Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:38:10.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Weed Control with Starch-Encapsulated Alachlor, Metolachlor, and Atrazine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Douglas D. Buhler
Affiliation:
Nat. Soil Tilth Lab., U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., 2150 Pammel Dr., Ames, IA 50011
Marvin M. Schreiber
Affiliation:
Insect and Weed Control Res. Unit, U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., Dep. Bot. Plant Pathol., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
William C. Koskinen
Affiliation:
Soil and Water Management Res. Unit, U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., Dep. Soil Sci., Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108

Abstract

Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities. At low weed densities (122 total plants/m2), giant foxtail and Pennsylvania smartweed control were not different with full rates of herbicide applied in starch encapsulated or commercial formulations. Velvetleaf control was less with starch-encapsulated than commercial formulations regardless of velvetleaf density. At high giant foxtail densities (740 plants/m2), control was not affected by formulation with full rates of alachlor plus atrazine. However, giant foxtail control was less with starch-encapsulated formulations than commercial formulations with 75% rates of alachlor plus atrazine and both 75 and 100% rates of metolachlor plus atrazine. At low weed densities, corn yield was not different with any treatment, except starch-encapsulated metolachlor plus atrazine at 75% rates, compared to the weed-free control. Alachlor plus atrazine at full rates was the only starch-encapsulated treatment to result in corn yield not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities. Conversely, all commercial formulation treatments resulted in corn yields not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities.

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. Bahadir, M. and Pfister, G. 1990. Controlled release formulations of pesticides. P. 164 in Haug, G. and Hoffmann, H., eds. Chemistry of Plant Protection. Vol. 6. Controlled Release, Biological Effects of Pesticides, Inhibition of Plant Pathogenic Fungi. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
2. Boydston, R. A. 1992. Controlled release starch granule formulations reduce herbicide leaching in soil columns. Weed Technol. 6:317321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Buhler, D. D., Koskinen, W. C., Schreiber, M. M., and Gan, J. 1994. Dissipation of alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine from starch encapsulated formulations in a sandy loam soil. Weed Sci. 42:(In press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Carr, M. W., Wing, R. E., and Doane, W. M. 1991. Encapsulation of atrazine within a starch matrix by extrusion processing. Cereal Chem. 68:262266.Google Scholar
5. Collins, R. L., Doglia, S., Mazak, R. A., and Samulski, E. T. 1973. Controlled release of herbicides theory. Weed Sci. 21:15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Fleming, G. F., Wax, L. M., and Simmons, F. W. 1992. Leachability and efficacy of starch-encapsulated atrazine. Weed Technol. 6:297302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Fleming, G. F., Wax, L. M., Simmons, F. W., and Felsot, A. S. 1992. Movement of alachlor and metribuzin from controlled release formulations in a sandy soil. Weed Sci. 40:606613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Gish, T. J., Schoppet, M. J., Helling, C. S., Shirmohammadi, A., Schreiber, M. M., and Wing, R. E. 1991. Transport comparison of technical grade and starch-encapsulated atrazine. Trans. ASAE 34:17381744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Gunsolus, J. L. 1993. Corn weed management. P. 515 in Durgan, B. R., Gunsolus, J. L., Becker, R. L., and Dexter, A. G. Cultural and Chemical Weed Control in Field Crops. Univ. Minnesota Ext. Serv., AG-BU-3157-S.Google Scholar
10. Leistra, M. and Green, R. E. 1990. Efficacy of soil-applied pesticides. P. 401428 in Cheng, H. H., ed. Pesticides in the Soil Environment. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
11. Schreiber, M. M., Shasha, B. S., Trimnell, D., and White, M. D. 1987. Controlled release herbicides. P. 171191 in McWhorter, C. G. and Gebhardt, M. R., eds. Methods of Applying Herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Mongr. 4, Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
12. Schreiber, M. M., Hickman, M. V., and Vail, G. D. 1993. Starch-encapsulated atrazine: efficacy and transport. J. Environ. Qual. 22:443453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Schreiber, M. M., Hickman, M. V., Vail, G. D., Bauman, T. T., Buhler, D. D., Harrison, S. K., Klein, R. N., Mortensen, D. A., Owen, M. D. K., and Wax, L. M. 1993. Three year summary of starch encapsulated herbicide efficacy in corn. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. p. 20.Google Scholar
14. Wienhold, B. J. and Gish, T. J. 1992. Effect of water potential, temperature, and soil microbial activity on release of starch encapsulated atrazine and alachlor. J. Environ. Qual. 21:382386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Wing, R. E., Maiti, S., and Doane, W. M. 1987. Effectiveness of jet-cooked pearl cornstarch as a controlled release matrix. Starch-Starke 39:422425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Winkle, M. E., Leavitt, J. R. C., and Burnside, O. C. 1981. Effects of weed density on herbicide absorption and bioactivity. Weed Sci. 29:405409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar