Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T22:26:31.793Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sorption of Metribuzin in Surface and Subsurface Soils of the Mississippi Delta Region

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Sidney S. Harper
Sidney S. Harper*
Affiliation:
USDA, ARS, Southern Weed Sci. Lab., Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sorption and desorption of metribuzin [4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one] were measured in Dundee silty clay loam surface and subsurface soils. Soil samples were taken from a profile that had been divided into six sections from the surface to a depth of 175 cm. Metribuzin sorbed weakly to all soils from this profile with Freundlich distribution constants ranging from 0.78 to 1.34 μmole/kg. Soils from lower depths of the profile having higher pH (>7.0) and clay contents (>35%) sorbed significantly more metribuzin than the lower clay content, higher organic matter surface soils. Stepwise regression of the distribution constants against the variables pH, organic matter, clay content, and sand content showed that clay was the single best predictor, with sorption increasing as clay content increased (r2 =0.750). The combination of two variables most related to sorption was clay and pH (r2 =0.860, P= 0.15). Organic matter was not one of the primary variables related to sorption. Metribuzin was easily desorbed in all soils with less than 5% of the originally applied metribuzin remaining after three desorption treatments. This would indicate little tendency for irreversible sorption. This study demonstrates that soil properties within a profile determine sorption and, subsequently, movement of metribuzin.

Keywords

Adsorptiondesorptionas-triazinessoil properties
Type
Soil, Air, and Water
Information
Weed Science , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , January 1988 , pp. 84 - 89
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Albro, P. W., Parker, C. E., Abusteit, E. O., Mester, T. C., Hass, J. R., Sheldon, Y. S., and Corbin, F. T. 1984. Determination of the pKa values of metribuzin and three of its metabolites: a comparison of spectrophotometric and potentiometric methods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 32:212–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Anderson, C. A. 1976. Sencor. Pages 453–471 in Zweig, G. and Sherma, J., eds. Analytical Methods for Pesticides and Plant Growth Regulators. VIII. Government Regulations, Pheromone Analysis, Additional Pesticides. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Baver, L. D., Gardner, W. H., and Gardner, W. R. 1972. Soil Physics. 4th ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 498 pp.Google Scholar
4. Bollag, J. -M. and Loll, M. J. 1983. Incorporation of xenobiotics into soil humus. Experentia 39:1221–1231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Bouchard, D. C., Lavy, T. L., and Marx, D. B. 1982. Fate of metribuzin, metolachlor, and fluometuron in soil. Weed Sci. 30:629–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Brown, D. F., McDonough, L. M., McCool, D. K., and Papendick, R. I. 1984. High-performance liquid chromatographic determination of bromoxynil octanoate and metribuzin in runoff water from wheat fields. J. Agric. Food Chem. 32:195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Brown, D. F., McCool, D. K., Papendick, R. I., and McDonough, L. M. 1985. Herbicide residues from winter wheat plots: effect of tillage and crop management. J. Environ. Qual. 14: 521–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Hance, R. J., Embling, S. J., Hill, D., Graham-Bryce, I. J., and Nicholls, P. 1981. Movement of fluometuron, simazine, 36Cl and 144Ce+3 in soil under field conditions: qualitative aspects. Weed Res. 21:289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Kunze, G. W. 1965. Pretreatment for mineralogical analysis. Page 568–577 in Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1: Physical and mineralogical properties, including statistics of measurement and sampling. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
10. Ladlie, J. S., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1976. Effect of soil pH on microbial degradation, adsorption, and mobility of metribuzin. Weed Sci. 24:477–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. LaFleur, K. S. 1980. Metribuzin movement in soil columns: observation and prediction. Soil Sci. 129:107–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Leistra, M. 1986. Modeling the behavior of organic chemicals in soil and ground water. Pestic. Sci. 17:256–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Martin, J. P. and Koerner, R. M. 1984. The influence of vadose zone conditions on groundwater pollution. Part I. Basic principles and static conditions. J. Hazard Mat. 8:349–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Nelson, D. W. and Sommers, L. E. 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Page 539–579 in Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2: Chemical and microbiological properties, 2nd ed. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
15. Peeper, T. F. and Weber, J. B. 1974. Vertical fluometuron movement in runoff studies in the southern region in Proceedings Southern Weed Sci. Soc. 27th Meeting, Atlanta. SWSPBE 27: 324–332.Google Scholar
16. Peter, C. J. and Weber, J. B. 1985. Adsorption, mobility, and efficacy of metribuzin as influenced by soil properties. Weed Sci. 33:868–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Savage, K. E. 1976. Adsorption and mobility of metribuzin in soil. Weed Sci. 24:525–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Sharom, M. S. and Stephenson, G. R. 1976. Behavior and fate of metribuzin in eight Ontario soils. Weed Sci. 24:153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Weber, J. B. 1980. Ionization of buthidazole, VEL3510, tebuthiuron, fluridone, metribuzin, and prometryn. Weed Sci. 28: 467–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar