Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:56:32.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Starch Xanthate and Sludge Polymer on the Initial Activity with Delayed Incorporation, Residual Activity, and Crop Safety of Several Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

M. E. Foley  and
L. M. Wax
M. E. Foley
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Sci. Ed. Admin., Agric. Res., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
L. M. Wax
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Sci. Ed. Admin., Agric. Res., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1977 and 1978 to compare the efficacy of the starch xanthate and activated-sludge polymer controlled-release herbicide formulations with the emulsifiable-concentrate formulations. As incorporation was delayed from immediately to never incorporated, starch xanthate and sludge polymer thiocarbamate herbicide formulations had activity equal to that of the emulsifiable concentrates at our initial and final rating dates. Trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine)-starch xanthate in 1977 had increased activity over that of the emulsifiable concentrate as incorporation was delayed, as indicated by initial and final visual rating. Starch xanthate did not greatly increase the residual activity of alachlor [2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide], metolachlor [2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide], or several thiocarbamate herbicides. Starch xanthate formulations of EPTC (S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate) and vernolate (S-propyl dipropylthiocarbamate) provided significantly less protection to corn than did addition of the protectant R-29148 [3-(dichloroacetyl)-2,2,5-trimethyloxazolidine]. The sludge polymer formulation had no controlled-release properties.

Keywords

Slow releasecontrolled release
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 28 , Issue 6 , November 1980 , pp. 626 - 632
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Ashton, F. M. and Sheets, T. J. 1959. The relationship of soil adsorption of EPTC to oat injury in various soil types. Weeds 7:88–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Burt, G. W. 1976. Factors affecting thiocarbamate injury to corn. II. Soil incorporation, seed placement, cultivar, leaching, and breakdown. Weed Sci. 24:327–330.Google Scholar
3. Chang, F. Y., Bandeen, J. D., and Stephenson, G. R. 1972. A selective antidote for prevention of EPTC injury in corn. Can. J. Plant Sci. 52:707–714.Google Scholar
4. Chang, F. Y., Bandeen, J. D., and Stephenson, G. R. 1973. N,N-diallyl-α,α-dichloroacetamide as an antidote for EPTC and other herbicides in corn. Weed Res. 13:399–406.Google Scholar
5. Danielson, L. L. 1967. Evaluation of herbicides – impregnated cloth. Weeds 15:60–62.Google Scholar
6. Foley, M. E. and Wax, L. M. 1978. Factors influencing starch xanthate and activated sludge-controlled release formulations. Proc. North Cent. Weed Contr. Conf. 33:133–137.Google Scholar
7. Gray, R. A. and Weierich, A. J. 1965. Factors affecting the vapor loss of EPTC from soils. Weeds 13:141–147.Google Scholar
8. Gray, R. A. and Weierich, A. J. 1968. Behavior and persistence of thiocarbamate herbicides in soil under different environmental conditions. Proc. 9th British Weed Contr. Conf. 1:94–101.Google Scholar
9. Hauser, E. W., Samples, L. E., and Parham, S. A. 1969. Incorporated versus subsurface vernolate for weed control in peanuts. Weed Res. 9:173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. McCormick, C. L., Savage, K. E., and Hutchinson, B. 1977. Development of controlled-release polymer systems containing pendant metribuzin. Proc. 1977 Inter. Controlled Release Pesticide Symp. pp. 28–40.Google Scholar
11. Mehltretter, C. L., Roth, W. B., Weakley, F. B., McGuire, T. A., and Russell, C. R. 1974. Potential controlled-release herbicides from 2,4-D esters of starch. Weed Sci. 22:415–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Parochetti, J. V. and Hein, E. R. 1973. Volatility and photodecomposition of trifluralin, benefin, and nitralin. Weed Sci. 21:469–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Roth, W. B. 1976. Methanol treated activated sludge as an agricultural chemical carrier. NTIS, U.S. Dep. of Commerce PB-697–174.Google Scholar
14. Schreiber, M. M., Shasha, B. S., Ross, M. A., Orwick, P. L., and Edgecomb, D. W. Jr. 1978. Efficacy and rate of release of EPTC and butylate from starch-encapsulated formulations under greenhouse conditions. Weed Sci. 26:679–686.Google Scholar
15. Shasha, B. S., Doane, W. M., and Russell, C. R. 1975–1976. Encapsulation by entrapment. NTIS, U.S. Dep. of Commerce PB-248430 and PB-262863.Google Scholar
16. Smith, A. E. and Verma, B. P. 1977. Weed control in nursery stock by controlled release of alachlor. Weed Sci. 25:175–178.Google Scholar
17. Waldrep, T. W. and Freeman, J. F. 1964. EPTC injury to corn as affected by depth of incorporation in the soil. Weeds 12:315–317.Google Scholar
18. Weaver, D. N., Meyer, R. E., and Merkle, M. G. 1971. Paraffin oil and granules as carriers for trifluralin. Agron. J. 63:705–708.Google Scholar
19. Wright, W. L. and Warren, G. F. 1965. Photochemical decomposition of trifluralin. Weeds 13:329–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar