Issue

Vol. 29 No. 1 (2017): Vol 29 Issue 1

Copyright (c) 2017 AJC

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Sorption of Aceto Lactase Synthase Inhibiting Rice Herbicides in Texturally Different Soils

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2017.20108
P. Janaki*
AICRP-WM, Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641 003, India *Corresponding author: Tel: +91 422 2441514; E-mail: janakibalamurugan@rediffmail.com; janaki.p@tnau.ac.in
N. Sakthivel
AICRP-WM, Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641 003, India *Corresponding author: Tel: +91 422 2441514; E-mail: janakibalamurugan@rediffmail.com; janaki.p@tnau.ac.in
C. Chinnusamy
AICRP-WM, Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641 003, India *Corresponding author: Tel: +91 422 2441514; E-mail: janakibalamurugan@rediffmail.com; janaki.p@tnau.ac.in

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 29 No. 1 (2017): Vol 29 Issue 1

Abstract

The aceto lactase synthase inhibiting herbicides are used frequently to control weeds in wetland rice ecosystems due to low dose and flexibility in time of application. Their occurrence in surface and groundwater is a cause for concern as they have medium to high mobility in environment. Thus, the present study was undertaken to assess the sorption behaviour of pyrazosulfuron ethyl and bispyribac sodium in different agricultural soils. Adsorption of both pyrazosulfuron ethyl and bispyribac sodium was best correlated with clay and organic carbon content, soil reaction and base saturation percent of soils. Pyrazosulfuron ethyl sorption was high in low organic carbon soils and bispyribac sodium sorption was high in high organic carbon soils. Bispyribac sodium sorption was masked by high organic carbon content in sandy clay and silty clay soils. The soil organic carbon coefficient (Koc) ranged from 11.6 to 81.8 for pyrazosulfuron ethyl and 4.6 to 198.1 for bispyribac sodium. The sorption of these herbicides fitted well with Freundlich equation. Freundlich constant (Kf) ranged from 0.38 to 0.76 and 0.30 to 1.05 mL g-1 for pyrazosulfuron ethyl and bispyribac sodium, respectively. The desorption rate of both the herbicides was high in high organic carbon soils. The hysteresis index was ranged from 1.7 to 4.1 for pyrazosulfuron ethyl and from 0.22 to 0.64 for bispyribac sodium in different soils and found that desorption of both herbicides from clay and silty clay loam soils was more difficult. The results indicate that the mobility of pyrazosulfuron ethyl is medium to high and bispyribac sodium is low to medium and varied according to soils.

Keywords

Adsorption Bispyribac sodium Organic carbon Desorption Hysteresis Pyrazosulfuron ethyl Soil texture.
Janaki*, P., Sakthivel, N., & Chinnusamy, C. (2016). Sorption of Aceto Lactase Synthase Inhibiting Rice Herbicides in Texturally Different Soils. Asian Journal of Chemistry, 29(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2017.20108
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. R.D. Wauchope, T.M. Buttler, A.G. Hornsby, P.W.M. Augustijn-Beckers and J.P. Burt, Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 123, 1 (1992).
  2. S. Saltzman and B. Yaron, Pesticides in soils. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1986.
  3. C.S. Helling, P.C. Kearney and M. Alexander, Adv. Agron., 23, 147 (1971).
  4. G. Singh, W.F. Spencer, M.M. Cliath and M.T. Genuchten, J. Environ. Qual., 19, 520 (1990).
  5. W.J. Farmer and Y. Aochi, in eds.: J.W. Biggar and J.N. Seiber, Chemical Conversion of Pesticides in the Soil-Water Environment, In: Fate of Pesticides in the Environment, University of California, Publication No. 3320 (1987).
  6. R.E. Green and S.W. Karickhoff, Estimation of Pesticide Sorption Coefficients for Soils and Sediments, SWAM, Vol. 3.USDA-ARS, Washington, DC (1986).
  7. R. Calvet, in ed.: R.J. Hance Adsorption -Desorption Phenomena, Interactions Between Herbicides and The Soil, Academic Press, New York, pp. 1-30 (1980).
  8. S.U. Khan, Pesticides in the Soil Environment, Elsevier Science Publication Company, New York (1980).
  9. EFSA, Conclusion on the Peer Review of the Pesticide Risk Assessment of the Active Substance Bispyribac (Unless Otherwise Stated All Data Evaluated Refer to the Variant Bispyribac-Sodium), EFSA Journal, 8, 1692 (2010); http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/1692.pdf. Accessed on 18 August, 2015.
  10. G.W. Ware, The Pesticide Book, Thomson Publications, Fresno, CA, edn 4 (1994).
  11. W.K. Vencill, Herbicide Handbook, Weed Science Society of America, Lawrence, KS, edn 8 (2002).
  12. USEPA, Risk Assessment for Section 3 Registration of Bispyribac- Sodium (Sodium 2,6-bis[(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)oxy]benzoate) (RegimentTM) USEPA Bispyribac-sodium (Pc Code 078906, 2001). www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem.../csr_PC-078906_6-Aug-01_001.pdf.Accessed on 8 August, 2014.
  13. C. Rajasekharam and A. Ramesh, Int. J. Adv. Chem. Technol., 3, 06 (2014).
  14. H. Wang, J. Xu, S.R. Yates, J. Zhang, J. Gan, J. Ma, J. Wu and R. Xuan, Chemosphere, 78, 335 (2010).
  15. J. Xu, X. Li, U. Xu, L. Qiu and C. Pan, Chemosphere, 74, 682 (2009).
  16. D.V. Naveen, R.C. Gowda and B. Mamatha, Asian J. Soc. Sci. (India), 7, 8 (2012).
  17. M.L. Jackson, Soil Chemical Analysis, Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India (1973).
  18. P. Janaki, R. Sathya Priya and C. Chinnusamy, J. Environ. Sci. Health B, 48, 941 (2013).
  19. P. Janaki, C. Chinnusamy and K. Nalini, J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 60, 230 (2012).
  20. R. Ishiwatari, Soil Sci., 107, 53 (1969).
  21. A. Valverde-Garcia, E. González-Pradas, M. Villafranca-Sánchez, F. del Rey-Bueno and A. Garcia-Rodriguez, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 52, 1571 (1988).
  22. A.K. Singh and S.S. Cameotra, J. Pet. Environ. Biotechnol., 4, 154 (2013).
  23. Z. Liu, Y. He, J. Xu, P. Huang and G. Jilani, Environ. Pollut., 152, 163 (2008).
  24. J.B. Weber and C.J. Peter, Weed Sci., 30, 14 (1982).
  25. R. Chirukuri and R. Atmakuru, Chemosphere, 138, 932 (2015).
  26. N. Singh and S.B. Singh, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 94, 125 (2015).
  27. C.H. Giles, T.H. MacEwan, S.N. Nakhwa and D. Smith, J. Chem. Soc., 3973 (1960).
  28. R. Calvet, Environ. Health Perspect., 83, 145 (1989).
  29. J.B. Weber, P.H. Shea and S.B. Weed, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 50, 578 (1986).
  30. Y. Angemar, M. Rebhun and M. Horowitz, J. Environ. Qual., 13, 321 (1984).
  31. C. Flores, V. Morgante, M. González, R. Navia and M. Seeger, Chemosphere, 74, 1544 (2009).
  32. I.D. Kovaios, C.A. Paraskeva, P.G. Koutsoukos and A.Ch. Payatakes, J. Colloid Interface Sci., 299, 88 (2006).
  33. P. Janaki, S. Meena and C. Chinnusamy, Trends Biosci., 8, 131 (2015).
  34. G. Ding, J.M. Novak, S. Herbert and B. Xing, Chemosphere, 48, 897 (2002).
  35. G.S. Xia and J.J. Pignatello, Environ. Sci. Technol., 35, 84 (2001).
  36. H. Zhu and H.M. Selim, Soil Sci., 165, 632 (2000).
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0