Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-04T05:11:45.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fundamental studies in bracken control—the use of additives to enhance herbicide uptake and translocation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

G. T. Cook ,
N. H. Stephen  and
H. J. Duncan
G. T. Cook
Affiliation:
Agricultural Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
N. H. Stephen
Affiliation:
Agricultural Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
H. J. Duncan
Affiliation:
Agricultural Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
Get access

Synopsis

Work done by the authors in relation to bracken control is reviewed. These studies are largely concerned with the use of additives to enhance both the uptake and translocation of aminotriazole and asulam using a number of approaches: (a) estimating uptake by applying known herbicide concentrations in the presence of additives followed by washing off and residue determination after set times; (b) bioassay studies for selecting additives which can reduce herbicide scorching and therefore possibly enhance translocation; (c) field trials with selected formulations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 81 , Issue 1-2: Bracken in Scotland , 1982 , pp. 97 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1982

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anon. 1979. Wetter speeds up bracken kill. Farmers Weekly, 27 July, p. 59.Google Scholar
Ashton, F. M. and Crafts, A. S. 1973. In The Mode of Action of Herbicides, p. 356. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Babiker, A. G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1974. Penetration of bracken fronds by asulam as influenced by the addition of surfactant to the spray solution and by pH. Weed Res. 14, 375–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babiker, A. G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1975a. Penetration of bracken fronds by amitrole as influenced by prespraying conditions, surfactants and other additives. Weed Res. 15, 123–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babiker, A. G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1975b. Penetration of bean leaves by asulam as influenced by adjuvants and humidity. Pestic. Sci. 6, 655–664.Google Scholar
Brown, J. C. and Carter, M. C. 1968. Influence of amitrole upon protein metabolism in bean plants. Weed Sci. 16, 222–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, M. C. 1975. Amitrole. In Herbicides Chemistry Degradation and Mode of Action (2nd edn), ed. Kearney, P. C. and Kaufman, D. D. Vol. 1, pp. 377–398. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Castelfranco, P. and Brown, M. S. 1963. A hypothesis of amitrole action based on its behaviour toward free radical generating systems. Weeds 11, 116–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, G. T. 1979. Studies in the Foliar Uptake and Translocation of Pesticides. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Cook, G. T., Babiker, A. G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1977. Penetration of bean leaves by aminotriazole as influenced by adjuvants and humidity. Pestic. Sci. 8, 137–146.Google Scholar
Cook, G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1978. Uptake of aminotriazole from humectant-surfactant combinations and the influence of humidity. Pestic. Sci. 9, 535–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1979. Mode of action of thiocyanates and iodides in aminotriazole formulations. Pestic. Sci. 10, 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, G. T., Stephen, N. H. and Duncan, H. J. 1981. Influence of ammonium thiocyanate on scorching and control of bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) by amitrole. Weed Sci. 29, 196–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnalley, W. F. and Ries, S.K. 1964. Amitrole translocation in Agropyron repens increased by the addition of ammonium thiocyanate. Science, N.Y. 145, 497–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forde, B. J. 1966. Translocation patterns of amitrole and ammonium thiocyanate in quackgrass. Weeds 14, 178–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massini, P. 1963. Aminotriazolylalanine: a metabolic product of aminotriazole from plants. Ada Bot. Need. 12, 64–72.Google Scholar
Plimmer, J. R., Kearney, P. C., Kaufman, D. D. and Guardia, F. S. 1967. Amitrole decomposition by free radical-generating systems and by soils. J. Agric. Fd Chem. 15, 996–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Racusen, D. 1958. The metabolism and translocation of 3-aminotriazole in plants. Archs Biochem. Biophys. 74, 106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephen, N. H., Cook, G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1979. A possible mechanism for the selective herbicidal activity of iodide in relation to thiocyanate content. Weed Res. 19, 395–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephen, N. H., Cook, G. T. and Duncan, H. J. 1980. Mode of action of thiocyanate and iodide in relation to IAA metabolism. Weed Res. 20, 333–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treinin, A. and Hayon, E. 1976. Quenching of triplet states by inorganic ions. Energy transfer and charge transfer mechanism. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 98, 3884–3891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Zweep, W. 1965. Laboratoriumversuche über die interaktion zwischen ammonium-thiocyanat bzur. N6 benzyl-adenin und amitrol. Z. PflKrankh. PflPathol. PflSchutz Supplement 3, 123–127.Google Scholar
Volger, C. 1969. Pteridium aquilinum and its control with aminotriazole. SchrReihe Forstl. Fak. Univ. Göttingen 41, 104. Cited: Weed Abstr. (1970) 19, no. 1738.Google Scholar