JEQ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (11)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roy, J.W.
Right arrow Articles by Clegg, B.S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Roy, J.W.
Right arrow Articles by Clegg, B.S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Roy, J.W.
Right arrow Articles by Clegg, B.S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Soil Physics
Right arrow Vadose Zone Processes and Chemical Transport
Right arrow Turfgrass
Right arrow Turfgrass Pesticides

Seasonal Leaching and Biodegradation of Dicamba in Turfgrass

J.W. Roya, J.C. Hallb, G.W. Parkin*,a, C. Wagner-Riddlea and B.S. Cleggb

a Dep. of Land Resource Science, Univ. of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
b Dep. of Environmental Biology, Univ. of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1



View larger version (34K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a field lysimeter showing instrumentation.

 


View larger version (23K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Dicamba concentrations in soil solution at 9-, 17-, 29-, 43-, 54-, 69-, and 85-cm depths below the turf surface (horizon in parentheses). Symbols represent field observations (obtained with suction samplers) for four lysimeters, the line represents LEACHM prediction, and arrows indicate application dates. The approximate detection limit is 0.2 mg L-1. Note the difference in maximum value along the ordinate of each graph.

 


View larger version (15K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. The fraction of dicamba remaining in thatch samples as a function of time. (a) 4°C and 0.21 water content, (b) 4°C and 0.28 water content, (c) 20°C and 0.21 water content, and (d) 20°C and 0.28 water content. The solid line indicates the curve described by Eq. [1].

 


View larger version (15K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. The fraction of dicamba remaining in soil samples as a function of time. (a) 4°C and 0.18 water content, (b) 4°C and 0.25 water content, (c) 20°C and 0.18 water content, and (d) 20°C and 0.25 water content. The solid line indicates the curve described by Eq. [1].

 


View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Predictions of dicamba concentration in soil water at the (A) 10- and (B) 54-cm depths, illustrating the effect of increased degradation in the turf layer. In one simulation the thatch and soil are treated separately, with different degradation rates (solid line), while in the other the entire profile is allotted the soil degradation rate (dashed line). Arrows indicate application dates.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of Plant Registrations The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.