Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T12:31:42.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sorption and Mobility of Sulfometuron and Imazapyr in Five Alabama Soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Glenn Wehtje ,
Ray Dickens ,
John W. Wilcut  and
Ben F. Hajek
Glenn Wehtje
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ., AL 36849
Ray Dickens
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ., AL 36849
John W. Wilcut
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ., AL 36849
Ben F. Hajek
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ., AL 36849
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mobility and sorption of radiolabeled sulfometuron {2-[[[[(4,6-dimethyl-2-pyrimidinyl)amino] carbonyl] amino] sulfonyl] benzoic acid} and imazapyr {(±)-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-5-oxo-1H-imidazol-2-yl]-3-pyridinecarboxylic acid} were evaluated in five soils representative of the major soil types in Alabama. Thin-layer soil chromatography indicated that sulfometuron was slightly more mobile (average Rf = 0.86) than imazapyr (average Rf = 0.79). Sulfometuron was more subject to sorption (average kd = 0.29) than imazapyr (average kd = 0.09) in batch equilibrium experiments. Least sorption of both herbicides occurred on clay soils, and maximum sorption occurred on a sandy clay. Similar results were obtained with a soil solution recovery technique. Sorption of both herbicides was exhanced by temporary reduction in soil water content and by lowering soil pH. The pH response of imazapyr was greater than that of sulfometuron.

Keywords

Sorptionherbicide leachingatrazinemetribuzin
Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 35 , Issue 6 , November 1987 , pp. 858 - 864
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 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. Adams, F., Burmester, C., Hue, N. V., and Long, L. F. 1982. A comparison of column displacement and centrifuge methods of obtaining soil solution. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 44:733–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1983. Reference soil test methods for the southern region of the United States. South. Coop. Series Bull. 289. Univ. Georgia, Athens, GA. 40 pp.Google Scholar
3. Arnold, P. W. 1981. Surface-electrolyte interactions. Pages 355–404 in Greenland, D. J. and Hayes, M. B., eds. The Chemistry of Soil Constituents. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
4. Atkinson, R. J., Posner, A. M., and Quirk, J. P. 1967. Adsorption of potential-determining ions at the ferric oxideaqueous electrolyte. J. Phys. Chem. 71:550–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Bohn, H., McNeal, B., and O'Connor, G. 1979. Soil Chemistry. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 172 pp.Google Scholar
6. Breeuwsma, A. and Lyklema, J. 1973. Physical and chemical adsorption of ions in electrical double layer on hematite (Fe2O3). J. Colloidal Int. Sci. 43:437–448.Google Scholar
7. Day, P. R. 1965. Particle fractionation and particle size analysis. Pages 545–566 in Black, C. A., ed. Methods of Soil Analysis (Part I). Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
8. Dickens, R. and Hiltbold, A. E. 1967. Movement and persistence of methanearsonates in soil. Weed Sci. 15:299–304.Google Scholar
9. Fredrickson, D. R. and Shea, P. J. 1986. Effect of soil pH on degradation, movement, and plant uptake of chlorsulfuron. Weed Sci. 34:328–332.Google Scholar
10. Hammaker, F. J., Goring, C.A.I., and Youngson, C. R. 1966. Sorption and leaching of 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloropicolinic acid in soil. Adv. Chem. Ser. 60:23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Gast, R. G. 1977. Surface and colloid chemistry. Pages 22–73 in Dixon, J. B. and Weed, S. B., eds. Minerals in Soil Environments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
12. Goetz, A. J., Wehtje, G., Walker, R. H., and Hajek, B. 1986. Soil solution and leachability characteristics of imazaquin in Alabama soils. Weed Sci. 34:788–793.Google Scholar
13. Greenland, D. J. and Mott, C.J.B. 1978. Surfaces of soil particles. Pages 321–354 in Greenland, D. J. and Hayes, M. B., eds. The Chemistry of Soil Constituents. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
