Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-fsdjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-27T07:08:34.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mathematical Description of Trifluralin Degradation in Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Carlos C. Reyes  and
Robert L. Zimdahl
Carlos C. Reyes
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. and Weed Sci., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Robert L. Zimdahl
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. and Weed Sci., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Degradation of trifluralin in four soils, each represented at four sites, under field conditions was determined quantitatively and described mathematically. A biexponential equation that resulted from integration of first-order and second-order differential rate equations described degradation data better than the first-order kinetic model for 15 of 25 soil-site combinations. Biexponential model regression coefficients indicated extent of degradation and that degradation is rapid at initially high trifluralin concentrations but slows as concentration decreases. The first-order kinetic model initially underestimated but ultimately overestimated degradation of trifluralin, thereby inferring that a first-order half-life is inadequate for predicting trifluralin persistence.

Keywords

Trifluralin2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl) benzenamineHerbicide degradationkinetics

Information

Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , July 1989 , pp. 604 - 608
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Hamaker, J. W. and Goring, C.A.I. 1976. Turnover of pesticide residues in soil. Pages 219–243 in Kaufman, D. D., Still, G. G., Paulson, G. D., and Bandal, S. K., eds. Bound and Conjugated Pesticide Residues. ACS Symp. Ser. 29, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
2. Hayden, B. J. and Smith, A. E. 1980. Comparison of the persistence of ethalfluralin and trifluralin in Saskatchewan field soils. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 25:508–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Jensen, K.I.N. and Kimball, E. R. 1980. Persistence of dinitramine and trifluralin in Nova Scotia, Canada. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 24:238–243.Google Scholar
4. LaFleur, K. S., McCaskill, W. R., and Gale, G. T. 1978. Trifluralin persistence in Congaree soil. Soil Sci. 126:285–289.Google Scholar
5. LaFleur, K. S. 1979. Sorption of pesticides by model soils and agronomic soils: rates and equilibria. Soil Sci. 127:94–101.Google Scholar
6. LaFleur, K. S. 1980. Loss of pesticides from Congaree sandy loam with time: characterization. Soil Sci. 130:83–87.Google Scholar
7. Neter, J., Wasserman, W., and Kutner, M. 1985. Applied linear statistical models: Regression, analysis of variance, and experimental designs. 2nd ed. Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Homewood, IL. Page 483.Google Scholar
8. Pritchard, M. K. and Stobbe, E. H. 1980. Persistence and phytotoxicity of dinitroaniline herbicides in Manitoba soils. Can. J. Plant Sci. 60:5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Savage, K. E. 1973. Nitralin and trifluralin persistence in soil. Weed Sci. 21:285–288.Google Scholar
10. Tepe, J. B. and Scroggs, R. E. 1967. Trifluralin. Pages 527–535 in Zweig, G., ed. Analytical Methods for Pesticides, Plant Growth Regulators, and Food Additives. Vol. V. Additional Principles and Methods of Analysis. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
11. Zimdahl, R. L. and Gwynn, S. M. 1977. Soil degradation of three dinitroanilines. Weed Sci. 25:247–251.Google Scholar