Influence of Spray Adjuvants on the Behavior of Trifluralin in the Soil

1998 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 569-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. K. Swarcewicz ◽  
Z. Muliński ◽  
I. Zbieć
Keyword(s):  
Spray Adjuvants

scholarly journals Spray adjuvant characteristics affecting agricultural spraying drift

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
RONE B. DE OLIVEIRA ◽  
ULISSES R. ANTUNIASSI ◽  
MARCO A. GANDOLFO
Keyword(s):  
Surface Tension ◽  
Wind Tunnel ◽  
Aqueous Solutions ◽  
Formation Process ◽  
Droplet Diameter ◽  
Brilliant Blue ◽  
Medium Size ◽  
Blue Dye ◽  
Methods Of Evaluation ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

This study defined the main adjuvant characteristics that may influence or help to understand drift formation process in the agricultural spraying. It was evaluated 33 aqueous solutions from combinations of various adjuvants and concentrations. Then, drifting was quantified by means of wind tunnel; and variables such as percentage of droplets smaller than 50 μm (V50), 100 μm (V100), diameter of mean volume (DMV), droplet diameter composing 10% of the sprayed volume (DV0.1), viscosity, density and surface tension. Assays were performed in triplicate, using Teejet XR8003 flat fan nozzles at 200 kPa (medium size droplets). Spray solutions were stained with Brilliant Blue Dye at 0.6% (m/ v). DMV, V100, viscosity cause most influence on drift hazardous. Adjuvant characteristics and respective methods of evaluation have applicability in drift risk by agricultural spray adjuvants.

Use of Spray Adjuvants to Reduce Drift

1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 0182-0186 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. J. Butler ◽  
N. B. Akesson and W. E. Yates
Keyword(s):  
Spray Adjuvants

Fading Activities of Herbicidal Droplets Amended with Emulsifiable Spray Adjuvants on Cucurbitaceous Leaves

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 1881-1888
Author(s):  
Jeng-Liang Lin ◽  
Heping Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Droplet Size ◽  
Spray Deposition ◽  
Herbicide Application ◽  
Spray Droplet ◽  
Coverage Area ◽  
Maximum Coverage ◽  
Fading Time ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

Abstract. Understanding reactions of surfactant-amended droplets on difficult-to-wet weed surfaces could help develop application strategies to increase herbicide efficacy. Behaviors of herbicidal droplets containing different emulsifiable anti-evaporation spray adjuvants were investigated by characterizing 250 and 450 µm herbicidal droplet dispersion and fading time on cucurbitaceous leaves placed inside a 20°C chamber at 30% and 60% relative humidity (RH). Droplet maximum coverage area increased with droplet size but not with RH, while droplet fading time increased with both droplet size and RH. Despite 450 µm droplets having greater maximum coverage area than 250 µm droplets, the larger droplets had higher fading rates and lower ratios of maximum coverage area to droplet volume. Droplet maximum coverage area and fading time on leaves were affected by adding spray adjuvants to the herbicide-only solution. The Uptake surfactant was more effective than the other two surfactants (AntiEvap+BS1000 and Enhance) in increasing droplet maximum coverage area and fading time. Compared to the herbicide-only solution, addition of Uptake surfactant to the herbicide solution could increase maximum coverage area by 68% and 52% for 250 and 450 µm droplets, respectively, but addition of AntiEvap+BS1000 or Enhance surfactants did not show significant increase. Similarly, addition of Uptake surfactant to the herbicide-only solution increased droplet fading times by 11.1% and 13.2% at 30% and 60% RH, respectively, for 250 µm droplets and by 34.7% and 2.8% at 30% and 60% RH, respectively, for 450 µm droplets. In contrast, addition of AntiEvap+BS1000 surfactant reduced fading time, and addition of Enhance surfactant did not significantly affect fading time. Therefore, appropriate selection of spray adjuvants for herbicide applications could significantly influence droplet deposit behaviors on cucurbitaceous leaves, leading to improved effectiveness of weed control. Keywords: Herbicide application, Spray deposition, Spray droplet, Surfactant, Weed control.

scholarly journals Deposition amount and dissipation kinetics of difenoconazole and propiconazole applied on banana with two commercial spray adjuvants

RSC Advances ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (34) ◽  
pp. 19780-19790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Xu ◽  
Xiaofang Long ◽  
Shijia Ge ◽  
Mengli Li ◽  
Lingzhu Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mineral Oil ◽  
Dissipation Kinetics ◽  
Deposition Amount ◽  
Banana Leaves ◽  
Kinetics Of ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

The effect of adding organosilicon and mineral oil adjuvants after being applied to the residues of difenoconazole and propiconazole in banana leaves was studied. The partition of the pesticides between soil, leaves and fruits was evaluated.

Cytokine responses to eye spray adjuvants for enhancing vaccine-induced immunity in chickens

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (7) ◽  
pp. 511-515
Author(s):  
Hiromi Takaki ◽  
Haruko Sato ◽  
Riho Kurata ◽  
Hirokazu Hikono ◽  
Takahiro Hiono ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cytokine Responses ◽  
Induced Immunity ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

scholarly journals The Influence of Spray Adjuvants on Exacerbation of Citrus Bacterial Spot

Plant Disease ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 81 (11) ◽  
pp. 1305-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. R. Gottwald ◽  
J. H. Graham ◽  
T. D. Riley
Keyword(s):  
Disease Incidence ◽  
Bacterial Spot ◽  
Water Control ◽  
Xanthomonas Axonopodis ◽  
Control Lesion ◽  
Simulated Wind ◽  
Citrus Spp ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

The effect of adjuvants on the spread of Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. citrumelo applied to nursery plots of citrus (Citrus spp.) rootstock trees in simulated wind-blown rain was studied. Commercial adjuvants tested included a penetrant-surfactant, the penetrant or surfactant components of the penetrant-surfactant alone, an antitranspirant, a surfactant, or 1 of 3 formulations of a spreader-binder. Individual rows were treated with the adjuvants or water alone as a control. Bacterial dispersal gradients in all rows were similar and extended the entire 7 m of the nursery rows. Disease incidence, number of lesions per plant, and lesion diameters were determined at selected assay points in each row 28 days after the event. The penetrant-surfactant and its surfactant component significantly increased the total number of lesions per plant and mean lesion diameters compared to the water control. The disease gradient slopes associated with the penetrant-surfactant and its surfactant component were significantly flatter and more extensive than the water control. The penetrant component of the penetrant-surfactant, the antitranspirant, and two spreader-binders adjuvants did not significantly alter the disease gradient compared to the water control. Lesion sizes and numbers were also increased by a surfactant product and the surfactant component of the penetrant-surfactant, but not by the penetrant component of the penetrant-surfactant, the antitranspirant, or the three spreader-binder formulations. These results suggest that surfactants which induce stomatal flooding may enhance infection and exacerbate citrus bacterial epidemics.

scholarly journals EFFICACY OF TRANFORM INSECTICIDE IN COMBINATION WITH SELECTED SPRAY ADJUVANTS AGAINST TARNISHED PLANTBUGS ON COTTON, (TEST 6) 2011

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Von Kanel ◽  
Angus L. Catchot ◽  
Lucas N. Owen ◽  
Joshua L. Jones ◽  
Brian P. Adams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spray Adjuvants

scholarly journals Inert agricultural spray adjuvants may increase the adverse effects of selected insecticides on honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) under laboratory conditions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Wernecke ◽  
Jakob H. Eckert ◽  
Rolf Forster ◽  
Nils Kurlemann ◽  
Richard Odemer
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bees ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Plant Protection Products ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Proportional Hazard ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazard ◽  
Lambda Cyhalothrin ◽  
Test Guideline ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

Abstract Currently, more than 350 spray adjuvants are registered in Germany (January 2021). Unlike plant protection products (PPPs), adjuvants are not subjected to regulatory risk assessment. In practice, numerous combinations of PPPs and adjuvants are therefore possible. Thus, tank mixtures containing insecticides that are classified as nonhazardous to bees and approved for use in bee attractive crops may raise pollinator safety concerns when mixed with efficacy increasing adjuvants. This study analyzes whether selected “PPP-adjuvant” combinations result in increased mortality and pose an elevated risk to honey bees. To answer this question, we chose six common spray adjuvants of different classes for laboratory screening. These were then tested in a total of 30 tank mixtures, each with a neonicotinoid (acetamiprid), pyrethroid (lambda-cyhalothrin), diamide (chlorantraniliprole), carbamate (pirimicarb), and butenolide (flupyradifurone) formulation. We followed OECD test guideline 214 (acute contact test) but adopted the use of a professional spray chamber for more realistic exposures. Our results showed that, in total, 50% of all combinations significantly reduced the lifespan of caged honey bees in comparison to individual application of insecticides. In contrast, none of the adjuvants alone affected bee mortality (Cox proportional hazard model, p > 0.05). With four of the five insecticide formulations, the organosilicone surfactant Break-Thru® S 301 significantly increased bee mortality within 72 h (for all insecticides except chlorantraniliprole). Furthermore, acetamiprid yielded the highest and second-highest mortality increases from a tank mixture with the crop oil surfactants LI-700 (hazard ratio = 28.84, p < 0.05) and Break-Thru® S 301 (hazard ratio = 14.66, p < 0.05), respectively. In the next step, field trials should be performed to provide a more realistic exposure scenario under colony conditions to verify these findings.

scholarly journals Honey bee response to high concentrations of some new spray adjuvants

2001 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 51-55
Author(s):  
B.J. Donovan ◽  
G. Elliott
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Honey Bee ◽  
Honey Bees ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
High Concentrations ◽  
Spray Adjuvants

The response of honey bees when treated orally and topically to the spray adjuvants DuWett Li700 Bond and Bond Xtra each at three different concentrations was evaluated in November 2000 under the OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals of 21 September 1998 The concentrations ranged from 01 to 10 the highest of which were well above those used in the field Dimethoate at three concentrations was used as a standard and for the topical test distilled water was used as a nonchemical control For both tests about 1000 honey bees from the brood combs of a healthy colony were anaesthetized with carbon dioxide from which bees were treated and held in groups of 10 in cages at 25C and 70 RH for 48 hours Each treatment was replicated three times Despite some mortality for two of the three cages of Bond Xtra at 1 when applied topically none of the adjuvants were found to be toxic to honey bees at any concentrations tested

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document