Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:14:42.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sorption and Desorption of Imazethapyr and 5-Hydroxyimazethapyr in Minnesota Soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jianying Gan ,
Monte R. Weimer ,
William C. Koskinen ,
Douglas D. Buhler ,
Donald L. Wyse  and
Roger L. Becker
Jianying Gan
Affiliation:
Dep. Soil Sci.
Monte R. Weimer
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. & Plant Genet, Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
William C. Koskinen
Affiliation:
Soil & Water Manage
Douglas D. Buhler
Affiliation:
Plant Sci. Res. Unit, USDA-ARS, Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Donald L. Wyse
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. & Plant Genet., Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Roger L. Becker
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. & Plant Genet., Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Laboratory batch equilibrium studies were conducted to evaluate the sorption-desorption behavior of imazethapyr and its major plant metabolite, 5-hydroxyimazethapyr, in three Minnesota soils. Sorption of both compounds on all soils was low, and pH did not significantly influence sorption in the range of 4,8 to 7.1. Less 5-hydroxyimazethapyr was sorbed than imazethapyr on the same soil. Once sorbed, both compounds were only partially desorbable from all soils. Significant hysteresis and formation of nonextractable residues indicate that the small amount of chemical sorbed is bound to selective surfaces with strong bonds. Webster clay loam had greater irreversibility than Waukegen silt loam and Estherville sandy loam soil. The hysteresis observed in desorption may be responsible for the difference between mobility estimations made from laboratory sorption studies and the limited mobility observed in field experiments.

Keywords

Imazethapyr, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acid5-hydroxyimazethapyr (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-hydroxyethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidHysteresisFreundlich isothermsbound pesticide residuesimazethapyr
Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , March 1994 , pp. 92 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Bowman, B. T. and Sans, W. W. 1977. Adsorption of parathion, fenitrothion, methyl parathion, aminoparathion, and paraoxon by Na+, Ca2+ an Fe3+ montmorillonite suspensions. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 41:514–519.Google Scholar
2. Bowman, B. T. and Sans, W. W. 1985. Partitioning behavior of insecticides in soil-water systems: II. Desorption hysteresis effects. J. Environ. Qual. 14:270–273.Google Scholar
3. Che, M., Loux, M. M., Traina, S. J., and Logan, T. J. 1992. Effect of pH on sorption and desorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on clays and humic acid. J. Environ. Qual. 21:698–703.Google Scholar
4. Clay, S. A., Allmaras, R. R., Koskinen, W. C., and Wyse, D. L. 1988. Desorption of atrazine and cyanazine from soil. J. Environ. Qual. 17:719–723.Google Scholar
5. Clay, S. A. and Koskinen, W. C. 1990. Characterization of alachlor and atrazine desorption from soils. Weed Sci. 38:74–80.Google Scholar
6. Clay, S. A. and Koskinen, W. C. 1990. Adsorption and desorption of atrazine, hydroxyatrazine, and S-glutathione atrazine on two soils. Weed Sci. 38:262–266.Google Scholar
7. DiToro, D. M. and Horzempa, L. M. 1982. Reversible and resistant components of PCB adsorption-desorption: Isotherm. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16:594–4502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Goetz, A. J. and Lavy, T. L. 1988. Mobility and sorptive properties of imazethapyr in Arkansas soils. Proc. South Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 41:337.Google Scholar
9. Green, R. E., Yamane, V. K., and Obien, S. R. 1968. Transport of atrazine in a latosolic soil in relation to adsorption, degradation, and soil water variables. Int. Congr. Soil Sci. Trans. 9th (Adelaide, Aust.). 1:195–204.Google Scholar
10. Han, R. G., Lignowski, E. M., and Taylor, F. R. 1991. Imazethapyr herbicide. Pages 247–256 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Conner, S. L., eds. The Imadazolinone Herbicides. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
11. Horzempa, L. M. and DiToro, D. M. 1983. The extent of reversibility of polychlorinated biphenyl adsorption. Water Res. 17:851–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Khan, S. U. 1973. Equilibrium and kinetic studies of the adsorption of 2,4-D and picloram on humic acid. Can. J. Soil Sci. 53:427–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Khan, S. U. 1982. Bound pesticide residues in soil and plants. Residual Rev. 84:125.Google Scholar
14. Koskinen, W. C., O'Connor, G. A., and Cheng, H. H. 1979. Characterization of hysteresis in the desorption of 2,4,5-T from soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43:871–874.Google Scholar
15. Koskinen, W. C. 1980. Evaluation of the batch equilibrium method for characterization of adsorption-desorption of 2,4,5-T in soils. , Washington State Univ., Pullman. Univ. microfilms. Ann Arbor, Mich. (Diss. Abstr. 41:20B).Google Scholar
16. Koskinen, W. C. and Cheng, H. H. 1982. Elimination of aerobic degradation during characterization of pesticide adsorption-desorption in soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46:256–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Lee, A-H., Gatterdam, P. E., Chiu, T. Y., Mallipudi, N. M., and Fiale, R. 1991. Plant metabolism. Pages 151–165 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imadazolinone Herbicides. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
18. Loux, M. M., Liebl, R. A., and Slife, F. W. 1989. Adsorption of imazaquin and imazethapyr on soils, sediments, and selected adsorbents. Weed Sci. 37:712–718.Google Scholar
19. Mangels, G. 1991. Behavior of the imadazolinone herbicides in soil—a review of the literature. Pages 191–210 in Shaner, D. L. and O'Connor, S. L., eds. The Imadazolinone Herbicides. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
20. Obien, S. R. and Green, R. E. 1969. Degradation of atrazine in four Hawaiian soils. Weed Sci. 17:509–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Peck, D. E., Corwin, D. L., and Farmer, W. J. 1980. Adsorption-desorption of diuron by freshwater sediments. J. Environ. Qual. 9:101–106.Google Scholar
22. Raman, S., Krishna, M., and Rao, P. C. 1988. Adsorption-desorption of atrazine on four soils of hyderabad. Water, Air, Soil Pollution 40:177–184.Google Scholar
23. Rao, P. S. C. and Davidson, J. M. 1980. Estimation of pesticide retention and transformation parameters required in nonpoint source pollution models. Pages 23–67 in Overcash, M. R. and Davidson, J. M., eds. Environmental Impact of Nonpoint Source Pollution. Ann Arbor Sci. Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
24. 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.Google Scholar
25. Stougaard, R. N., Shea, P. J., and Martin, A. R. 1990. Effect of soil type and pH on adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of imazaquin and imazethapyr. Weed Sci. 38:67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar