Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:45:34.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soil Detection and Mobility of Fluridone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

P. A. Banks  and
M. G. Merkle
P. A. Banks
Affiliation:
Soil and Crop Sci. Dep., Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
M. G. Merkle
Affiliation:
Soil and Crop Sci. Dep., Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bioassay and gas chromatographic procedures were evaluated for their effectiveness in detecting fluridone [1-methyl-3-phenyl-5-[3-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4(1H)-pyridinone] in soil. Bioassay procedures were limited to a detection range of 0.05 to 0.45 ppmw if grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Monech) was used. Visual estimations of chlorophyll content in affected plants, used as an indicator of fluridone concentration, were as reliable as spectrophotometric determinations. Gas-liquid chromatographic (GLC) procedures were less variable than the bioassay and had no upper limit of detection. Recovery of fluridone from treated soil ranged from 60 to 100 percent, depending on soil type. Soil water content affected percent recovery. Fluridone did not leach more than 1 cm in clay or sandy loam soils when up to 10 cm of water was passed through a soil column containing the herbicide, as determined by GLC. Extensive downward movement, 12 to 16 cm, occurred in a coarse sand when 5 or 10 cm of water was passed through the column.

Keywords

Bioassaygas-liquid chromatographherbicide
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , May 1979 , pp. 309 - 312
Copyright
Copyright © 1979 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. Banks, P. A. and Merkle, M. G. 1978. Effectiveness and persistence of fluridone. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 31:74.Google Scholar
2. Bartels, P. G. and Watson, C. W. 1978. Inhibition of carotenoid synthesis by fluridone and norfluruzon. Weed Sci. 26:198–203.Google Scholar
3. Berard, D. F., Rainey, D. P., and Lin, C. C. 1978. Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of fluridone in selected crop species. Weed Sci. 26:252–254.Google Scholar
4. Waldrep, T. W. and Taylor, H. M. 1978. One-methyl-3-phenyl-5-[3-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(1H)-pyridinone, a new herbicide. J. Agric. Food Chem. 24:1250–1251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Webster, H. L., Addison, D. A., Banks, J. C., Keaton, J. A., McNeill, K. E., Hicks, R. D., and Nicholson, J. F. 1977. Field performance of EL-171 for weed control in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30:103–112.Google Scholar
6. West, S. D. 1978. Determination of residue levels of the herbicide fluridone by electron-capture gas chromatography. J. Agric. Food Chem. 26:644–646.Google Scholar
7. Wills, G. D. 1977. Effect of EL-171 on cotton and purple nutsedge. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 30.113–115.Google Scholar