Evaluation of Sensitivity of Some Plants to Simulated Trifluralin Residues in Soil

پژوهش های حفاظت گیاهان ایران

Article 8, Volume 33, Issue 1 - Serial Number 43, March 2019, Pages 57-67   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jpp.v31i4.21616

Authors

majid barzoei; e . Izadi- Darbandi^* ; m Rashed Mohassel; m Rastgoo; mohammad hassanzade khayat

Abstract

Introduction: Trifluralin is one of the important soil applied selective, pre-sowing or pre-emergence herbicide used to control many annual grasses and broadleaf weeds in a large variety of arable and horticultural crops. It is a generally regarded as a moderately persistence herbicide with a half-life of 1.5 to 6.5 months. Several factors determine the length of time herbicides persist and their carryover. These factors fall into three categories: soil factors, climatic conditions, and herbicide properties. Soil related factors including soil temperature, soil texture, and soil moisture and soil organic matter are the most important factors in herbicide persistence. However physicochemical of herbicide such as absorption properties are also important factor. So different herbicides may have different persistence in soil and have different effects on agroecosytems and also on subsequent rotational crops. Normally residual herbicides extend the period of weed control, and increase the efficiency of weed management efforts. However, they may persist longer than desired and injure or kill subsequent rotational crops. Most herbicide labels include crop rotation guidelines, but rotational restrictions are often not listed for many crops. Several experiments have demonstrated that trifluralin herbicide can per­sist in the soil and carryover to affect succeeding crops. Some crops tolerate a particular herbicide residue and can be replanted soon after that herbicide is applied, while other crops remain sensitive to the herbicide for a longer time after application. This experiment was conducted to investigation of some plants sensitivity to soil residue of trifluralin in greenhouse conditions.
Materials and Methods: To evaluate the sensitivity of some plants to simulated trifluralin soil residues, an experiment was conducted based on completely randomized design as factorial layout and four replications in Research Greenhouse of Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. Treatments included seven plants (sorghum, millet, barley, wheat, oat, alfalfa and cucumber) and eight levels of concentrations of simulated trifluralin residue in soil (0, 0.002, 0.004, 0.021, 0.043, 0.046, 0.086 and 0.129 mg a.i. kg-1 soil). Trifluralin aquatic solution incorporated to soil and transported to the plastic pots with a 15-cm diameter.  Plants emergence percentage was recorded and their shoot and root biomass were measured 35 days after emergence. The data were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance, and differences among mean values of treatments were compared by Duncan's test using SAS software.  For determination the required dose of herbicides to reduce 50% of plants response (ED50), the dose response curves were fitted simultaneously using the following three-parameter logistic dose-response model with the lower limit equal to zero.
               
Where f is the response (above ground dry weight and root dry weight), d is the upper limit, b is the curve slope, e denotes the dose required to give a response halfway between the upper and lower limits (ED50); and x is the herbicide concentration in soil. The validity of the above model and the comparisons between the parameters were made using F-test for lack-of-fit with a 5% level of significance.
Results and Discussion: Results showed that trifluralin residue decreased plants mergence and shoot and root biomass. By increasing the trifluralin soil residue, reduced all above mentioned parameters significantly (p≤0.01) in all plants. Plants showed different response (p≤0.01) to trifluralin soil residue. The highest and the lowest percent shoot and root dry weight to control treatment were observed in alfafa and sorghum, respectively. Based on ED50 parameter, alfafa (0.164 mg a.i. trifluralin kg-1 soil) and sorghum (0.048 mg a.i. trifluralin kg -1 soil) appeared the most tolerant and the most sensitive plants to trifluraline soil residue, respectively. The other crops sensitivity to trifluralin in soil residue followed the following order: sorghum> millet >barley> wild oat > wheat > cucumber >alfafa.
Conclusion: According to the results, trifluralin residue in soil can affect the growth of rotational crops specially sorghum and millet. Therefore, regarding to the distance planting of sensitive crops after trifluralin application is necessary. Based on the results, plant response to trifluralin residues in soil were different significantly. However some sensitive plants such as sorghum and millet may be used for soil residue of trifluraline in bioassay experiments.

Keywords

Bioassays; Alfalfa; Cucumber; wheat; Wild oat; barley; millet; Sorghum

References

1- Anna M., Jeef J., and Irvine S. 2008. Evaluating a mustard root-length bioassay for predicting crop injury from soil residual flucarbazone. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 39: 31-41.

2- Beckie H., Friesen J.V., and Nawolske K.E. 1990. A rapid bioassay to detect trifluralin-resistant green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Technology 4: 505-508.

3- Caren A.J., Neal J.C., and Leidy R.B. 2003. Trifluralin (Preen) Dissipation from the Surface Layer of a Soilless Plant Growth Substrate. Environmental Horticulture 21: 216–222.

4- Cedergreen D. 2008. Herbicides can stimulate plant growth. European Weed Research Society Weed Research 48: 429–438.

5- Duke S.O., Cedergreen N., Veline E.D., and Belz R.G. 2006. Hormesis: is it an important factor in herbicide use and allelopathy? Outlooks on Pest Management 17: 29–33.

6- Frank A., Manthey Richard K., Zollinger Michael S., McMullen and Orval R. 1998. Trifluralin reduces oat establishment and yield but not quality. Department of Cereal Science and Department of Plant Sciences. North Dakota State University.

7- Farenhorst A. 2007. Influence of crop residues on trifluralin mineralization in a silty clay loam soil. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part B: Pesticides, Food Contaminants, and Agricultural Wastes 42: 265-269.

8- Gerwing P.D., and McKercher R.B. 1992. The relative persistence of trifluralin (545 EC and 5 G) and ethafluralin in prairie soils. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 72: 255-266.

9- Loux M.M., and Reese K.D. 1993. Effect of soil type and pH on persistence and carryover of imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 7: 452-458.

10- Malterre F., Grebil G., Pierre J-G., and Schiavon M. 1997. Trifluralin behavior in soil: a microlysimeter study. Chemosphere 34: 447-454.

11- Morrison I.N., Nawolsky K.M., Marshall G.M., and Smith A.E. 1989. Recovery of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) injured by trifluralin. Weed Science 37: 784-789.

12- Nawolsky K.M., Morrison I.N., Marshall G.M., and Smith A.E. 1992. Growth and yield of flax (Linum usitatissimum) injured by triflluralin. Weed Science 40: 460-464.

13- Rahman A. 2006. Persistence of terbacil and trifluralin under different soil and climatic conditions. Weed Research 17: 145–152.

14- Szmigielski A.M., Schoenau J.J., Lervine A., and Schilling B. 2010. Evaluation a mustard root bioassay for predicting crop injury from soil residual flucarbazone. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 39: 413- 420.

15- Thais C.F., Mazzeo M.A., and Marin M. 2007. Mechanism of micronuclei formation in polyploidizated cells of Allium cepa exposed to tri Xuralin herbicide. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 88: 252–259.

16- Uludag A., Uremis, I., Ulger A.C., Cakir B., and Aksoy E. 2006. The use of maize as replacement crop in trifluralin treated cotton fields in Turkey. Crop Protection 25: 275–280.

17- Vencill W.K. 2002. Herbicide Handbook, 8th ed. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America, 493 pp.

18- Wall D.A. 1997. Effect of crop growth stage on tolerance to low doses of thifen sulfuronztribenuron. Weed Science 45: 538-545.