4.4 Article

Evaluation of Dicamba Persistence among Various Agricultural Hose Types and Cleanout Procedures Using Soybean (Glycine max) as a Bio-Indicator

期刊

WEED SCIENCE
卷 65, 期 2, 页码 305-316

出版社

WEED SCI SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1017/wsc.2016.29

关键词

Contamination; drift; interaction; plant growth-regulating herbicides (PGR); sequestration; tank contamination; volitization

资金

  1. Mississippi Soybean Promotion Board
  2. BASF Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Synthetic rubbers, synthetic plastic polymers (polyvinyl chlorides [PVC]), polyurethane blends, and polyethylene blends make up modern-day agricultural spray hoses. The objective of this study was to determine whether agricultural hose types would differ with respect to 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid (dicamba) sequestration. Field and greenhouse studies were conducted to evaluate the sequestration potential of dicamba within five agricultural hose types when cleaned with different cleanout procedures. Rinsate solutions were applied to soybean, which was used as a bio-indicator to test for cleanout efficiency. Differences among hose types and cleanout procedures exist with observations including soybean injury, height reduction, dry matter, yield, and part per million by volume (ppmv) analyte retained. The makeup of PVC polyurethane-blend and synthetic rubber-blend hoses increased retention of dicamba analyte when compared with the polyethylene blend hose. No differences were observed after the addition of ammonia to the cleanout solution when compared with water alone. Differences in a hose type's ability to sequester the dicamba analyte may have more to do with the hose's internal chemical composition, manufacturing process, and composition breakdown. Scanning electron microscopy revealed imperfections in new PVC polyurethane and synthetic rubber hoses that eventually lead to inner wall depletion of these hose types. This is in contrast to what was found in the polyethylene-blend hose type, in which the inner wall is smooth and free of imperfections.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据