Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:25:52.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biodegradation Characteristics of Imazaquin and Imazethapyr

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John R. Cantwell ,
Rex A. Liebl  and
Fred W. Slife
John R. Cantwell
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Illinois, 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61802
Rex A. Liebl
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Illinois, 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61802
Fred W. Slife
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Illinois, 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61802
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The extent of 14C-imazaquin and 14C-imazethapyr abiotic vs. biotic degradation in soil was investigated. Degradation was measured in an in vitro system which allowed 90% recovery of applied herbicide. Triallate biodegradation is well documented and therefore used as a standard. Herbicide degradation was compared in two soils, a Cisne silt loam and a Drummer silty clay loam. Herbicide degradation in gamma-irradiated soil was compared to fresh soil. Biomass quantities were measured for the duration of the experiments. 14CO2 evolution, extractable parent, metabolites, and unextractable residue were measured. After 12 weeks of incubation, 95% of the radioactivity could be extracted as parent from sterilized soil. In unsterilized soil, imazaquin and imazethapyr degraded at a similar rate which was dependent upon soil type. All herbicides degraded slower in the Drummer soil and triallate degraded two to three times faster than the imidazolinones in either soil. 14C-imazaquin degradation products included 14CO2 and unextractable residues. The major product from 14C-imazethapyr degradation was 14CO2. Evolution of 14CO2 from an imazethapyr-treated Cisne soil, containing a serial dilution of activated charcoal, demonstrated that adsorption of herbicide was negatively correlated with degradation. Therefore imidazolinone microbial degradation is regulated by the amount of herbicide in soil solution as determined by soil characteristics.

Keywords

Imazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-quinolinecarboxylic acidimazethapyr, (±)-2-(4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl) − 5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl)-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidtriallate, S-(2,3,3-trichlor-2-proponyl) bis(1-methylethyl)carbamothioate14CO2biomassmicrobial
Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 6 , November 1989 , pp. 815 - 819
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. Alexander, M. 1977. Introduction to Soil Microbiology. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
2. Anderson, J.P.E. and Domsch, K. H. 1980. Relationship between herbicide concentration and the rates of enzymatic degradation of 14C-diallate and 14C-triallate in soil. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 9:259–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Anderson, J.P.E. 1981. Soil moisture and the rates of biodegradation of diallate and triallate. Soil Biol. Biochem. 13:155–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Anderson, J.P.E. and Domsch, K. H. 1982. A physiological method for the quantitative measurement of microbial biomass in soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 10:215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Anderson, J.P.E. 1984. Herbicide degradation in soil: influence of microbial biomass. Soil Biol. Biochem. 16:483–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Basham, G. W., Lavy, T. L., Oliver, L. R., and Scott, H. D. 1987. Imazaquin persistence and mobility in three Arkansas soils. Weed Sci. 35:576–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Basham, G. W. and Lavy, T. L. 1987. Microbial and phytotolytic dissipation of imazaquin in soil. Weed Sci. 35:865–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Cole, M. A. 1976. Effect of long-term atrazine application on soil microbial activity. Weed Sci. 24:473–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1988. Availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone in soil. Weed Sci. 37:259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Marinucci, A. C. and Bartha, R. 1979. Apparatus for monitoring the mineralization of volatile 14C-labeled compounds. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38:1020–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Ogram, A. V., Jessup, R. E., Ou, L. T., and Rao, P. S. 1985. Effects of sorption on Biological degradation rates of (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid in soils. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 49:582–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Pramer, D. and Bartha, R. 1972. Preparation and processing of soil samples for biodegradation studies. Environ. Lett. 2:217–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1988. Effect of soil pH on imazaquin and imazethapyr adsorption to soil and phytotoxicity to corn (Zea mays). Please furnish publication title. 36:78–83.Google Scholar
14. Smith, A. E. 1969. Factors affecting the loss of triallate from soils. Weed Res. 9:306–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Smith, A. E. 1970. Degradation, adsorption, and volatility of diallate and triallate in prairie soils. Weed Res. 10:331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar