Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T04:57:34.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sorption and Mobility of Chlorimuron in Alabama Soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Andrew J. Goetz
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849-5412
Robert H. Walker
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849-5412
Glenn Wehtje
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849-5412
Ben F. Hajek
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Alabama Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849-5412

Abstract

Soil thin-layer chromatography and a soil solution technique were used to evaluate chlorimuron adsorption and mobility in five Alabama soils. The order of adsorption was atrazine > metribuzin > chlorimuron; mobility was chlorimuron > metribuzin > atrazine. The order of adsorption of chlorimuron in the five soils was Sumter clay > Eutaw clay > Lucedale fine sandy loam > Decatur silt loam > Dothan sandy loam, and Rf values were 0.63, 0.73, 0.69, 0.76, and 0.80, respectively. Chlorimuron mobility and adsorption were not highly correlated to any one soil type. Adsorption of all herbicides was inversely related to soil pH. Maximum chlorimuron adsorption in the Hiwassee loam was attributed to the high hematite and gibbsite content of the soil.

Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by the 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. Adams, F., Burmester, C., Hue, N. V., and Long, L. F. 1982 A comparison of column displacement and centrifugation methods of obtaining soil solution. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 44:733735.Google Scholar
2. Breevwsma, A. and Lyklema, J. 1973. Physical and chemical adsorption of ions in electrical double layer on hematite (Fe2 O3). J. Coll. Int. Sci. 43:437448.Google Scholar
3. Giles, C. H., MacEwan, T. H., Nakhwa, S. N., and Smith, D. 1960. Studies in adsorption. Part XI. A system of classification of solution adsorption isotherms, and its use in diagnosis of adsorption mechanisms and in measurements of specific surface area of solids. J. Chem. Soc. 1960:39733993.Google Scholar
4. Gast, R. G. 1977. Surface and colloid chemistry. Pages 2273 in Dixon, J. B. and Weed, S. B., eds. Minerals in Soil Environments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
5. Goetz, A. J., Wehtje, G., Walker, R. H., and Hajek, B. F. 1986. Soil solution and mobility characterization of imazaquin. Weed Sci. 4:788793.Google Scholar
6. Greenland, D. J. and Mott, D.J.B. 1978. Surfaces of soil particles. Pages 321354 in Greenland, D. J. and Hayes, M. B., eds. The Chemistry of Soil Constitutents. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
7. Helling, C. S. 1971. Pesticide mobility in soils. III. Influence of soil properties. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 35:743747.Google Scholar
8. Hingston, F. J., Posner, A. M., and Quirk, J. P. 1972. Anion adsorption by goethite and gibbsite. I. The role of the proton in determining adsorption envelopes. J. Soil Sci. 23:177192.Google Scholar
9. Kamp, N. and Schwertmann, U. 1982. The 5-M-NaOH concentration treatment for iron oxides in soils. Clays and Clay Minerals 30(6):401408.Google Scholar
10. Karanthansis, A. D. and Hajek, B. F. 1982. Revised methods for rapid quantitative determination of minerals in soil clays. J. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. 46:419425.Google Scholar
11. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of soil pH on microbial degradation, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:447481.Google Scholar
12. Mott, C.J.B. 1981. Anion and ligand exchange. Pages 179218 in Greenland, D. J. and Hayes, M. B., eds. The Chemistry of Soil Processes. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
13. Norrish, K. and Taylor, R. M. 1961. The isomorphous replacement of iron by aluminum in soil goethite. J. Soil Sci. 12:249306.Google Scholar
14. Parks, G. A. and DeBruyn, P. L. 1962. The zero point of charge of oxides. J. Phys. Chem. 66:967972.Google Scholar
15. Patterson, M. G., Buchanan, G. A., Walker, R. H., and Patterson, R. M. 1982. Fluometuron in soil solution as an indicator of its efficacy in three soils. Weed Sci. 30:688691.Google Scholar
16. Peter, C. J. and Weber, J. B. 1985. Adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of metribuzin as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:868873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Ross, A. R. and Lembi, C. A. 1985. Applied Weed Science. Burgess Publishing Co., Minneapolis, MN. Page 100.Google Scholar
18. Savage, K. E. 1976. Adsorption and mobility of metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:525528.Google Scholar
19. Schwertmann, U. and Taylor, R. M. 1977. Iron oxides. Pages 145180 in Dixon, J. B. and Weed, S. B., eds. Minerals in Soil Environments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
20. Shea, P. J. 1986. Chlorsulfuron dissociation and adsorption on selected adsorbents and soils. Weed Sci. 34:474478.Google Scholar
21. Sheets, T. J. 1958. The comparative toxicities of four phenylurea herbicides in several soil types. Weeds 6:413424.Google Scholar
22. Talber, R. E. and Fletchall, O. R. 1965. The adsorption of some s-triazines in soils. Weeds 13:4652.Google Scholar
23. Upchurch, R. P. and Mason, D. D. 1962. The influence of soil organic matter on the phytotoxicity of herbicides. Weeds 10:913.Google Scholar
24. Wang, C. H., Willis, D. J., and Loveland, W. D. 1975. Pages 181232 in Radiotracer Methodology in the Biological, Environmental, and Physical Sciences. Prentice-Hall, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
25. Weber, J. B. 1970. Mechanism of adsorption of s-triazines by clay colloids and factors affecting plant availability. Residue Rev. 32:93130.Google Scholar
26. Wilcut, J. W., Wehtje, G., Patterson, W. G. 1988. Adsorption, translocation, and metabolism of foliar-applied chlorimuron in soybean, peanut and selected weeds. Weed Sci. In Press.Google Scholar