Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T08:12:40.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of Soil Factors on the Phytotoxicity and Plant Selectivity of Diuron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert P. Upchurch
Robert P. Upchurch*
Affiliation:
North Carolina State College
Get access

Extract

Although many studies have been made on the behavior of herbicides in soils, there is still insufficient information to make intelligent use of many herbicides. Certain theories on herbicidal behavior in soils are well established in some regions, but the applicability of such theories to other regions under different soil and environmental conditions is not always known.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , April 1958 , pp. 161 - 171
Copyright
Copyright © 1958 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. Bingham, Wayne, Upchurch, R. P., and Rud, Orvin. A study of the influence of nutrient level (N, P, K) and pH on the response of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and Italian rye grass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) to 3–(3,4–dichlorophenyl)–1,1–dimethylurea. Proc. Southern Weed Conf. p. 153. 1956.Google Scholar
2. Blouch, Roger, and Fults, Jess. The influnce of soil type on the selective action of chloro-IPC and sodium TCA. Weeds 2:119–125. 1953.Google Scholar
3. Ennis, W. B. Jr. Some soil and weather factors influencing usage of pre-emergence herbicides. Soil Science Soc. Florida 14:130–139. 1954.Google Scholar
4. Ennis, W. B. Jr. Weed control in principal crops of the Southern United States. Advances in Agron. 7:251–297. 1955.Google Scholar
5. Hollingsworth, Everett B. Effect of soil pH on activity of DNOSBP. Proc. Southern Weed Conf. pp. 212–218. 1954.Google Scholar
6. Linder, P. J. Movement and persistence of herbicides following the application to the soil surface. Proc. Northeastern Weed Control Conf. pp. 7–11. 1952.Google Scholar
7. Mac Gillivray, John H., and Doneen, L. D. Soil moisture conditions as related to the irrigation of truck crops on mineral soils. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 40:483–492. 1942.Google Scholar
8. Moore, Donald H., George, Donald K., Martin, Vaughan O., and Garman, John A. Evaluation of three carbamate herbicides in comparison with isopropyl N–(3–chlorophenyl) carbamate. Agr. and Food Chem. 1:1154–1158. 1953.Google Scholar
9. Ogle, R. E., and Warren, G. F. Fate and activity of herbicides in soils. Weeds 3:257–273. 1954.Google Scholar
10. Sherburne, H. R., and Freed, V. H. Adsorption of 3(p–chlorophenyl)–1,1–dimethylurea as a function of soil constituents. Agr. and Food Chem. 2:937–939. 1954.Google Scholar
11. Thompson, J. T., Hauser, E. W., and Stacy, S. V. Chemical weed control in Georgia (Cotton-1953). Proc. Southern Weed Control Conf. pp. 115–118. 1954.Google Scholar
12. Upchurch, R. P. The influence of soil-moisture content on the response of cotton to herbicides. Weeds: 5:112–120. 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar