Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-qks25 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T11:46:15.933Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Soil Type and Irrigation Method on Lateral Movement of Cycloate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles E. Stanger Jr.  and
Arnold P. Appleby
Charles E. Stanger Jr.
Affiliation:
Dep. of Farm Crops, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Oregon 97331
Arnold P. Appleby
Affiliation:
Dep. of Farm Crops, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Oregon 97331
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In greenhouse studies, lateral movement and toxicity of S-ethyl N-ethylthiocyclohexanecarbamate (cycloate) to barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crusgalli (L.) Beauv.) was greater in a loamy sand soil than in two silt loam soils when cycloate was applied by subsurface line injection. Greatest movement and effectiveness resulted from injection into a preirrigated soil without further irrigation. Lateral movement was adequate under furrow irrigation, but the treated band was displaced. Movement of the cycloate was inadequate under sprinkler or subirrigation. Cycloate was more effective when mechanically mixed with the soil than when injected. Cycloate moved more readily in moist soils than in dry soils. When cycloate was injected into a dry loamy sand soil, movement was similar whether irrigation was applied immediately or after 24 hr.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 19 , Issue 6 , November 1971 , pp. 709 - 711
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. Antognini, J. 1958. Activity of EPTC as affected by soil moisture at time of application. Proc. Northeast. Weed Contr. Conf. 12:398.Google Scholar
2. Dawson, J. H. 1971. Weed control in sugar beets with cycloate in Washington. U. S. Dep. Agr. Tech. Bull. (In Press).Google Scholar
3. Fang, S. C., Theisen, Patricia, and Freed, V. H. 1961. Effects of water evaporation, temperature and rates of application on the retention of ethyl-N,N-di-n-propylthiolcarbamate in various soils. Weeds 9:569–574.Google Scholar
4. Gray, Reed A. and Weierich, Andre J. 1965. Factors affecting the vapor loss of EPTC from soils. Weeds 13:141–147.Google Scholar
5. Jordan, L. S. and Day, B. E. 1962. Effects of soil properties on EPTC phytotoxicity. Weeds 10:212–215.Google Scholar
6. Koren, Ephraim, Foy, Chester L., and Ashton, Floyd M. 1969. Adsorption, volatility, and migration of thiocarbamate herbicides in soil. Weed Sci. 17:148–153.Google Scholar
7. Mortland, M. M. and Meggitt, W. F. 1966. Interaction of ethyl-N,N-di-n-propylthiolcarbamate (EPTC) with montmorillonite. J. Agr. Food Chem. 14:126–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Sheets, T. J. 1959. Effects of soil type and time on the herbicidal activity of CDAA, CDEC, and EPTC. Weeds 7:442–448.Google Scholar