Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T19:41:24.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Napropamide Adsorption, Desorption, and Movement in Soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Chu-Huang Wu ,
Normie Buehring ,
J. M. Davidson  and
P. W. Santelmann
Chu-Huang Wu
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74074
Normie Buehring
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74074
J. M. Davidson
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74074
P. W. Santelmann
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74074
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Soil columns and soil thin-layer chromatography were used to evaluate the mobility of napropamide [2-(α-naphthoxy)-N,N,-diethylpropionamide] in various soils. The surface-applied herbicide did not move deeper than approximately 6 cm in a Teller sandy loam soil after a water application of 10.2 cm. The Rf values for napropamide and two reference herbicides were in the order of fluometuron [1,1-dimethyl-3-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)urea] > napropamide > terbutryn [2-(tert-butylamino)-4-(ethylamino)-6-(methylthio)-s-triazine]. The mobility of each herbicide was reduced with an increase in clay and organic matter content. Carbon-14 ring labeled napropamide was used to determine the adsorption and desorption characteristics of the herbicide in various soils. The Rf values obtained with napropamide and each soil agreed with the adsorptive characteristics. Small applications of a muck soil to a sand (2%, w/w) significantly increased herbicide adsorption and decreased herbicide desorption.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 23 , Issue 6 , November 1975 , pp. 454 - 457
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 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. Abbott, D.C., Bunting, J.A., and Thomson, J. 1965. The thin-layer chromatographic determination of triazine herbicides in soil and water. Analyst 90:356–361.Google Scholar
2. Abbott, D.C. and Wagstaffe, P.J. 1969. Thin-layer chromatographic identification of the active ingredients of mixed herbicide formulations. J. Chromatog. 43:361–367.Google Scholar
3. Bailey, G.W., White, J.L., and Rothberg, T. 1968. Adsorption of organic herbicides by montomorillonite: Role of pH and chemical character of adsorbate. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 32:222–234.Google Scholar
4. Deli, J. and Warren, G.F. 1971. Adsorption, desorption, and leaching of diphenamid in soils. Weed Sci. 19:67–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Deming, J.M. 1963. Determination of volatility losses of CDAA from soil surfaces. Weeds 11:91–96.Google Scholar
6. Dubey, H.D. and Freeman, J.F. 1965. Leaching of linuron and diphenamid in soils. Weed Sci. 13:360–362.Google Scholar
7. Eshel, J. 1969. Phytotoxicity, teachability, and site of uptake of 2-chloro-2′,6′ diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide. Weed Sci. 17:441–444.Google Scholar
8. Harris, C.I. 1964. Movement of dicamba and diphenamid in soils. Weeds 12:112–115.Google Scholar
9. Harris, C.I. 1967. Movement of herbicides in soils. Weeds 15:214–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Helling, C.S. and Turner, B.C. 1968. Pesticide mobility: Determination by soil thin-layer chromatography. Science 162:562–563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Hornsby, A.G. and Davidson, J.M. 1974. Solution and adsorbed fluometuron concentration distribution in a water-saturated soil: Experimental and predicted evaluation. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 37:823–828.Google Scholar
12. Parker, C. 1966. The importance of shoot entry in the action of herbicide applied to the soil. Weeds 14:117–124.Google Scholar
13. Weber, J.B. and Best, J.A. 1972. Activity and movement of 13 soil-applied herbicides as influenced by soil reaction. Proc. S. Weed Sci. Soc. 25:403–413.Google Scholar