Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-cbk24 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T11:50:08.204Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicide Dissipation from Low Density Polyethylene Mulch

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Timothy L. Grey,
William K. Vencill,
Theodore M. Webster and
A. Stanley Culpepper
Timothy L. Grey*
Affiliation:
University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 6 Weed Science Annex, Tifton, GA 31794
William K. Vencill
Affiliation:
University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 4105 Plant Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602
Theodore M. Webster
Affiliation:
Crop Protection and Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, P.O. Box 748 Tifton, GA 31794-0748
A. Stanley Culpepper
Affiliation:
University of Georgia, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 6 Weed Science Annex, Tifton, GA 31794
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: tgrey@uga.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field and laboratory studies were conducted to examine herbicide dissipation when applied to low density polyethylene (LDPE) mulch for dry scenarios vs. irrigation. Analytical chemical analysis was used for quantification. In field studies, halosulfuron, paraquat, carfentrazone, glyphosate, and flumioxazin were surface applied to black 32-μm-thick (1.25 mil) LDPE mulch. LDPE mulch harvest began 1 h after treatment (HAT) then continued every 24 h for five consecutive rain-free days after treatment (DAT) to determine the level of herbicide dissipation from the LDPE mulch surface. In a related study, treated LDPE mulch was harvested 1 HAT, then sprinkler irrigation was applied, followed by a sampling five HAT, then the same irrigation and sampling procedure was repeated every 24 h for five consecutive DAT. The order for half-life, as defined as time for 50% dissipation (DT50), varied by herbicide and method of dissipation for dry and irrigated studies. Data indicated that glyphosate and paraquat dissipation was rapid following irrigation. Glyphosate and paraquat DT50 were both 1 h in the irrigated study, but 84 and 32 h for the dry scenario, respectively. This indicated that glyphosate and paraquat could be removed from LDPE mulch with rainfall or irrigation, primarily due to their high water solubility. Halosulfuron and flumioxazin DT50 were 3 and 6 h in the irrigated study, and 18 and 57 h for the dry study, respectively. Carfentrazone DT50 was similar at 28 and 30 h for the irrigated and dry studies, respectively. This indicated that carfentrazone was adsorbed to the LDPE mulch, and irrigation water did not remove it from the LDPE mulch. Results from 14C-herbicide laboratory studies were similar to those from field studies for halosulfuron, glyphosate, paraquat, and flumioxazin.

Keywords

CarfentrazoneflumioxazinglyphosatehalosulfuronparaquatHerbicide persistenceherbicide dissipationlow density polyethylene mulchexponential decay equationhalf-life

Information

Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 3 , June 2009, pp. 351 - 356
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Dermiyati, S. K. and Yamamoto, I. 1997. Degradation of the herbicide halosulfuron-methyl in two soils under different environmental conditions. J. Pest. Sci. 22:282–287.Google Scholar
Ferrell, J. A. and Vencill, W. K. 2003. Flumioxazin soil persistence and mineralization in laboratory experiments J. Agric. Food Chem. 51:4719–4721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrell, J. A., Vencill, W. K., Xia, Kang, and Grey, T. L. 2004. Sorption and desorption of flumioxazin to soil, clay minerals and ion-exchange resin. Pest Manage. Sci. 60:40–46.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P. and Duranceau, S. J. 1986. Photodegradation of paraquat applied to polyethylene mulch film. HortScience. 21:1145–1146.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P. and Santos, B. M. 2004. Bioassays on glyphosate residue toxicity and photodegradation on polyethylene mulch. Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. of Fla. Proc. 63:21–24.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Santos, B. M., and Duranceau, S. J. 2006. Seasonal variation of paraquat photodegradation rate on polyethylene mulch. Weed Technol. 20:315–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grey, T. L., Culpepper, A. S., and Webster, T. M. 2007. Fall vegetable response to herbicides spring applied under polyethylene mulch. Weed Technol. 21:496–500.Google Scholar
Hoogenboom, G. 2008. Georgia Automated Environmental Monitoring Network. http://www.griffin.uga.edu./aemn/. Accessed: February 19, 2008.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 2005. Effect of herbicide application method on weed management and crop injury in transplanted cantaloupe production. Weed Technol. 19:108–112.Google Scholar
MacRae, A. W. and Culpepper, A. S. 2007. Weed management update for cantaloupe, cucumber, squash, and watermelon. Pages 50. In Kelley, W. T. Proceedings 2007 Southeast Regional Vegetable Conference. Athens, GA Coop. Ext. Serv. Univ. Georgia Coll. Agr. Environ. Sci.Google Scholar
McConnell, J. S. and Hossner, L. R. 1985. pH-dependent adsorption isotherms of glyphosate. J. Agric. Food Chem. 33:1075–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, T. C., Shaw, D. R., and Witt, W. W. 1999. Relative dissipation of acetochlor, alachlor, metolachlor, and SAN 582 from three surface soils. Weed Technol. 13:341–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nerin, C., Tornes, A. R., Domeno, C., and Cacho, J. 1996. Absorption of pesticides on plastic films used as agricultural soil covers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 44:4009–4014.Google Scholar
Ohmes, G. A., Mueller, T. C., and Hayes, R. M. 2000. Sulfentrazone dissipation in a Tennessee soil. Weed Technol. 14:100–105.Google Scholar
Papiernik, S. K. and Yates, S. R. 2001a. Transport of fumigant compounds through HDPE and virtually impermeable films. Pages 16-1–16-3. in. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions Conference Proceedings. http://mbao.org/2001proc/mbrpro01.html. Accessed March 5, 2009.Google Scholar
Papiernik, S. K. and Yates, S. R. 2001b. An approach for estimating the permeability of agricultural films. Environ. Sci. Technol. 35:1240–1246.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1998. Suppression of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) with polyethylene film mulch. Weed Technol. 12:275–280.Google Scholar
Rice, J. P., McConnell, L. L., Heighton, L. P., Sadeghi, A. M., Isensee, A. R., Teasdale, J. R., Abdul-Baki, A. A., Harman-Fetcho, J. A., and Hapeman, C. J. 2001. Runoff loss of pesticides and soil: a comparison between vegetative mulch and plastic mulch in vegetable production systems. J. Environ. Qual. 30:1808–1821.Google Scholar
Rogers, C. E. 1985. Permeation of gases and vapors in polymers. Pages 11–73. In Comyn, J. Polymer Permeability. London Elevier.Google Scholar
Senseman, S. A. 2007. Herbicide Handbook. 9th ed. Champaign, IL Weed Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Csinos, A. S., Johnson, A. W., Dowler, C. C., Sumner, D. R., and Fery, R. L. 2001. Methyl bromide alternatives in a bell pepper-squash rotation. Crop Prot. 20:605–614.Google Scholar