Uptake of chlorfenvinphos and phorate from soil by carrots as influenced by mode of application and cultivar

Suett, D. L.

doi:10.1002/ps.2780050110

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Residues in both studies were generally less than 0.05 ppm except in carrots and parsnips where they approached the 0.10ppm level. Suett (1974) found that the rate and amount of insecticide uptake by carrots are influenced by the rate and mode of insecticide application and by the carrot cultivar. The depth of incorporation of the insecticide had little bearing on the rate of decline ofresidues in the soil.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Persistence of Chlorfenvinphos in Soil and Its Uptake by Some Crops

Chisholm¹

1975

Can. J. Soil. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Persistence of Chlorfenvinphos in Soil and Its Uptake by Some Crops

Chisholm¹

1975

Can. J. Soil. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is volatile and volatilization is probably a major factor in its dissipation from soil (Getzin and Chapman 1960; Harris and Lichtenstein 1961; Getzin and Shanks 1970). In addition it is oxidized in soil to the sulfoxide and sulfone (Getzin and Chapman 1960;Parker and Dewey 1965; Dewey and Parker 1965; Bache and Lisk 1966; Getzin and Shanks 1970;Menzer et al 1970; Suett 1971Suett , 1974Suett , 1975; Schulz et a l . 1973; Lichtenstein et a l .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the sulfoxide can be reduced by microbial action to phorate, particularly in flooded soil (Getzin and Shanks 1970;Walter-Echols and Lichtenstein 1977). The mobility of phorate in soil is limited, but the more water soluble sulfoxide and sulfone move more readily (Getzin and Suett 1971Suett , 1975; Schulz et al 1973; Lichtenstein et al 1974). Persistence studies generally indicate that phorate degrades relatively quickly in soil but that the sulfoxide and sulfone are more persistent.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Persistence studies generally indicate that phorate degrades relatively quickly in soil but that the sulfoxide and sulfone are more persistent. The persistence of phorate residues is dependent on soil and climatic factors and insecticide formulation, rate, and manner of application Chapman 1959, 1960;Hacskaylo et al 1961 Getzin and Shanks 1970;Menzer et al 1970; Suett 1971Suett , 1974Suett , 1975; Burns 1971;Schulz et al 1973;Lichtenstein et al 1973Lichtenstein et al , 1974Mithyantha and Perur 1974;Rajukkannu et al 1977;Walter-Echols and Lichtenstein 1978a;Ahmad et al 1979). Studies on the biological activity of phorate in soil have given contradictory results.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In part, these differences can be explained by the fact that factors influencing the persistence of phorate in soil affect biological activity also. The contribution of the degradation products to "phorate bioactivity" is not clear-some authors have concluded that the sulfoxide and sulfone are biologically active in soil while others feel that they do not play a major role Chapman 1959, 1960;Mulla et al 1961 Harris 1969Harris , 1977Read 1969Read , 1971Read , 1976; Getzin and Shanks 1970; Suett 1971). We conducted this study to obtain more precise information on the behaviour of phorate and its main oxidation products in soil and on the persistence and degradation of phorate in the field relative to soil type and climatic conditions in southern Ontario.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Insecticidal Activity and Persistence of Phorate, Phorate Sulfoxide, and Phorate Sulfone in Soils

Harris¹,

Chapman²

1980

Can Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory tests indicated that phorate, phorate sulfoxide, and phorate sulfone were toxic contact insecticides with broad spectrum activity. In general, p. sulfoxide was most toxic to insects > p. sulfone > phorate. When compared with other insecticides using 24–48 h old field crickets, Acheta pennsylvanicus (Burmeister), as test insects, the three compounds were less toxic by direct contact than carbofuran and fensulfothion, but as or more toxic than aldrin. P. sulfoxide and p. sulfone were strongly inactivated in moist Plainfield sand and were not as insecticidally active in soil against crickets as phorate. Nevertheless, the sulfoxide arid sulfone in soil were intermediate in toxicity between carbofuran and fensulfothion. The insecticidal activity of phorate, p. sulfoxide, and p. sulfone in soil was influenced by soil type, moisture, and temperature. Fumigant toxicity tests indicated that the three compounds volatilized from soil. Chemical analysis showed p. sulfone was most persistent in sand and muck > p, sulfoxide > phorate. Oxidation was observed to be a major degradation reaction for phorate and p. sulfoxide in both soils. Parallel bioassay tests indicated that, in sand, the biological action of "phorate" was due to the joint action of the three compounds. In a field study phorate EC, applied as a broadcast application at 3.4 kg AI/ha and incorporated into the top 7–8 cm of soil was slightly more persistent in muck than in sand. More than 99% and 98% of the applied phorate and its oxidation products disappeared from the sand and muck, respectively, within a year of treatment, indicating that the residues were only moderately persistent under climatic conditions encountered in southwestern Ontario. Low residues of p. sulfoxide and p. sulfone were detected in radishes grown on both soils in the first year but none were present in the second year. No residues were detected in carrots grown on either soil.

show abstract

Persistence and degradation of chlorfenvinphos, chlormephos, disulfoton, phorate and pirimiphos‐ethyl following spring and late‐summer soil application

Suett¹

1975

Pestic. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Granular formulations of chlorfenvinphos, chlormephos, disulfoton, phorate and pirimiphos‐ethyl were broadcast at 2 kg a.i./ha and incorporated to 100 mm into a sandy‐loam soil either in May or in September 1971. The relative persistence of their residues, including insecticidally active oxidation products, after both application dates was disulfoton > chlorfenvinphos > phorate > pirimiphos‐ethyl > chlormephos. When applied in September all the insecticides persisted for longer than when applied in May. Degradation was slower during the winter while the mean soil temperature at 100 mm depth remained below 6 to 7°C. Rising soil temperature in the following spring rapidly increased the rates of degradation of chlorfenvinphos, chlormephos and pirimiphos‐ethyl residues but not of disulfoton‐ and phorate‐derived residues, predominantly the parent sulphones, which had been leached deeper. Ten months after the September application, half the total residues derived from disulfoton and phorate were found below the initial incorporation depth, whereas the other insecticides showed relatively little downward movement. It was concluded that late summer/early autumn applications for carrot fly control would leave appreciable residues of some insecticides in the soil at the beginning of the next growing season which may contribute to the terminal residues in crops. These would be minimised if moderately persistent compounds were used or if doses of persistent ones were substantially reduced.

show abstract

Uptake of chlorfenvinphos and phorate from soil by carrots as influenced by mode of application and cultivar

Cited by 10 publications

References 11 publications

Persistence of Chlorfenvinphos in Soil and Its Uptake by Some Crops

Persistence of Chlorfenvinphos in Soil and Its Uptake by Some Crops

Insecticidal Activity and Persistence of Phorate, Phorate Sulfoxide, and Phorate Sulfone in Soils

Persistence and degradation of chlorfenvinphos, chlormephos, disulfoton, phorate and pirimiphos‐ethyl following spring and late‐summer soil application

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About