Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:32:32.853Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leachability and Efficacy of Starch-Encapsulated Atrazine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Gwen F. Fleming ,
Loyd M. Wax  and
F. William Simmons
Gwen F. Fleming
Affiliation:
Dept. Agron., Univ. Ill., Res. Agron., U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
Loyd M. Wax
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
F. William Simmons
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Controlled-release formulations have the potential to reduce atrazine leaching but may reduce herbicide bioavailability and weed control. This research was conducted to determine if starch-encapsulated atrazine produced by the extrusion process could be modified to provide an optimum rate of herbicide release for adequate weed control and reduced leaching potential in sandy soils. The dry flowable (DF) and six starch-encapsulated atrazine formulations of various mesh size (14 to 20 and 20 to 40), clay content (0 and 5%), and extruder processing speed (200 and 400 rpm) were evaluated. All starch encapsulations reduced the amount of atrazine leaching from the surface 5 cm of soil columns by an average of 68% compared with the dry flowable formulation. Compared with the larger starch granules (14 to 20 mesh) 8% more atrazine in the smaller granules leached from the surface 5 cm. Atrazine efficacy was measured using an oat bioassay conducted in the greenhouse. Smaller granules (20 to 40 mesh) provided equivalent efficacy to DF while large granules (14 to 20 mesh) did not. Extruder speed and clay content did not affect efficacy or leaching potential. This study indicates that finer starch granules should result in faster atrazine release and improved weed control while still reducing the leaching potential of atrazine.

Keywords

Atrazine, 6-chloro-N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamineoat, Avena sativa L.Soil columnsleachingcontrolled release formulations
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , June 1992 , pp. 297 - 302
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Carr, M. E., Wing, R. E., and Doane, W. M. 1991. Encapsulation of atrazine within a starch matrix by extrusion processing. Cereal Chem. 68:262–266.Google Scholar
2. Cohen, S. Z., Eiden, C., and Lorber, M. N. 1986. Monitoring ground water for pesticides. p. 170–196 in Evaluation of Pesticides in Groundwater. Garner, W. Y., Honeycut, R. C., and Nigg, H. N., eds. ACS Symposium Series No. 315, Am. Chem. Soc., Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Fleming, G. F. 1991. Atrazine movement in soil columns as influenced by starch encapsulation and acrylic polymer additives. Ph.D. thesis. University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. Google Scholar
4. Richard, J. J., Junk, G. A., Avery, M. J., Nehring, N. L., Fritz, J. S., and Svec, H. J. 1975. Analysis of various Iowa waters for selected pesticides: atrazine, DDE, and dieldrin-1974. Pestic. Monit. J. 9:117–123.Google ScholarPubMed
5. Ritter, W. F. 1986. Pesticide contamination of groundwater–a review. ASAE Paper No. 86–2028. ASAE. St. Joseph, Mich. Google Scholar
6. SAS Institute. 1986. p. 159–174 in SAS System for Linear Models, 1986 edition. Crum, L., ed. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, N.C. Google Scholar
7. Schoppet, M. J., Gish, T. J., and Helling, C. S. 1989. Effect of starch encapsulation on atrazine mobility in small undisturbed soil columns. ASAE Paper No. 89–2507. ASAE. St. Joseph, Mich. Google Scholar
8. Schreiber, M. M., Shasha, B. S., Trimnell, D., and White, M. D. 1987. Controlled release herbicides. p. 177–191 in Methods of Applying Herbicides. McWhorter, C. G., and Gebhardt, M. R., eds. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Monog. 4.Google Scholar
9. Shasha, B. S., Trimnell, D., and Otey, F. H. 1981. Encapsulation of pesticides in a starch-calcium adduct. J. Polym. Sci. 19:1891–1899.Google Scholar
10. Shasha, B. W., Doane, W. M., and Russell, C. R. 1976. Starch encapsulated pesticides for slow release. J. Polym. Sci., Polym. Lett. Ed. 14(7):417–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Trimnell, D., and Shasha, B. 1990. Controlled release formulations of atrazine in starch for potential reduction of groundwater pollution. J. Controlled Release 12:251–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Trimnell, D., Shasha, B. S., Wing, R. E., and Otey, F. H. 1982. Pesticide encapsulation using a starch-borate complex as wall material. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 27:3919–3929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Agricultural Chemicals in Ground Water Proposed Pesticide Strategy. Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Washington, DC. 150 p.Google Scholar
14. Wauchope, D. R., Glaze, N. C., and Dowler, C. C. 1990. Mobility and efficacy of controlled-release formulations of atrazine. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 30:216.Google Scholar
15. Wing, R. E., Maiti, S., and Doane, W. M. 1987. Effectiveness of jet-cooked pearl cornstarch as a controlled release matrix. Starch/Stärke, 39:422–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar