Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:29:19.913Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Availability and Persistence of Imazaquin, Imazethapyr, and Clomazone in Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Mark M. Loux ,
Rex A. Liebl  and
Fred W. Slife
Mark M. Loux
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Rex A. Liebl
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Fred W. Slife
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The availability and persistence of imazaquin, imazethapyr, and clomazone were studied in a Cisne silt loam (1.3% organic matter) and a Drummer silty clay loam (5.8% organic matter). Availability of all three herbicides to bioassay species was greater in the Cisne soil than in the Drummer soil. Corn root growth was more sensitive to imazaquin and imazethapyr than corn shoot growth. Shoot and root growth of wheat was inhbited by similar clomazone concentrations. In field experiments conducted in 1984, 1985, and 1986, all three herbicides were more persistent in the Drummer silty clay loam than in the Cisne silt loam. Clomazone and imazethapyr were detected by liquid or gas chromatographic analysis in the Drummer soil 3 yr following application. Crop injury occurred 5 months after application of imazaquin and clomazone to the Drummer soil. In the Cisne soil, only imazethapyr caused crop injury 5 months after application. Herbicide residues found below 7.5 cm were greater in the Drummer soil than in the Cisne soil.

Keywords

Imazaquin, 2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl] −3-quinolinecarboxylic acidimazethapyr, (±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-5-ethyl-3-pyridinecarboxylic acidclomazone 2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinonecorn, Zea mays L. ‘B73 X Mo17′wheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Caldwell’Bioactivitycarryoverdissipation
Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , March 1989 , pp. 259 - 267
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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. Basham, G. W. and Lavy, T. L. 1987. Microbial and photolytic dissipation of imazaquin in soil. Weed Sci. 35:865–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Basham, G., Lavy, T. L., Oliver, L. R., and Scott, H. D. 1987. Imazaquin persistence and mobility in three Arkansas soils. Weed Sci. 35:576–582.Google Scholar
3. Goetz, A. J., Wehtje, G., Walker, R. H., and Hajek, B. 1986. Soil solution and mobility characterization of imazaquin. Weed Sci. 34:788–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Gunsolus, J. L., Behrens, R. H., Lueschen, W. E., Warnes, D. D., and Wiersma, J. V. 1986. Carryover potential of AC-263,499, DPX-F6025, FMC 57020, and imazaquin in Minnesota. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 41:52.Google Scholar
5. Keifer, D. W. and El-Nagger, S. F. 1984. Interaction of FMC 57020 with soil. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 39:79.Google Scholar
6. Lo, C. and Merkle, M. G. 1984. Factors affecting the phytotoxicity of norflurazon. Weed Sci. 32:279–283.Google Scholar
7. Loux, M. M. 1985. Residual properties and mobility of dimethazone and fomesafen in soil; Differential shoot and root activity of dimethazone. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801. 104 pp.Google Scholar
8. Mersie, W. and Foy, C. L. 1985. Phytotoxicity and adsorption of chlorsulfuron as affected by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33: 564–568.Google Scholar
9. Mills, J. A., Witt, W. W., and Slack, C. H. 1987. Effects of tillage on imazaquin, AC-263,499, and FMC-57020 efficacy and phytotoxicity to rotational corn. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 27:1.Google Scholar
10. Renner, K. A., Meggitt, W. F., and Leavitt, R. A. 1988. Influence of rate, method of application, and tillage on imazaquin persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 36:90–95.Google Scholar
11. 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
12. Rogers, C. B., Talbert, R. E., Mattice, J. D., Lavy, T. L., and Frans, R. E. 1986. Residual fluometuron levels in three Arkansas soils under continuous cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) production. Weed Sci. 34:122–130.Google Scholar
13. Savage, K. E. 1978. Persistence of several dinitroaniline herbicides as affected by soil moisture. Weed Sci. 26:465–471.Google Scholar
14. Schroeder, J. and Banks, P. A. 1986. Persistence and activity of norflurazon and fluridone in five Georgia soils under controlled conditions. Weed Sci. 34:599–606.Google Scholar
15. Tymonko, J. M. and Guscar, H. L. 1984. Influence of soil properties on the activity of FMC 57020. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 39:76.Google Scholar
16. Zimdahl, R. L., Catizone, P., and Butcher, A. C. 1984. Degradation of pendimethalin in soil. Weed Sci. 32:408–412.Google Scholar