picloram. Late spring frosts diuron (Karmex) may cause leaf and twig distortions similar to tebuthiuron (Spike) injury by growth-regulator herbicides. karbutilate (Tandex) atrazine (Aatrex) (high rates) Triazine Herbicides (simazine, prometon, prometon (Pramitol) atrazine) - The initial symptom is chlorosis of monuron (Urox) leaf blade between the veins. Leaf browning, princep (Simazine) (high rates) dieback and death may follow. Nutrient deficiencies, air pollution injury, and sucking The soil sterilant herbicides are extremely toxic insects may produce leaf chlorosis similar to to woody plants and misapplications of this triazine herbicide injury. group account for the majority of herbicide- related deaths of landscape plants. Soil Contact Herbicides (glyphosphate, paraquat, sterilants are absorbed readily by tree roots and cacodylic acid) - Light drift may appear as translocated throughout the crown. Many of small, brown spots where droplets contacted these herbicides are water-soluble and may be the foliage. Leaf browning and dieback usually leached or carried by runoff into the root system is restricted to treated areas of the plants. of a desirable plant. These materials also have Foliage, such as root suckers, accidentally a long residual of a year or more. treated late in the growing season may cause Subsequently, plants may be injured long after severe crown-dieback the following year, application if roots grow into a treated area or if especially on shrubs and small trees. a tree or shrub is planted in contaminated soil. Amino-traizole causes severe chlorosis and Injury and mortality of landscape plants is may bleach treated foliage white. Amitrole may particularly common when soil sterilants are be translocated to untreated portions of the used for total vegetation control for sidewalks plant where similar symptoms are evident. In and driveways around homesites before severe instances, dieback and decline may pavement is installed. Soil sterilants often are result. formulated with other herbicides and sold under a variety of trade names. Homeowners and Urea and Uracil Herbicides (Soil Sterilants: inexperienced
Load more

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]
  • 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]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, TIDE USA HEXAZINONE 2SL,03/06
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, DC 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION March 6, 2019 Ms. Katy DeGroot Regulatory Consultant Tide International, USA, Inc. c/o Pyxis Regulatory Consulting Inc. 4110 136th St. Ct. NW Gig Harbor, WA 98332 Subject: Notification per PRN 98-10 – Add optional referral statements. Product Name: Tide USA Hexazinone 2SL EPA Registration Number: 84229-35 Application Date: February 1, 2019 Decision Number: 548309 Dear Ms. DeGroot: The Agency is in receipt of your Application for Pesticide Notification under Pesticide Registration Notice (PRN) 98-10 for the above referenced product. The Registration Division (RD) has conducted a review of this request for its applicability under PRN 98-10 and finds that the action requested falls within the scope of PRN 98-10. The label submitted with the application has been stamped “Notification” and will be placed in our records. 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. If the website is false or misleading, the product would be misbranded and unlawful to sell or distribute under FIFRA section 12(a)(1)(E). 40 CFR 156.10(a)(5) list examples of statements EPA may consider false or misleading. In addition, regardless of whether a website is referenced on your product’s label, claims made on the website may not substantially differ from those claims approved through the registration process. Therefore, should the Agency find or if it is brought to our attention that a website contains false or misleading statements or claims substantially differing from the EPA approved registration, the website will be referred to the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance.
    [Show full text]
  • Exposure to Herbicides in House Dust and Risk of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
    Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2013) 23, 363–370 & 2013 Nature America, Inc. All rights reserved 1559-0631/13 www.nature.com/jes ORIGINAL ARTICLE Exposure to herbicides in house dust and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia Catherine Metayer1, Joanne S. Colt2, Patricia A. Buffler1, Helen D. Reed3, Steve Selvin1, Vonda Crouse4 and Mary H. Ward2 We examine the association between exposure to herbicides and childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Dust samples were collected from homes of 269 ALL cases and 333 healthy controls (o8 years of age at diagnosis/reference date and residing in same home since diagnosis/reference date) in California, using a high-volume surface sampler or household vacuum bags. Amounts of agricultural or professional herbicides (alachlor, metolachlor, bromoxynil, bromoxynil octanoate, pebulate, butylate, prometryn, simazine, ethalfluralin, and pendimethalin) and residential herbicides (cyanazine, trifluralin, 2-methyl-4- chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA), mecoprop, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), chlorthal, and dicamba) were measured. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by logistic regression. Models included the herbicide of interest, age, sex, race/ethnicity, household income, year and season of dust sampling, neighborhood type, and residence type. The risk of childhood ALL was associated with dust levels of chlorthal; compared to homes with no detections, ORs for the first, second, and third tertiles were 1.49 (95% CI: 0.82–2.72), 1.49 (95% CI: 0.83–2.67), and 1.57 (95% CI: 0.90–2.73), respectively (P-value for linear trend ¼ 0.05). The magnitude of this association appeared to be higher in the presence of alachlor.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Biotechnology: Benefits of Transgenic Soybeans
    AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY: BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC SOYBEANS Leonard P. Gianessi Janet E. Carpenter April 2000 National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 1616 P Street, NW, First Floor Washington, DC 20036 Tel: 202-328-5048 Fax: 202-328-5133 [email protected] Preparation of this report was supported financially with a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. U.S. Soybean Production 3. Soybean Products 4. Soybean Physiology 5. Soybeans – Agronomic Factors 6. Soybean Genetic Improvements A. Introduction B. Reproductive Process C. Artificial Cross Breeding D. Mutation Breeding E. Transgenic Plants 7. Weed Competition – Soybeans 8. Weed Control in Soybeans: 1940’s – 1950’s 9. Herbicides – An Overview 10. Herbicide Use in Soybeans: 1960’s – 1995 A. Introduction B. Historical Overview 1. The Early 1960’s 2. Soil Applied Herbicides 3. Postemergence Herbicides 4. Sulfonylurea/Imidazolinone Herbicides 5. Burndown Herbicides C. Summary of Usage: 1995 11. Transgenic Herbicide Tolerant Soybeans A. Glyphosate – An Overview B. Performance of Roundup Ready Soybeans C. Herbicide Ratings D. Adoption Impacts: 1995 – 1998 1. Herbicide Costs 2. Soybean Yields 3. Returns 4. Other Aggregate Studies 5. Herbicide Treatments 6. Herbicide Use Amounts 7. Other Impacts 12. Summary and Conclusions 13. References Appendix 1: Soybean Processing – A Description 1. Introduction Soybeans and other crops have been improved genetically for many decades through traditional crop breeding – a technique that requires that species be sexually compatible. With the development of biotechnology methods, scientists have the ability to transfer single genes from one living organism into another, regardless of species or sexual compatibility. Varieties that are developed through the transfer of genes between species that are not sexually compatible are referred to as “transgenic.” Transgenic soybean plants have been developed with a gene from a soil bacteria that allows the use of an herbicide that would normally kill soybeans.
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicology and Potential Health Risk of Chemicals That May Be Encountered by Workers Using Forest Vegetation Management Options
    Toxicology and Potential Health Risk of Chemicals that May Be Encountered by Workers Using Forest Vegetation Management Options PART V: RISKS TO WORKERS USING HEXAZINONE FORMULATIONS (PRONONE® AND VELPAR®) Title Number Forest Practices Branch BC Ministry of Forests 7 Abstract Hexazinone is a broad-spectrum soil active herbicide used for site preparation, conifer release and in nurseries. The acute toxicity of hexazinone is low. Dermal toxicity is also very low, indicating poor absorption across the skin. It is irritant to the eyes, but does not produce skin sensitization. In a standard 90-day subchronic assay, rats consuming a diet containing 5000 ppm hexazinone (about 250 mg/kg/day) were unaffected except for slightly decreased weight gain. There was no effect at 1000 ppm. Dogs given 200 mg hexazinone/kg/day were unaffected except for modest weight loss. Two-year cancer studies of rats and mice indicated no detectable carcinogenic response, and there were no pathological changes other than benign adenomas (harmless tumours) found in the livers of mice maintained on a diet containing 10,000 ppm hexazinone. Lifetime systemic no-effect levels were 10 mg/kg/day for rats and 35 mg/kg/day for mice. Some liver effects were detectable at higher dose rates. Hexazinone was found to have no effect on reproduction and did not cause birth defects at doses that can be tolerated by the dams. It was shown to have limited mutagenic potential. Risks associated with use of hexazinone in forestry are slight, limited to eye and skin irritation. If daily intake is on the order of 0.03 mg/kg, which is to be expected of a worker who is moderately careful, the safety factor based on the no-observable-effect level (NOEL) of 10 mg/kg/day will be over 300.
    [Show full text]
  • Risks of Linuron Use to Federally Threatened California Red-Legged Frog (Rana Aurora Draytonii)
    Risks of Linuron Use to Federally Threatened California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii) Pesticide Effects Determination Environmental Fate and Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs Washington, D.C. 20460 June 19, 2008 Primary Authors: Michael Davy, Agronomist Wm. J. Shaughnessy, Ph.D, Environmental Scientist Environmental Risk Branch II Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C) Secondary Review: Donna Randall, Senior Effects Scientist Nelson Thurman, Senior Fate Scientist Environmental Risk Branch II Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) Branch Chief, Environmental Risk Assessment Branch #: Arthur-Jean B. Williams, Acting Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch II Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) 2 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary.................................................................................................8 2. Problem Formulation .............................................................................................14 2.1 Purpose...........................................................................................................................14 2.2 Scope..............................................................................................................................16 2.3 Previous Assessments ....................................................................................................18 2.4 Stressor Source and Distribution ...................................................................................19 2.4.1 Environmental Fate
    [Show full text]
  • ACTION: Original DATE: 08/20/2020 9:51 AM
    ACTION: Original DATE: 08/20/2020 9:51 AM TO BE RESCINDED 3745-100-10 Applicable chemicals and chemical categories. [Comment: For dates of non-regulatory government publications, publications of recognized organizations and associations, federal rules, and federal statutory provisions referenced in this rule, see paragraph (FF) of rule 3745-100-01 of the Administrative Code titled "Referenced materials."] The requirements of this chapter apply to the following chemicals and chemical categories. This rule contains three listings. Paragraph (A) of this rule is an alphabetical order listing of those chemicals that have an associated "Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)" registry number. Paragraph (B) of this rule contains a CAS registry number order list of the same chemicals listed in paragraph (A) of this rule. Paragraph (C) of this rule contains the chemical categories for which reporting is required. These chemical categories are listed in alphabetical order and do not have CAS registry numbers. (A) Alphabetical listing: Chemical Name CAS Number abamectin (avermectin B1) 71751-41-2 acephate (acetylphosphoramidothioic acid o,s-dimethyl ester) 30560-19-1 acetaldehyde 75-07-0 acetamide 60-35-5 acetonitrile 75-05-8 acetophenone 98-86-2 2-acetylaminofluorene 53-96-3 acifluorfen, sodium salt [5-(2-chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy)-2- 62476-59-9 nitrobenzoic acid, sodium salt] acrolein 107-02-8 acrylamide 79-06-1 acrylic acid 79-10-7 acrylonitrile 107-13-1 [ stylesheet: rule.xsl 2.14, authoring tool: RAS XMetaL R2_0F1, (dv: 0, p: 185720, pa:
    [Show full text]
  • Sorption of Atrazine, Alachlor and Trifluralin from Water Onto Different Geosorbents
    RSC Advances Sorption of atrazine, alachlor and trifluralin from water onto different geosorbents Journal: RSC Advances Manuscript ID: RA-ART-04-2014-003886.R1 Article Type: Paper Date Submitted by the Author: 04-Dec-2014 Complete List of Authors: Leovac, Anita; University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department for Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection Vasyukova, Ekaterina; Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Institute of Urban Water Management Ivančev-Tumbas, Ivana; University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department for Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection Uhl, Wolfgang; Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Institute of Urban Water Management Kragulj, Marijana; University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department for Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection Trickovic, Jelena; University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department for Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection Kerkez, Đurña; University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department for Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection Dalmacija, Bozo; University of Novi Sad Faculty of Sciences, Department for Chemistry, Biochemistry and Environmental Protection Page 1 of 21 RSC Advances 1 Sorption of atrazine, alachlor and trifluralin from water onto different geosorbents 2 Anita S. Leovac 1, Ekaterina Vasyukova 2, Ivana I. Ivan čev-Tumbas 1, Wolfgang Uhl 2, 3 Marijana M. Kragulj 1, Jelena S. Tri čkovi ć1, Đur đa V. Kerkez 1, Božo D. Dalmacija 1
    [Show full text]
  • Trifluralin Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment FINAL REPORT
    SERA TR-052-26-03a Trifluralin Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment FINAL REPORT Submitted to: Paul Mistretta, COR USDA/Forest Service, Southern Region 1720 Peachtree RD, NW Atlanta, Georgia 30309 USDA Forest Service Contract: AG-3187-C-06-0010 USDA Forest Order Number: AG-43ZP-D-10-0010 SERA Internal Task No. 52-26 Submitted by: Patrick R. Durkin Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc. 8125 Solomon Seal Manlius, New York 13104 E-Mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.sera-inc.com September 20, 2011 Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF APPENDICES .............................................................................................................. viii LIST OF ATTACHEMENTS ...................................................................................................... viii ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ................................................................ ix COMMON UNIT CONVERSIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................. xii CONVERSION OF SCIENTIFIC NOTATION ......................................................................... xiii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... xiv 1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicity of Herbicides to Newly Emerged Honey Bees,1.2.3
    PUKOr.SED BV THE ACr.ICl'.LT RESEARCH SIRViCE. U. S. DEPA:;T.rfEH OF AGRICULTURE FOR OFFICIAL US* Reprinted from the Environmental Entomology Volume 1, Number 1, pp. 102-104, February 1972 Toxicity of Herbicides to Newly Emerged Honey Bees,1.2.3 HOWARD L. MORTON,' JOSEPH O. MOFFETT," and ROBERT H. MACDONALD" Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Tucson, Arizona 85719 :, ■ ABSTRACT . We fed herbicides to newly emerged worker Apis mellifera L. in 60% sucrose syrup at concentrations of 0, 10, 100, and ] 000 parts per million by weight. The following herbicides were relatively nontoxic to honey bees at all concentra tions: 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, silvcx, 2,4-DB, dicamba, 2,3,6-TBA, chloramben, picloram, Ethrel®, 2-chIoroethylphosphonic acid, EPTC, and dalapon. The following were extremely toxic at 100 and 1000 ppmw concentrations: paraquat, MAA, MSMA, DSMA, hexaflurate, and cacodylic acid. Two compounds, bromoxynil and endothall, were very toxic only at 1000 parts per million by weight (ppmw) concentration. Paraquat, MAA, and cacodylic acid were moderately toxic at 10 ppmw. No sig nificant differences were noted in the toxicity of purified and commercially formulated herbicides. Studies conducted at this laboratory (MolTctt Materials and Methods et al. 1972) and elsewhere (Palmer-Jones 1950, Ten grams (approximately 100 individuals) of 1964; King 1961") indicate that toxicily of herbi newly emerged honey bees were placed in 2x6x6- cides to honey bees, Apis mellijera L., depends upon in. screened cages. All honey bees were less than the chemical, the formulation, and the carrier used 24 hr old at the time they were placed in the with the herbicide.
    [Show full text]