Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:23:46.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fate and Activity of Herbicides in Soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

R. E. Ogle  and
G. F. Warren
R. E. Ogle
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Purdue University Hercules Powder Company, Wilmington, Delaware
G. F. Warren
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Get access

Extract

The fate of herbicides in the soil is of great importance to both research workers developing chemical weed control methods and to growers employing these newer techniques. It is desirable to know whether herbicides applied to the soil will persist and be cumulative so that subsequent crops will be affected, if a short period of residual activity can be expected, or if the compounds are rapidly dissipated. In case of pre-emergence applications where timing is critical and results vary with such factors as soil type, moisture and temperature, the activity and persistence of a herbicide are of great importance. Thus it seemed pertinent to study the effects of soil type, exchange capacity, temperature and amount of rainfall on breakdown, leaching and retention of certain herbicides in the soil. The herbicides used were 2,4–dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4–D), N–1 naphthyl phthalmic acid (NPA), trichloroacetic acid (TCA), 3–(p–chlorophenyl)–1, 1–dimethylurea (CMU) and isopropyl N–(3–chlorophenyl) carbamate (CIPC).

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , July 1954 , pp. 257 - 273
Copyright
Copyright © 1954 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. Andrus, L. J. The biological detoxication of hormone herbicides in soil. Plant and Soil 3: 170–192. 1951.Google Scholar
2. Barrons, K. C., and Hummer, R. W. Some basic herbicidal studies with derivatives of TCA. Proc. 4th Ann. Southern Weed Control Conf. 3–12. 1951.Google Scholar
3. Baver, L. D. Soil Physics. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 1940.Google Scholar
4. Brown, J. W., and Mitchell, J. W. Inactivation of 2,4–D in soil as affected by soil moisture, temperature, manure and autoclaving. Bot. Gaz. 109: 314–323. 1948.Google Scholar
5. Crafts, A. S. Toxicity of 2,4–D in California soils. Hilgardia 19: 141–158. 1949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. DeRose, H. R. Crabgrass inhibition with O-isopropyl N–(3–chlorophenyl) carbamate. Agron. Jour. 43: 139–142. 1951.Google Scholar
7. DeRose, H. R. Persistence of some plant growth-regulators when applied to the soil in herbicidal treatments. Bot. Gaz. 107: 583–589. 1946.Google Scholar
8. DeRose, H. R. and Newman, A. S. Persistence of growth regulators in the soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 12: 222–226. 1947.Google Scholar
9. Freed, V. H. Some factors influencing the herbicidal efficacy of isopropyl N-phenyl carbamate. Weeds 1: 48–60. 1951.Google Scholar
10. Hanks, R. W. Removal of 2,4–dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and its calcium salt from six different soils by leaching. Bot. Gaz. 108: 186–191. 1946.Google Scholar
11. Hernandez, T. P., and Warren, G. F. Some factors affecting the rate of inactivation and leaching of 2,4–D in different soils. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort Sci. 56: 287–293. 1950.Google Scholar
12. Jackson, M. L. Soil Analysis—Chemical and Physicochemical Methods. Madison, Wisconsin. 1949.Google Scholar
13. Jensen, H. L., and Peterson, H. I. Detoxication of hormone herbicides by soil bacteria. Nature 170: 39–40. 1952.Google Scholar
14. Jorgensen, C. J. C., and Hamner, C. L. Weed control in soils with 2,4–dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and related compounds and their residual effects under varying environmental conditions. Bot. Gaz. 109: 324–333. 1948.Google Scholar
15. Kries, O. H. Persistence of 2,4–dichlorophenoxyacetic acid in soil in relation to content of water, organic matter, and lime. Bot. Gaz. 108: 510–525. 1947.Google Scholar
16. Loustalot, A. J., and Ferrer, R. Studies on the persistence and movement of sodium trichloroacetate in the soil. Agron. Jour. 42: 323–327. 1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Marshall, C. E., and Patnik, N. Ionization of soils and colloids. Soil Sci. 75: 153–165. 1953.Google Scholar
18. Mitchell, J. W., and Marth, P. C. Sensitivity of grasses and some crop plants to isopropyl N-phenyl carbamate. Science 106: 15–17. 1947.Google Scholar
19. Newman, A. S., DeRose, H. R., and DeRigo, H. T. Persistence of isopropyl N-phenyl carbamate in soils. Soil Science 66: 393–397. 1948.Google Scholar
20. Newman, A. S., Thomas, J. R., and Walker, R. L. Disappearance of 2,4–dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and 2,4,5–trichlorophenoxyacetic acid from soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 16: 21–24. 1952.Google Scholar
21. Ries, S. K., and Sweet, R. D. CMU, Endothal and TCA on red beets. Proc. 7th Ann. Northeastern Weed Control Conf. 163–169. 1953.Google Scholar
22. Robinson, R. G., and Dunham, R. S. Effect of TCA on flax and its residual effect on the following soybean crop. 6th Ann. North Central Weed Control conf. Research Rpt. 89. 1949.Google Scholar
23. Smith, R. J. Jr., and Ennis, W. B. Jr. Studies on the downward movement of 2,4–D and 3–chloro–IPC in soils. Proc. 6th Ann. Southern Weed Control Conf. 63–71. 1953.Google Scholar
24. Smith, A. E., and Stone, G. M. Unpublished method for the micro-determination of N–1 naphthyl phthalamic acid residues. Presented at the 122nd National Meeting of the American Chemical Society. 1952.Google Scholar
25. Stevens, L. F., and Carlson, R. F. The effects of chloro IPC on various crops and its residual properties in various soils. Proc. 6th Ann. Northeastern Weed Control Conf. 33–44. 1952.Google Scholar
26. Warren, G. F. Crop reactions to pre-emergence herbicides. Proc. 5th Ann. Northeastern Weed Control Conf. Supplement 41–45. 1951.Google Scholar
27. Wolf, D. E. CMU—A new herbicide. Proc. 8th Ann. North Central Weed Control Conf. 104. 1951.Google Scholar