Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:21:50.913Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Nonylphenol Ethoxylation on the Biological Activity of Three Herbicides with Different Water Solubilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jerry M. Green
Jerry M. Green*
Affiliation:
DuPont Agricultural Products. Stine-Haskell Research Center. P.O. Box 30, Newark, DE 19714. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Changing the number of ethylene oxide (EO) units on a nonylphenol surfactant changes its physicochemical and biological properties. Increasing the number of EO units makes the surfactant more hydrophilic and increases its hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB). Surfactants with high HLB values, more than 16, were the most active with the hydrophilic herbicide glyphosate. More lipophilic surfactants with HLB values from 11 to 13 were more active with the lipophilic herbicide, the ethyl ester of quizalofop-P. Surfactants with intermediate HLB values were the most active with the herbicide that had intermediate water solubility, nicosulfuron. Matching the physicochemical properties of the herbicide and surfactant improved biological efficacy on giant foxtail.

Keywords

Glyphosate, N-(phosphonomethyl)glycinenicosulfuron, 2-[[[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl) amino]carbonyl]sulfonyl]-N, N-dimethyl-3-pyridinecarboxamidequizalofop-P, (R)-2-[4-[6-chloro-2-quinoxalinyl)oxy]phenoxy] propanoic acidgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi HerrmAdjuvantnonionic surfactantEO, ethylene oxideHLB, hydrophilic-lipophilic balance
Type
Notes
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , December 1999 , pp. 840 - 842
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 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

DuPont Co. 1999. Guidelines to qualify adjuvant for use with DuPont row crop and cereal herbicides. Publ. H-81853, Wilmington, DE: DuPont Co. 2 p.Google Scholar
Franz, R. E., Mao, M. K., and Sikorski, J. A. 1997. Glyphosate: A Unique Global Herbicide. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. 653 p.Google Scholar
Gaskin, R. E. and Holloway, P. J. 1992. Some physicochemical factors influencing foliar uptake enhancement of glyphosate mono(isopropylammonium) by polyoxyethylene surfactants. Pestic. Sci. 34:195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, W. C. 1954. Calculation of HLB of non-ionic surfactants. J. Soc. Cosmetic Chem. 5:249–258.Google Scholar
Holloway, P. J. and Stock, D. 1990. Factors affecting the activation of foliar uptake of agrochemicals by surfactants. In Karsa, D. R., ed. Industrial Application of Surfactants II. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry. pp. 303–337.Google Scholar
Kapusta, G. 1998. A Compendium of Herbicide Adjuvants. 4th ed. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University. 58 p.Google Scholar
Lichtenthaler, H. K. 1990. Mode of action of herbicides affecting acetyl-CoA carboxylase and fatty acid biosynthesis. Z. Naturforsch. 45c:521–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manthey, F. A., Szelezniak, E. F., and Nalejawa, J. D. 1997. Lipophilic chemistry affects surfactant phytotoxicity and enhancement of herbicide efficacy. In Goss, G. R., Hopkinson, M. J., and Collins, H. M., eds. Pesticide Formulations and Application Systems. Volume 17. Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials. pp. 267–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L. W., Foy, C. L., and Bayer, D. E. 1966. Structure-activity relationships of alkyl-phenol ethylene oxide ether nonionic surfactants and three water-soluble herbicides. Weed Res. 6:233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starke, R. J. and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Interaction of glyphosate with chlorimuron, fomesafen, imazethapyr, and sulfentrazone. Weed Sci. 46:652–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, P.J.G. and Bukovac, M. J. 1985. Properties of octylphenoxy surfactants and their effects on foliar uptake. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf. Weeds, Brighton, pp. 309–316.Google Scholar
Stickle, W. E. 1998. The registration and regulatory challenges of adjuvants in the United States. In McMullan, P. M., ed. Proc. Fifth Int. Symp. on Adjuvants for Agrochemicals Volume 1. Memphis, TN: Chemical Producers and Distributors Association. pp. 139–146.Google Scholar
U.S. Government. 1987. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Subchapter E, Pan 180, Subpart D-180.1001. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar