Proceedings-Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Proceedings-Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off HERBICIDES TO AID ESTABLISHMENT OF FOURWING SALTBUSH Joseph L. Petersen Darrell N. Ueckert Matthew W. Wagner ABSTRACT of this study was to identify herbicides effective for selec­ tive control of competing vegetation in fourwing saltbush Failures in attempts to establish fourwing saltbush plantings. (Atriplex canescens) are often attributed to interference from weeds. Field experiments were conducted in western Texas to evaluate preemergence and postemergence appli­ MATERIALS AND METHODS cations of selected herbicides for we~d control in fourwing The study was conducted on an Angelo clay loam saltbush plantings. Sprays ofmetolachlor at 2.0 kg a.i.lha (fine, mixed, thermic Torrertic Calciustolls) at the Texas and alachlor at 2.5 kg/ha appeared promising as preemer­ A&M University Agricultural Research and Extension gence treatments. Acifluorfen at 0.56 kglha and clopyralid Center, 8 km northwest of San Angelo in the southern at 0.28 kg/ha effectively controlled broadleafed weeds, and Rolling Plains resource area. Soil pH was 7.8 and organic fluazifop-P at 0.21 kg/ha effectively controlled grasses matter content was 1.2 percent.. Elevation is 580 m and while causing no or only slight injury to fourwing saltbush mean annual precipitation is 47 em. The most predictable plants that were 1 month to 2 years old. Postemergence and abundant periods of rainfall are April-June and herbicides appear more practical than preemergence herbi­ September-October. cides in arid and semiarid areas where fourwing saltbush is utilized. Preemergence Herbicide Experiments INTRODUCTION Selected preemergence herbicide treatments were evaluated in three experiments. Seedbeds were disked Fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) is used exten­ twice and packed before planting. About 800 dewinged sively for rangeland seeding because of its wide range fourwing saltbush seeds (4 g) from a commercial source of adaptation to edaphic and climatic conditions and its (harvested in western Texas) were hand planted 1.3 em potential to produce nutritious forage for livestock and deep in each of two 120-cm rows in 2- by 2-m plots sepa­ wildlife, particularly during winter (Plummer and others rated by 1.2-m borders. Germination of the seed on moist 1966; Petersen and others 1987). However, success in blotter paper in a controlled environment was 22 percent. establishing the shrub by seeding or transplanting Herbicide treatments included trifluralin [2,6-dinitro­ seedlings has been highly variable. Failures have been N ,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine] at 0.8 kg attributed to poor seedbed preparation, poor seed quality, a.i .lha, oryzalin [4-( di propyl amino)-3,5-dini trobenzene­ inadequate soil moisture, grazing, and excessive competi­ sulfonamide] at 1.1 kg/ha, ethalfluralin [N-ethyl-N-(2- tion from associated plants (Springfield 1970; Nord and methyl-2-propenyl)-2, 6-dinitro-4-( trifl uoromethyl)­ others 1971; Aldon 1972; Petersen and others 1986). benzenamine] at 1.9 kg/ha, metolachlor [2-chloro-N-(2- Plant competition is most often the primary factor ethyl-6-methyl phenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)­ limiting establishment offourwing saltbush plantings acetamide] at 2.0 kg/ha, and alachlor [2-chloro-N-(2,6- (Giunta and others 1975; VanEpps and McKell 1977, diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide] at 1983; Geist and Edgerton 1984; Petersen and others 2.8 kg/ha. 1986). Selective weed control practices are often needed Treatments were applied in separate experiments on to enhance and hasten shrub establishment and return April27, 1987, September 15, 1987, and May 13, 1988. the investment in seed, seedbed preparation, fencing, Other treatments included hand-weeding and untreated and deferment. Various weed control strategies have checks. Herbicides were applied in water at a total vol­ increased the survival and growth of tree plantings in ume of 1.9 Uplot using hand-held sprayers. Trifluralin semiarid regions (Felker and others 1986). The objective was incorporated 3 to 5 em deep with garden rakes imme­ diately after application, just prior to planting fourwing saltbush seed. All other herbicides were applied immedi­ ately after seeding, without incorporation. The experi­ Paper presented at the Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die­ Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management, Las Vegas, NV, ments were arranged as randomized complete blocks with April 5-7, 1989. four replications. Soil water contents were maintained Joseph L. Petersen and Darrell N. Ueckert are Research Associate and Range Ecologist, respectively, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, at field capacity by frequent irrigation with garden sprin­ 7887 N. Hwy. 87, San Angelo, TX 76901. Matthew W. Wagner is Biologist klers to assure seed germination, emergence, and estab­ II, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, lishment offourwing saltbush. The study sites were TX 78744. fenced to eliminate rodents, lagomorphs, and livestock. 305 This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. Phytotoxicity of the herbicides to fourwing saltbush was Phytotoxicity of the herbicides to fourwing saltbush quantified by counting the live seedlings 15 and 90 days plants was estimated 15 and 90 DAT by visually ranking after treatment (DAT) and by measuring seedling heights percent necrosis in each plot (0 percent = no visible injury, 90 DAT. Canopy cover (percent) of grasses and broad­ 100 percent = no live tissue visible). Efficacy of the treat­ leafedweeds was visually estimated in five 0.1-m2 ran­ ments for weed control was estimated 90 DAT by visually domly located quadrats in each plot 90 DAT. Grasses estimating weed canopy cover from five 0.1-m2 randomly and broadleafed weeds were then harvested at ground located quadrats in each plot. Grasses and broadleafed level and dried to a constant weight at 50 °C for estimates weeds in the quadrats were then harvested at ground of standing crop. level and dried to a constant weight at 50 oc for estimates of standing crop. The data were subjected to analyses of variance. Trans­ Postemergence Herbicide formations of percentage data did not affect data interpre­ Experiments tation, so actual values are presented. Results from the Field experiments were established to evaluate the April 1987 and May 1988 experiments with preemergence effects of selected postemergence herbicides on fourwing herbicides were similar, thus the data were pooled. Means were separated by Duncan's multiple range test (P 0.05) saltbush seedlings. Plots were 3 by 3m and separated = where appropriate. by 1.2-m borders. Plots were rototilled and packed just prior to planting seed and transplanting seedlings. Four age classes offourwing saltbush plants occurred in each RESUL~PREEMERGENCE plot when treatments were applied. These included: HERBICIDES (1) 1-month-old seedlings, hand planted at 8 g/2.4-m row, 1.3 em deep, about 6 weeks prior to treatment. The Preemergence applications of metolachlor and alachlor number of seedlings present at time of treatment ranged had little effect on emergence or growth of fourwing from 12 to 80/plot; (2) 4-month-old seedlings (seven/plot), saltbush seedlings. Shrub seedling densities in plots transplanted on 38-cm centers 1 month prior to treat­ treated with metolachlor or alachlor were similar to ment; (3) 9-month-old seedlings (seven/plot), transplanted those in hand-weeded plots after 90 days (table 1). on 38-cm centers 1 month prior to treatment; and ( 4) 2- However, shrub seedling densities were significantly year-old, stem-cut seedlings (five/plot), transplanted on lower (P = 0.05) in plots treated with trifluralin, oryzalin, 61-cm centers 6 months before treatment. One row of and ethalfluralin than in hand-weeded plots after 90 each plant age class was included in each plot. days. Seedling emergence and establishment were much Seeds used for the first three age classes were pur­ lower following autumn seeding compared to spring seed­ chased from a commercial source harvested in western ing, but the responses to autumn herbicide applications Texas. The stem-cut seedlings were from mature plants were generally similar to those observed for spring of an accession from Texon, TX, growing in a nursery at treatments. the Research Center. The plots were frequently irrigated The preemergence herbicides did not affect saltbush as discussed earlier. seedling heights compared to heights of seedlings in hand­ Herbicide treatments applied postemergence to the weeded plots (table 1). The high mortality of saltbush weeds June 16, 1988 included acifluorfen {5-[2-chloro-4- seedlings during the first 3 months after planting in well­ (trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid} at 0.56 kg prepared seedbeds with hand weeding and frequent irri­ a.i .lha, metsulfuron {2-[[[[( 4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5- gation indicated that poor stand establishment in these triazin-2yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic experiments was partly related to poor seed quality, low acid} at 0.04 kg/ha, sulfometuron {2-[[[[(4,6-dimethyl-2- inherent vigor of seedlings, or both. pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acid} at 0.05 kglha, fluazifop-P {(R)-2-[4-[[5-(trifluoromethyl)-2- pyridinyl]oxy]phenoxy]propanoic acid} at 0.21 kg/ha, and Table 1-Fourwing saltbush seedling densities (No./2.4-m row) 30 clopyralid (3,6-dichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid) at 0.28 and 90 days (d) and heights (mm) 90 days after spring or kg/ha. Herbicide treatments applied on October 4, 1988 autumn applications of selected preemergence herbicides were the same as above except that metsulfuron and sul­ near San Angelo, TX 1 fometuron were applied' at 0.02 kg/ha based on results Average seedling from the first experiment. Broadleafed and grass weeds densities Average seedling were actively growing and varied phenologically from the 2 Treatment S~ring Autumn height at 90 d two-leaf stage to flowering at time of herbicide application Herbicide Rate 30d 90d 30d 90d S~ring Autumn in both experiments.
Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Factors Affecting Differential Sensitivity of Sweet Corn to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides Martin M
    Weed Science 2010 58:289–294 Factors Affecting Differential Sensitivity of Sweet Corn to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides Martin M. Williams II and Jerald K. Pataky* Mutation of a cytochrome P450 (CYP) allele on the short arm of chromosome 5 affects sensitivity in sweet corn to mesotrione and to tembotrione plus isoxadifen applied POST. Hybrids that are homozygous for the functional allele (i.e., CYPCYP) are rarely injured at registered use rates, hybrids that are homozygous for mutant alleles (i.e., cypcyp) are frequently injured, and hybrids that are heterozygous for a functional and mutant allele (i.e., CYPcyp) have more variable responses over trials. The objectives of this work were (1) to conduct side-by-side comparisons of sweet corn hybrid responses to mesotrione, tembotrione plus isoxadifen, and topramezone under field conditions; and (2) to compare dose– response relationships among CYPCYP, CYPcyp, and cypcyp hybrids. Among 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibitors used POST in sweet corn, topramezone was safe on the 746 hybrids tested. When environmental conditions favored crop growth, mesotrione injured the largest number of hybrids, and these hybrids were almost exclusively cypcyp or CYPcyp. The safener isoxadifen added to the tembotrione product greatly reduced occurrence of injury to the CYPcyp genotypic class but not to the cypcyp hybrids. Despite a common genetic basis for herbicide metabolism, genotypic classes of sweet corn hybrids did not have identical field responses to mesotrione, tembotrione plus isoxadifen, and topramezone. Nomenclature: Isoxadifen, ethyl-5, 5-diphenyl-2-isoxazoline-3-3-carboxylate; mesotrione; tembotrione; topramezone; sweet corn, Zea mays L. Key words: Cross-sensitivity, cytochrome P450, dose–response, herbicide tolerance, nsf1 gene.
    [Show full text]
  • North Dakota Herbicide Chart
    This chart lists premix herbicides alphabetically by their trade names so you can identify the premix's component herbicides and their respective site of action groups. Refer to the Mode of Action chart on the left for more information. North Dakota ------------------------------- Component -------------------------------------------------------- Premix Site of Action Trade Name ® Trade Name ® Active Ingredient Group Affinity BroadSpec Harmony :1 thifensulfuron 2 Express :1 tribenuron 2 Herbicide Chart Repeated use of herbicides with the same site of action alone can Affinity TankMix Harmony :4 thifensulfuron 2 Express :1 tribenuron 2 result in the development of herbicide-resistant weed populations. Anthem * Zidua* pyroxasulfone 15 Cadet fluthiacet-ethyl 14 By Mode of Action (effect on plant growth) Audit Harmony :3 thifensulfuron 2 This chart groups herbicides by their modes of action to assist you in selecting 1) to maintain Express :1 tribenuron 2 greater diversity in herbicide use and 2) to rotate among herbicides with different sites of action to delay the development of herbcide resistance. Authority Assist Spartan sulfentrazone 14 Pursuit imazethapyr 2 The Site of Action Group is a classification system developed by the Weed Science Society of America. Authority First Spartan sulfentrazone 14 Number of resistant - or Sonic FirstRate cloransulam 2 weed species in U.S. Site of Authority MTZ Spartan sulfentrazone 14 Action Product Examples Metribuzin metribuzin 5 Group Site of Action Chemical Family Active Ingredient Trade Name ®
    [Show full text]
  • An Interactive Database to Explore Herbicide Physicochemical Properties
    Electronic Supplementary Material (ESI) for Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2015 Supplementary Information An interactive database to explore herbicide physicochemical properties Michael N. Gandy,a Maxime G. Corral,a,b Joshua S. Mylnea,b* and Keith A. Stubbsa* aSchool of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, 6009, Australia. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] bARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Perth 6009, Australia Materials and Methods Compound selection To gather a comprehensive list of herbicides the literature was initially surveyed and all compounds listed in previous reviews1 were incorporated. Compounds were also sourced from the World of Herbicides provided by Herbicide Resistance Action Committee and produced by Syngenta as well as from the EU pesticide database, Department of Horticulture database (University of Kentucky), Urban Integrated Pest Management database (University of Arizona) and Department of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries (Republic of South Africa) and the Pesticide Manual 2. A textual list of the 334 compound names follows: 2,4,5-T; 2,4-D; 2,4-DB; acetochlor; acifluorfen; aclonifen; acrolein; alachlor; allidochlor; alloxydim; ametryne; amicarbazone; amidosulfuron; aminocyclopyrachlor; aminopyralid; amiprophos-methyl; amitrole; anilofos; asulam; atrazine; azafenidin; azimsulfuron; beflubutamid; benazolin; benazolin-ethyl; benfluralin; benfuresate; bensulfuron-
    [Show full text]