Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T19:50:01.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Environment on the Activity of Diphenamid

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

M. R. Lynch  and
R. D. Sweet
M. R. Lynch
Affiliation:
Dep. of Vegetable Crops, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York
R. D. Sweet
Affiliation:
Dep. of Vegetable Crops, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The activity of foliage applications of N,N-dimethyl-2,2-diphenylacetamide (diphenamid) was greatly enhanced by exposing the plants to high relative humidity for 6 hr immediately after chemical application. Growing plants under low light intensity further increased the activity of diphenamid under these conditions. This response occurred with a number of plant species, including tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.), Japanese millet (Echinochloa crusgalli (L.) Beauv., var. frumentacea), lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.), and radish (Raphanus sativus L.). Low light, but not high relative humidity, increased the activity of diphenamid as a soil application. Unaltered diphenamid and not its known metabolites seemed to be responsible for the increased activity of foliage sprays under conditions of low light and high relative humidity.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , July 1971 , pp. 332 - 337
Copyright
Copyright © 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. Audus, L. J. 1964. The physiology and biochemistry of herbicides. Academic Press, London and New York. p. 75–88. 555 p. Google Scholar
2. Gentner, W. A. 1968. A study of the activity of diphenamid and three analogs. Proc. No. East Weed Control Conf. 22:499.Google Scholar
3. Gentner, W. A. 1969. Phytotoxicity of demethylated analogs of diphenamid. Weed Sci. 17:284–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Golab, T., Herberg, R. J., Parka, S. J. and Tepe, J. B. 1966. The metabolism of carbon-14 diphenamid in strawberry plants. J. Agr. Food Chem. 14:592–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Koontz, H. and Biddulph, O. 1957. Factors affecting absorption and translocation of foliar applied phosphorous. Plant Physiol. 32:463–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Lemin, A. J. 1966. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of diphenamid-1-C14 by tomato seedlings. J. Agr. Food Chem. 14:109–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Lynch, M. R. and Sweet, R. D. 1969. Environmental effects on diphenamid activity – A progress report. Proc. N. East Weed Contr. Conf. 23:34–43.Google Scholar
8. Skoss, J. D. 1955. Structure and composition of plant cuticle in relation to environmental factors and permeability. Botan. Gaz. 117:55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Smith, J. M. and Sagar, G. R. 1966. A re-examination of the influence of light and darkness on the long-distance transport of diquat in Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. Weed Res. 6:314–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar