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 ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by van Alphen, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Stoorvogel, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by van Alphen, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Stoorvogel, J. J.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by van Alphen, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Stoorvogel, J. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Spatial Distribution
Right arrow Ground Water Quality
Right arrow Best Management Practices
Right arrow Agricultural Pesticides
Right arrow Water Pollution

Effects of Soil Variability and Weather Conditions on Pesticide Leaching— A Farm-Level Evaluation

B. J. van Alphen and J. J. Stoorvogel*

Laboratory of Soil Science and Geology, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 37, 6700 AA Wageningen, the Netherlands



View larger version (35K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Sampled soil profiles. Profile A combines heavy texture and high soil organic matter (SOM) percentage (relatively low risk for leaching), Profile B reflects average properties in the study area (average risk for leaching), and Profile C combines light texture and low SOM percentage (relatively high risk for leaching). Sand fractions are not included, but equal 100 minus the sum of clay and silt fractions.

 


View larger version (34K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Leaching (in percent) as a function of degradation time (DT50) and coefficient of sorption to organic matter (Kom). The DT50Kom combinations of pesticides used in the study area are plotted as {diamond} (leaching <=0.1 µg L-1) or {diamondsuit} (leaching >0.1 µg L-1).

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Degradation patterns of isoproturon recorded in incubated soil cores. Samples are coded according to their soil profile (A, B, or C) and sampling depth (1 for topsoil, 2 for subsoil). Sample B1 is excluded as pesticide concentrations failed to show a consistent decrease over time.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Simulated and measured isoproturon concentrations at 28 wk after application. Simulated concentrations for the higher dosage (1 kg ha-1) assume no initial losses, whereas the lower dosage (0.67 kg ha-1) accounts for interception losses during spraying.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Cumulative probability plots of isoproturon leaching from soil profiles (A, B, and C). Plotted data refer to simulated leaching fractions for 20 years of data.

 


View larger version (65K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6. Effects of soil variability on the leaching of isoproturon, metribuzin, and bentazon.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Vadose Zone Journal Journal of Plant Registrations
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.