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 Related articles in JEQ
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 (8)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Potter, T. L.
Right arrow Articles by Bednarz, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Potter, T. L.
Right arrow Articles by Bednarz, C.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Potter, T. L.
Right arrow Articles by Bednarz, C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Cotton
Right arrow Field-Scale Studies
Right arrow Pesticides
Right arrow Runoff
Right arrow Tillage

Fluometuron and Pendimethalin Runoff from Strip and Conventionally Tilled Cotton in the Southern Atlantic Coastal Plain

Thomas L. Pottera,*, Clint C. Trumana, David D. Boscha and Craig Bednarzb

a USDA-ARS, Southeast Watershed Research Laboratory, P.O. Box 946, Tifton, GA 31793
b Department of Crop and Soil Science, University of Georgia, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA 31794



View larger version (49K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Study site topography and plot layout.

 


View larger version (34K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. Average pendimethalin concentration (mg kg–1) in soil before (adjacent to plot) and after (within plot) rainfall simulations for conventional-tillage (CT) and strip-tillage (ST) treatments.

 


View larger version (26K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Pendimethalin application and runoff from conventional-tillage (CT) plots under natural rainfall during 2000 and 2001.

 


View larger version (23K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. Fluometuron application and runoff from conventional-tillage (CT) plots under natural rainfall during 2000 and 2001.

 


View larger version (34K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Average fluometuron concentration (mg kg–1) in soil before (adjacent to plot) and after (within plot) rainfall simulations for conventional-tillage (CT) and strip-tillage (ST) treatments.

 


View larger version (26K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 6. Fluometuron application and desmethylfluometuron (DMF) runoff from conventional-tillage (CT) plots under natural rainfall during 2000 and 2001.

 




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 © 2004 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.