Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:03:12.323Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Slow-Release Delivery System for Herbicides in Container-Grown Stock

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Stanley F. Gorski*
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., The Ohio State Univ., Columbus, OH 43210

Abstract

Metolachlor, applied to the surface of leaching columns as dicalcium phosphate tablets, was recovered over a period of 25 d compared with 2 and 3 d for emulsifiable concentrate and granular formulations, respectively. In similar studies, approximately 27% of napropamide was recovered from tablets during the same period. Adding an adjuvant to the napropamide tablet mixture increased the recovery rate to 55%. Tablet hardness and size had little effect on the release rate of napropamide. Tablets containing 4% ai napropamide released greater amounts of herbicide at a single collection period than did tablets containing 1% ai. Adding an adjuvant to the napropamide tablet mixture significantly improved Italian ryegrass control in the area adjacent to herbicide placement.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Anderson, W. P. 1977. Weed Science Principles. West Publ., New York. p. 171200.Google Scholar
2. Baur, J. R. 1980. Release characteristics of starch xanthide herbicide formulations. J. Environ. Qual. 9:379382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Dale, J. E. 1984. Multichemical granules formulated with gum xanthan, loess, and rung oil. Weed Sci. 32:315319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Danielson, L. L. 1967. Evaluation of herbicide impregnated cloth. Weeds 15:6062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Gorski, S. F., Reiners, S., and Ruizzo, M. A. 1989. Release rate of three herbicides from controlled-release tablets. Weed Technol. 3:349352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hamill, A. S., Layne, R.E.C., and von Stryk, F. G. 1975. Weed control in a fruit tree nursery with herbicide-impregnated string. HortScience 10:587588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Koncal, J. J., Gorski, S. F., and Fretz, T. A. 1981. Slow-release herbicide formulation for weed control in container-grown plants. HortScience 16:8384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Koncal, J. J., Gorski, S. F., and Fretz, T. A. 1981. Leaching of EPTC, alachlor, and metolachlor through a nursery medium as influenced by herbicide formulations. HortScience 16:757758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Raboy, V. and Hopen, H. J. 1982. Effectiveness of starch xanthide formulations of chloramben for weed control in pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata). Weed Sci. 30:169174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Riggle, B. D. and Penner, D. 1987. Evaluation of pine kraft lignins for controlled release of alachlor and metribuzin. Weed Sci. 35:243246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Ruizzo, M. A., Smith, E. M., and Gorski, S. F. 1983. Evaluations of herbicides in slow-release formulations for container-grown landscape crops. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 108:551553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Schreiber, M. M. and White, M. D. 1980. Granule structure and rate of release with starch-encapsulated thiocarbamates. Weed Sci. 28: 685690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Smith, A. E. and Verma, B. P. 1977. Weed control in nursery stock by controlled release of alachlor. Weed Sci. 25:175177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Verma, B. P. and Smith, A. E. 1978. Slow release herbicide tablets for container nursery. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 21:10541059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Verma, B. P. and Smith, A. E. 1981. Dry-pressed slow release herbicide tablets. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 24:14001407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar