Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society Vol. 15â1961 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society
Table 4. 36. The Percent of Applied Radio-Dalapon VJhich -JVas Found in the Rhtzomes , Roots, and Untr-eated Shoots* ---------~----------------I--------- 0/0Wetting Agent New Old Untreated Formulation . in Solution Rhizom e .Rhizom e Shoot Roots --------------------------1-------- Dalapon Alone 0.0 0.74 0.22 4.9 0.26 Dalapon with P-26-2 0.05 1.35 0.53 7.3 0.28 O.1 1. 92 0.67 8.4 O. 17 0.2 2.94 0.81 10.5 0.24 Dalapon with O. 05 1. 43 O. 49 6. 9 O. 22 Tergitol TMN O. 1 2.05 O. 73 7. 7 0.26 ~~-----------~~----~~ __ !~~I __!! __ ~~- * Application made on third leaf of six-leaf plants of quackgz-asa. These experiments clearly showed that the additil of selected non ionic wett ing agents to the formulation resulted in increa4ed movement of dalapon into the rhizomes and that the results obtained wijth the two wetting agents were .quit e similar. " I - The accumulation of dalapon in young tissue was ~ISO markedly incr eaaed by the addition of non-ionic wetting agents, and sjuch increases are .nhown in Table 5. Table 5. The Percent of Applied C 14 - Da la pon I -iVhich was Found in the Leaves Above the Treated ~Third) Leaf - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I - - - - - - - 0/0T~~J etting Agent 4th i5th 6th Formulation in Solution Leaf. Leaf Leaf -------------~------------~------- Dalapon Alone 0.0 2.0 I 3.2 3.4 I Dalapon plus P-26-2 0.05 0.1 0.2 2.4 3.9 6.3 3.9 5.6 8.2 11. 7 16.5 24.4 Dalapon plus Tergitol TMN - - - - - - - - - - - HerE:, as shown increased ac.curnul.at ion - - .- - 0.05 O.1 0.2 befor-e, the of dalapon-2 - - - - - use of the _C 14 • 2.2 6.0 10.8 - - - wetting i 2.6 I 6.6 .11.9 i - -! - - - - - ag~ts resulted I I 9.2 16. 1 26.2 - - in I i I I i I I i I
The comparisons for lower leaves, stems and roots were also made, and in each instance the addition of wetting agent increased the amount of radioactivity. The differences were quite large in some cases, probably because the amount of radioactivity found in these plant parts was quite low when no wetting agent was used. In every instance, the amount of radioactivity which remained in the treated leaf was less when wetting agents were added than when dalapon alone was used, indicating increased uptake by diffzr- . ence, These data show clearly that the addition of a non-ionic wetting agent to the formulation used in this experiment markedly increased the uptake and translocation of dalapon-2-C I 4• The amount of dalapon-2-C 1 4 translocated above and below the treated leaf was determined by computing the net count per minute for the appropriate plant parts (sample average net count per minute times the dilution factor used in preparing the sample) then comparing the count beyond the treated leaf with the total count. The percent of applied dalapon translocated above the treated leaf and the percent translocated below the treated leaf are shown in Table 6. 37. Table 6. The Translocation of C 14 Labelled Dalapon in Formulations Yv'ith and Ithout Added ~j'1 etting Agents - - - - - - - naIa"Pon -paEiliO~~V!.1t~- f-~..:~ - 12~~wli§."te!:fili! o "tIV!..N Alone O. 05% o, 1% 0.2% o. 05% o. 1% o,2% Percent of applied dalapon 8. 7 17.4 26.1 38.5 14.0 49.7 translocated above treated Leaf. Percent of 7. 1 . applied dalapon 13.4 19.0 28.9 10.4 18.0 29.2 translocated below treated leaf. ----------------------------------- These data show several things in addition to the obvious influence of added wetting agent. First, although both non-ionic wetting agents performed similarly, When formulations containing the low rate of wetting agent were used, the use of Polyglycol 26-2 resulted in greater accumulation of C 14_ dalapon in the various plant parts than did the use of Tergitol TMN. The
- Page 1 and 2: THE USE OF VEGETATIVECHARACTERISTIC
- Page 3 and 4: In a few grasses with smooth sheath
- Page 5 and 6: 5. FACTORSINFLUEUCINGTHE PERFORFANC
- Page 7 and 8: 7. The introduction of synthetic or
- Page 9 and 10: The com;onents the distribution of
- Page 11 and 12: grains. We early found that the oat
- Page 13 and 14: 13. Atrazine Days following cpm/O.
- Page 15 and 16: 15. not find an abundant production
- Page 17 and 18: Weed Control In Suburbia 1 Howard H
- Page 19 and 20: For establishing new lawns, I would
- Page 21 and 22: Any improvement that you can make i
- Page 23 and 24: PROMISINGNEWCHEMICALSFORWEEDCONTROL
- Page 25 and 26: 25. Promis ins results have also be
- Page 27 and 28: 27. (Lycbnis alba), cinquefoil (Pot
- Page 29 and 30: THE EFFECTS OF ADDED PENETRANT AIDS
- Page 31 and 32: ... Surfactant Produced bz: . 31
- Page 33 and 34: 33. 33. of scintillation solution,
- Page 35: Table 3. The Net Counts Per Minute
- Page 39 and 40: 39. SUMMARY Tests using 2-C 14-1abe
- Page 41 and 42: 41. RECENTDEVELOPMENTS IN THEUSE OF
- Page 43 and 44: second application be made not late
- Page 45 and 46: 45. Combinations of vegadex-Randox
- Page 47 and 48: 11/ Persistence of Soil-Incorporate
- Page 49 and 50: Plot size varied from 9 sq. ft. to
- Page 51 and 52: Lower rates of R-1856 were tested o
- Page 53 and 54: greenhouse tests are listed below.
- Page 55 and 56: PROGRESSREPORTON LAY-BYUEEDCONTROLI
- Page 57 and 58: 57. Table 1. Effect of sodium silic
- Page 59 and 60: Sheets (1959) studied, under labora
- Page 61 and 62: M, ',. • • •• • " ' Treat
- Page 63 and 64: Figure 1. Relative performance trea
- Page 65 and 66: A duplicate test was started August
- Page 67 and 68: 67. "he two tests which dealt with
- Page 69 and 70: 69. CONTROLOF WEEDSIN VEGETABLECROP
- Page 71 and 72: 71.' TABLE 3. RESPONSE OF VEGETABLE
- Page 73 and 74: 73. COHBIltit.TloNS' OF cnu:'PITH C
- Page 75 and 76: 75. Results The delay in applicatio
- Page 77 and 78: 77. Summary Logarithmic, tank-mixed
- Page 79 and 80: (' ( ( Table 1 Rates and Dates of H
- Page 81 and 82: ( ( ( Table 3 Effect of Post-Tran~l
- Page 83 and 84: ( ( ( Table 5 Effect of Lay-By Herb
- Page 85 and 86: Chemical Weed Control Charles J. No
Table 4.<br />
<br />
36.<br />
The Percent of Applied Radio-Dalapon<br />
VJhich -JVas Found in the Rhtzomes , Roots, and Untr-eated Shoots*<br />
---------~----------------I---------<br />
0/0Wetting Agent New Old Untreated<br />
Formulation . in Solution Rhizom e .Rhizom e Shoot Roots<br />
--------------------------1--------<br />
Dalapon Alone 0.0 0.74 0.22 4.9 0.26<br />
Dalapon with P-26-2 0.05 1.35 0.53 7.3 0.28<br />
O.1 1. 92 0.67 8.4 O. 17<br />
0.2 2.94 0.81 10.5 0.24<br />
Dalapon with O. 05 1. 43 O. 49 6. 9 O. 22<br />
Tergitol TMN O. 1 2.05 O. 73 7. 7 0.26<br />
~~-----------~~----~~ __ !~~I __!! __ ~~-<br />
* Application made on third leaf of six-leaf plants of quackgz-asa.<br />
These experiments clearly showed that the additil of selected non<br />
ionic wett ing agents to the formulation resulted in increa4ed movement of<br />
dalapon into the rhizomes and that the results obtained wijth the two wetting<br />
agents were .quit e similar. " I -<br />
The accumulation of dalapon in young tissue was ~ISO markedly incr<br />
eaaed by the addition of non-ionic wetting agents, and sjuch increases are<br />
.nhown in Table 5.<br />
Table 5.<br />
The Percent of Applied C 14 - Da la pon I<br />
-iVhich was Found in the Leaves Above the Treated ~Third) Leaf<br />
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I - - - - - - - <br />
0/0T~~J etting Agent 4th i5th 6th<br />
Formulation in Solution Leaf. Leaf Leaf<br />
-------------~------------~-------<br />
Dalapon Alone 0.0 2.0 I 3.2 3.4<br />
I<br />
Dalapon plus P-26-2 0.05<br />
0.1<br />
0.2<br />
2.4<br />
3.9<br />
6.3<br />
3.9<br />
5.6<br />
8.2<br />
11. 7<br />
16.5<br />
24.4<br />
Dalapon plus<br />
Tergitol<br />
TMN<br />
- - - - - - - - - - -<br />
HerE:, as shown<br />
increased ac.curnul.at ion<br />
- - .- -<br />
0.05<br />
O.1<br />
0.2<br />
befor-e, the<br />
of dalapon-2<br />
- - - - -<br />
use of the<br />
_C 14 •<br />
2.2<br />
6.0<br />
10.8<br />
- - -<br />
wetting<br />
i 2.6<br />
I 6.6<br />
.11.9<br />
i<br />
- -! - - - - -<br />
ag~ts resulted<br />
I<br />
I<br />
9.2<br />
16. 1<br />
26.2<br />
- -<br />
in<br />
I<br />
i<br />
I<br />
I<br />
i<br />
I<br />
I<br />
i<br />
I