Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T16:53:36.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uptake and Translocation of Diquat in Elodea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

P. J. Davies  and
D. E. Seaman
P. J. Davies
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University of California, Davis, California
D. E. Seaman
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University of California, Davis, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Uptake and translocation of 6,7-dihydrodipyrido[1,2-a:2′, 1′-c]pyrazidiinium salt (diquat) in elodea (Elodea canadensis Michx) was investigated by autoradiography and counting of plants treated with diquat-14C. Uptake initially was very rapid followed by a slower accumulation of diquat. Part of this uptake was reversible in water and rapidly reached a saturation value while the slower uptake was nonreversible. This reversibility of uptake appears to indicate an initial passive adsorption probably followed by accumulation. Slight basipetal and acropetal movement of diquat was demonstrated with accumulation in the nodes and axillary buds. Movement was unaffected by light versus dark treatments. Diquat injured treated and adjacent untreated shoots of elodea to almost the same extent. This transfer occurred whether or not the treated and untreated shoots were in contact.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , July 1968 , pp. 293 - 295
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. Baldwin, B. C. 1963. The translocation of diquat in plants. Nature 198:872.Google Scholar
2. Blackburn, R. D. 1963. Evaluating herbicides against aquatic weeds. Weeds 11:21–24.Google Scholar
3. Brian, R. C. 1967. The uptake and adsorption of diquat and paraquat by tomato, sugar beet, and cocksfoot. Ann. Appl. Biol. 59:91–99.Google Scholar
4. Davies, P. J. and Seaman, D. E. 1964. Physiological effects of diquat on submersed aquatic weeds. WSA Abstr. p. 100.Google Scholar
5. Funderburk, H. H. Jr. and Lawrence, J. M. 1963. Preliminary studies on the absorption of C14 labelled herbicides in fish and aquatic plants. Weeds 11:217–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Funderburk, H. H. Jr. and Lawrence, J. M. 1963. Absorption and translocation of radioactive herbicides in submersed and emersed aquatic weeds. Weed Res. 3:304–311.Google Scholar
7. Hiltibran, R. C. 1965. The effect of diquat on aquatic plants in Central Illinois. Weeds 13:71–72.Google Scholar
8. Matthews, L. J. 1963. New chemicals give safe and effective control of many aquatic weeds. New Zealand. J. Agr. 107:394–395.Google Scholar
9. Seaman, D. E. and Thomas, T. M. 1966. Absorption of herbicides by aquatic plants. Proc. Calif. Weed Conf. pp. 11–12.Google Scholar
10. Thrower, Stella L., Hallam, N. D., and Thrower, L. B. 1965. Movement of diquat, (1,1′-ethylene-2,2′-bipyridylium) dibromide in leguminous plants. Ann. Appl. Biol. 55:253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. White, A. C. 1963. Diquat and paraquat. Synopsis of aquatic weed experiments. Proc. SWC. 16:357–364.Google Scholar
12. Yamaguchi, S. and Crafts, A. S. 1958. Autoradiographic method for studying absorption and translocation of herbicides using C14-labelled compounds. Hilgardia 29:161–191.Google Scholar
13. Yeo, R. R. 1967. Dissipation of diquat and paraquat and effects on aquatic weeds and fish. Weeds 15:42–46.Google Scholar