14. Harvey, J. Jr., Dulka, J. J., and Anderson, J. J. 1985. Properties of sulfometuron methyl affecting its environmental fate: aqueous hydrolysis and photolysis, mobility and adsorption on soils, and bioaccumulation potential. J. Agric. Food Chem. 33:590–596.Google Scholar
15. Helling, C. S. 1971. Pesticide mobility in soils I. Parameters of thin-layer chromatography. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 36: 732–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Hsu, P. H. 1977. Aluminum hydroxides and oxyhydroxides. Pages 99–143 in Dixon, J. B. and Weed, S. B., eds. Minerals in Soil Environments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
17. Karathanasis, A. D. and Hajek, B. F. 1982. Revised methods for rapid quantitative determination of minerals in soil clays. J. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. 46:419–425.Google Scholar
18. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of soil pH on microbial degradation, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:477–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Majka, J. T. and Lavy, T. L. 1977. Adsorption, mobility, and degradation of cyananzine and diuron in soils. Weed Sci. 25: 401–406.Google Scholar
20. Metcalf, C. S. 1985. Herbaceous weed control in loblolly pine plantations: rate and timing study. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 38:190.Google Scholar
21. Mott, C.J.B. 1981. Anion and ligand exchange. Pages 179–218 in Greenland, D. J. and Hayes, M. B., eds. The Chemistry of Soil Processes. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
22. Muljadi, D. A., Posner, M., and Quirk, J. P. 1966. The mechanisms of phosphate adsorption by kaolinite, gibbsite, and pseudo boehmite, Part I. The adsorption isotherms and effect of pH on adsorption. J. Soil Sci. 17:212–228.Google Scholar
23. O'Connor, D. A. and Anderson, J. U. 1974. Soil factors affecting the adsorption of 2,4,5-T. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 38:433–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Parfitt, R. L. 1978. Anion adsorption by soils and soil materials. Adv. Agron. 30:1–50.Google Scholar
25. Parks, G. A. and DeBruyn, P. L. 1962. The zero point of charge of oxides. J. Phys. Chem. 66:967–972.Google Scholar
26. Patterson, M. G., Buchanan, G. A., Walker, R. H., and Patterson, R. M. 1982. Fluometuron in soil solution as an indicator of its efficacy in three soils. Weed Sci. 30:688–691.Google Scholar
27. Peter, C. J. and Weber, J. B. 1985. Adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of metribuzin as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:868–873.Google Scholar
28. Reyes, E. D. and Jurinak, J. J. 1967. A mechanism of molybdate adsorption on Fe2O3 . Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 31:637–640.Google Scholar
29. Schofield, R. K. and Samson, H. R. 1953. The deflocculation of kaolinite suspensions and the accompanying change-over from positive to negative chloride adsorption. Clay Miner. Bull. 2:45–50.Google Scholar
30. Shea, P. J. 1986. Chlorsulfuron dissociation and adsorption on selected adsorbents and soils. Weed Sci. 34:474–478.Google Scholar
31. Talbert, R. E. and Fletchall, O. R. 1965. The adsorption of some s-triazines in soils. Weeds 13:46–52.Google Scholar
32. Turner, D. L. and Dickens, R. 1984. Two herbicides effective against bahiagrass in centipedegrass sods. Highlights of Agric. Res., Ala. Agric. Exp. Stn. 31(3):6.Google Scholar
33. Turner, D. L. and Dickens, R. 1984. Weed control programs for highway rights-of-way. Agron. Abstr. 156.Google Scholar
34. Wauchope, R. D. 1975. Fixation of arsenicals herbicides, phosphate, and arsenate in alluvial soils. J. Environ. Qual. 4:355–358.Google Scholar
35. Wang, C. H., Willis, D. J., and Loveland, W. D. 1975. Radiotracer Methodology in the Biological, Environmental, and Physical Sciences. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
36. Zelazny, L. W. and Calhoun, F. G. 1977, Polygorskite, (Attapulgite), Sepiolite, Tale, Pyrophyllite, and Zeolites. Pages 435–470 in Dixon, J. B. and Weed, S. B., ed. Minerals in Soil Environments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI 53711.Google Scholar