Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:11:34.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phytotoxicity and persistence of flucarbazone-sodium in soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Rachael Eliason ,
Jeff J. Schoenau ,
Anna M. Szmigielski  and
William M. Laverty
Rachael Eliason
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada
Anna M. Szmigielski
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada
William M. Laverty
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E6, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Flucarbazone-sodium, a new herbicide, exhibits high bioactivity at low concentrations. To elucidate potential carryover and crop injury, the behavior of flucarbazone in six Western Canadian soils was studied in the laboratory. A sensitive bioassay was developed for the detection of flucarbazone. Of five crops tested, oriental mustard showed the highest degree of root and shoot inhibition from the presence of flucarbazone in soil. Flucarbazone concentrations as low as 1 μg kg−1 were detected by the mustard root inhibition method. This bioassay was used to examine phytotoxicity and persistence of flucarbazone. Phytotoxicity was related to soil organic carbon content. Concentrations corresponding to 50% inhibition (I 50 values) were estimated after fitting the data to a log-logistic model. I 50 estimates ranged from 6.0 to 27.5 μg kg−1 for soils containing 1.1 to 4.3% organic carbon, respectively, and were correlated (R = 0.979) with percent organic carbon in the investigated soils. Persistence of flucarbazone was examined in soils incubated at 25 C and moisture content of 85% field capacity (FC). Flucarbazone dissipation followed first-order kinetics in one soil, but a two-compartment model provided the best fit for dissipation in the other soils. Half-lives (t0.5), calculated from dissipation curves in each soil, ranged from 6 to 110 d. Half-lives were correlated (R = 0.776) with soil organic carbon. Flucarbazone dissipation was more rapid in soils containing less organic carbon. Flucarbazone was more persistent in drier soil; t0.5 was 11 d in soil at 85% FC and was 25 d in soil at 50% FC. Soil characteristics and environmental conditions will affect the degree of plant injury to sensitive crops the year after flucarbazone application.

Keywords

Flucarbazone-sodiumoriental mustard, Brassica juncea L. ‘AC Vulcan’Herbicide carryoverbioassayroot growth inhibition
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 52 , Issue 5 , October 2004 , pp. 857 - 862
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Atienza, J., Jimenez, J. J., Herguedas, A., and Bernal, J. L. 1996. Comparative study of three extraction procedures for imazamethabenz-methyl in agricultural soil. J. Chromatogr 721:113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckie, H. J. and McKercher, R. B. 1989. Soil residual properties of DPX-A7881 under laboratory conditions. Weed Sci 37:412–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bresnahan, G. A., Dexter, A. G., Koskinen, W. C., and Lueschen, W. E. 2002. Influence of soil pH-sorption interactions on the carryover of fresh and aged soil residues of imazamox. Weed Res 42:45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, H. M. 1990. Mode of action, crop selectivity and soil relations of the sulfonylurea herbicides. Pestic. Sci 29:263–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Che, A., Loux, M. M., Traina, S. J., and Logan, R. J. 1992. Effect of pH on sorption and desorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on clays and humic acid. J. Environ. Qual 21:698–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galletti, G. C., Bonetti, A., and Dinelli, G. 1995. High-performance liquid chromatographic determination of sulfonylureas in soil and water. J. Chromatogr 692:27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groves, K. E. M. and Foster, R. K. 1985. A corn (Zea mays L.) bioassay technique for measuring chlorsulfuron levels in three Saskatchewan soils. Weed Sci 33:825–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, B. D. and Schaalje, G. B. 1985. A two-compartment model for the dissipation of deltamethrin on soil. J. Agric. Food Chem 33:1001–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshi, M. M., Brown, H. M., and Romesser, J. A. 1985. Degradation of chlorsulfuron by soil microorganisms. Weed Sci 33:888–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klaffenbach, P. and Holland, P. T. 1993. Analysis of sulfonylurea herbicides by gas-liquid chromatography. Determination of chlorsulfuron and metsulfuron-methyl in soil and water samples. J. Agric. Food Chem 41:396–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskinen, W. C., Rice, P. J., Anhalt, J. A., Sakaliene, O., Moorman, T. B., and Arthur, E. L. 2002. Sorption-desorption of “aged” sulfonylaminocarbonyltrizolinone herbicides in soil. J. Agric. Food Chem 50:5368–5372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LaFleur, K. S. 1980. Loss of pesticides from congaree sandy loam with time: characterization. Soil Sci 130:83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaFleur, K. S., McCaskill, W. R., and Gale, G. T. 1978. Trifluralin persistence in congaree soil. Soil Sci. 126: 285:289.Google Scholar
Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr and clomazone in soil. Weed Sci 37:259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mersie, W. and Foy, C. L. 1985. Phytotoxicity and adsorption of chlorsulfuron as affected by soil properties. Weed Sci 33:564–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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). Weed Sci 36:78–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose-response relationships. Weed Technol 9:218–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunderland, S. L., Santelmann, P. W., and Baughman, T. A. 1991. A rapid, sensitive soil bioassay for sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Sci 39:296–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmigielska, A. M., Schoenau, J. J., and Greer, K. 1998. Comparison of chemical extraction and bioassay for measurement of metsulfuron in soil. Weed Sci 46:487–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vencill, W. K. ed. 2002. Herbicide Handbook. 8th ed. Flucarbazone-sodium. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America. 191 p.Google Scholar
Walker, A. 1991. Influence of soil and weather factors on the persistence of soil-applied herbicides. Appl. Plant Sci 5:94–98.Google Scholar
Walker, A. and Brown, P. A. 1983. Measurement and prediction of chlorsulfuron persistence in soil. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol 30:365–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, A. and Welch, S. J. 1989. The relative movement and persistence in soil of chlorsulfuron, metsulfuron-methyl and triasulfuron. Weed Res 29:375–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, D. and Anderson, D. W. 1998. Direct measurement of organic C content in soils by the Leco CR-12 carbon analyzer. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal 29:15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Q. and Liu, W. 1999. Correlation of imazapyr adsorption and desorption with soil properties. Soil Sci 164:411–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. and Gwynn, S. M. 1977. Soil degradation of three dinitroanilines. Weed Sci 25:247–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar