Residues and Dissipation of the Herbicide Imazapyr after Operational Use in Irrigation Water
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Imazapyr Application
- (1)
- In May 2015 (late autumn) canals with delta arrowhead infestations were dewatered at the start of the irrigation off-season.
- (2)
- Irrigation canals were then left dewatered for varying periods of time (median 24, min 1, max 60 days before herbicide application).
- (3)
- Imazapyr was then applied as a proprietary product (active ingredient (a.i.): 150 g ae L−1 imazapyr (isopropylamine salt) and 150 g ae L−1 glyphosate (isopropylamine salt)) at a rate of 750 g imazapyr a.i. ha−1 to the foliage of delta arrowhead and the sediment directly below it. This was applied at 5 L ha−1 of product with high volume handguns (600 L spray mix ha−1) according to herbicide product label instructions. Irrigation canals were treated individually from late May to early July 2015. The total length of canal in this application program was ~400 km.
- (4)
- Irrigation canals were then left dewatered for varying periods of time (median 30, min 8, max 55 days after application).
- (5)
- Irrigation canals were then recharged by filling canals pool by pool, from upstream to downstream (a pool is defined as a length of canal between two flow-regulating structures). Once recharged, pools were left ponded and imazapyr residues in the water were determined at intervals to verify dissipation. Near the end of the irrigation off-season pools with >1 µg L−1 imazapyr were flushed to displace imazapyr-contaminated water prior to resumption of supply of irrigation water.
2.2. Key Environmental Variables in the Region of Imazapyr Application
2.3. Imazapyr Residue Sampling Program and Analytical Method
2.4. Imazapyr Residue Data Collation
- Initial imazapyr concentration upon canal refilling (Model 1)
- Dissipation of imazapyr during the ponding period, after canal refilling (Model 2)
2.5. Statistical Analysis—Model 1, Initial Imazapyr Concentration
2.6. Statistical Analysis—Model 2, Dissipation of Imazapyr
3. Results
3.1. Model 1, Initial Imazapyr Concentration
3.2. Model 2, Dissipation of Imazapyr
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Imazapyr—Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment–Final Report. Available online: https://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/pesticide/pdfs/Imazapyr_TR-052-29-03a.pdf (accessed on 9 December 2016).
- Weed Science Society of America (WSSA). Imazapyr. In Herbicide Handbook, 10th ed.; Shaner, D.L., Ed.; Weed Science Society of America: Lawrence, KS, USA, 2014; pp. 258–259. [Google Scholar]
- Ecological Risk Assessment of the Proposed Use of the Herbicide Imazapyr to Control Invasive Cordgrass (Spartina spp.) in Estuarine Habitat of Washington State. Available online: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/pesticides/final_pesticide_permits/noxious/risk_assessment_Imazapyr.pdf (accessed on 18 August 2016).
- United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Imazapyr; United States Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; pp. 1–108.
- Kay, S.H. Efficacy of wipe-on applications of glyphosate and imazapyr on common reed in aquatic sites. J. Aquat. Plant Manag. 1995, 33, 25–26. [Google Scholar]
- Patten, K. Smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) control with imazapyr. Weed Tech. 2002, 16, 826–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Netherland, M.D.; Getsinger, K.D.; Stubbs, D.R. Aquatic plant management: Invasive species and chemical control. Outlook Pest Manag. 2005, 16, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clements, D.; Dugdale, T.M.; Butler, K.L.; Florentine, S.K.; Sillitoe, J. Herbicide efficacy for aquatic Alternanthera philoxeroides management in an early stage of invasion: Integrating above-ground biomass, belowground biomass and viable stem fragmentation. Weed Res. 2017, 57, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dugdale, T.M.; Champion, P.D. Control of alligator weed with herbicides: A review. Plant Prot. Q. 2012, 27, 70. [Google Scholar]
- Clements, D.; Butler, K.L.; Hunt, T.D.; Liu, Z.; Dugdale, T.M. Efficacy of endothall dimethylalkylamine salt applied to static irrigation channels during winter to control aquatic weeds in temperate Australia. J. Aquat. Plant Manag. 2018, 56, 84–92. [Google Scholar]
- Dugdale, T.M.; Hunt, T.D.; Clements, D. Aquatic weeds in Victoria: Where and why are they a problem, and how are they being controlled? Plant Prot. Q. 2013, 28, 35. [Google Scholar]
- Clements, D.; Dugdale, T.M.; Butler, K.L.; Hunt, T. Control of delta arrowhead (Sagittaria platyphylla) in Australian irrigation channels with long exposure to endothall dipotassium salt during winter. J. Aquat. Plant Manag. 2015, 53, 165–170. [Google Scholar]
- Kwong, R.M.; Sagliocco, J.L.; Harms, N.E.; Butler, K.L.; Green, P.T.; Martin, G.D. Biogeographical comparison of the emergent macrophyte, Sagittaria platyphylla in its native and introduced ranges. Aquat. Bot. 2017, 141, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adair, R.J.; Keener, B.R.; Kwong, R.M.; Sagliocco, J.L.; Flower, G.E. The biology of Australian weeds, 60: Sagittaria platyphylla (Engelmann) J.G. Smith and S. Calycina Engelmann. Plant Prot. Q. 2012, 27, 47–58. [Google Scholar]
- Developing Best Practice Management Strategies for Sagittaria in Australia. Phase 1: Current Management Practices—May 2018. Available online: http://www.riverinaweeds.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Developing-best-practice-management-strategies-for-sagittaria-in-Australia-May-2018-FINAL.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2018).
- Solomon, K.; Thompson, D. Ecological risk assessment for aquatic organisms from over-water uses of glyphosate. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health Part B 2003, 6, 289–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, L.; Rana, I.; Shaffer, R.M.; Taioli, E.; Sheppard, L. Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2019, 781, 186–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kwong, R.M.; Broadhurst, L.M.; Keener, B.R.; Coetzee, J.A.; Knerr, N.; Martin, G.D. Genetic analysis of native and introduced populations of the aquatic weed Sagittaria platyphylla–implications for biological control in Australia and South Africa. Biol. Control 2017, 112, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR). Imazapyr: Review for Use in Lakes & Ponds in Massachusetts. 2012; pp. 1–70. Available online: http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/agr/pesticides/aquatic/imazapyr.pdf (accessed on 9 December 2016).
- Tu, M.; Hurd, C.; Randall, J.M. Weed Control Methods Handbook: Tools and Techniques for Use in Natural Areas. The Nature Conservancy. 2001. Available online: http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/handbook.html (accessed on 9 December 2016).
- Clements, D.; Dugdale, T.M.; Hunt, T.D. Determining the efficacy of the herbicides endothal and diquat on the aquatic weed sagittaria in irrigation channels. Plant Prot. Q. 2013, 28, 85–87. [Google Scholar]
- Bowmer, K.H. Residues of glyphosate in irrigation water. Pestic. Sci. 1982, 13, 623–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowmer, K.H.; Michael, P.; Boulton, D.; Short, D.L.; Higgins, M.L. Glyphosate–sediment interactions and phytotoxicity in turbid water. Pestic. Sci. 1986, 17, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowmer, K.H. Residues of dalapon and TCA in sediments and irrigation water. Pestic. Sci. 1987, 18, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowmer, K.H.; Adeney, J.A. Residues of diuron and phytotoxic degradation products in aquatic situations. II. Diuron in irrigation water. Pestic. Sci. 1978, 9, 354–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowmer, K.H.; Higgins, M.L. Some aspects of the persistence and fate of acrolein herbicide in water. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 1977, 5, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowmer, K.H.; O’Loughlin, E.M.; Shaw, K.; Sainty, G.R. Residues of dichlobenil in irrigation water. J. Environ. Qual. 1976, 5, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.S.; Hunt, T.D.; Liu, Z.; Butler, K.L.; Dugdale, T.M. Sediment facilitates microbial degradation of the herbicides endothall monoamine salt and endothall dipotassium salt in an aquatic environment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Avila, L.A.; Massey, J.H.; Senseman, S.A.; Armbrust, K.L.; Lancaster, S.R.; Mccauley, G.N.; Chandler, J.M. Imazethapyr aqueous photolysis, reaction quantum yield, and hydroxyl radical rate constant. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 2635–2639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mangels, G. Behavior of the Imidazolinone herbicides in the aquatic environment. In The Imidazolinone Herbicides, 1st ed.; Shaner, D.L., O’Connor, S.L., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1991; pp. 183–190. ISBN 9780203709993. [Google Scholar]
- Mallipudi, N.M.; Stout, S.J.; DaCunha, A.R.; Lee, A.H. Photolysis of imazapyr (AC 243997) herbicide in aqueous media. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1991, 39, 412–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramezani, M.; Oliver, D.P.; Kookana, R.S.; Gill, G.; Preston, C. Abiotic degradation (photodegradation and hydrolysis) of imidazolinone herbicides. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 2008, 43, 105–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Butler, B.E.; Baldwin, J.W.; Penman, F.; Downes, G.W. Soil Survey of Part of the County of Moira, Victoria; Bulletin No. 152; CSIRO: Melbourne, Australia, 1942; p. 20. [Google Scholar]
- Johnston, E.J. The Soils of the Western Part of the Murray Valley Irrigation Area; Report No. 4; CSIRO: Melbourne, Australia, 1952; p. 23. [Google Scholar]
- Skene, J.K.M.; Poutsma, T.J. Soils and Land Use in Part of the Goulburn Valley, Victoria; Technical Bulletin No. 14; Department of Agriculture: Victoria, Australia, 1962.
- Skene, J.K.M. Soils and Land Use in the Deakin Irrigation Area, Victoria; Technical Bulletin No. 16; Department of Agriculture: Victoria, Australia, 1963.
- Bureau of Meteorology. Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology Climate Classification Maps. 2016. Available online: http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/climate_averages/climate-classifications/index.jsp?maptype=kpn#maps (accessed on 17 October 2018).
- Schreiber, F.; Scherner, A.; Massey, J.H.; Zanella, R.; Avila, L.A. Dissipation of clomazone, imazapyr, and imazapic herbicides in paddy water under two rice flood management regimes. Weed Tech. 2017, 31, 330–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martini, L.F.D.; Mezzomo, R.F.; de Avila, L.A.; Massey, J.H.; Marchesan, E.; Zanella, R.; Peixoto, S.C.; Refatti, J.P.; Cassol, G.V.; Marques, M. Imazethapyr and imazapic runoff under continuous and intermittent irrigation of paddy rice. Agric. Water Manag. 2013, 125, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Soil Name | Proportion of Irrigation Area (%) | Australian Soil Classification (ASC) | World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) |
---|---|---|---|
Lemnos loam/Moira loam | 40 | Red Sodosol/Chromosol | Luvisol, Solonetz |
Moira loam/Goulburn loam | 25 | Brown Sodosols | Solonetz |
Goulburn Boosey loam | 10 | Grey Sodosol/Vertosol | Solonetx, Vertisol |
Term | Median | Min. | Max. | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Pool characteristics | ||||
Irrigation district | 3 level factor | Murray Valley, Shepparton, and Central Goulburn | ||
Canal name | 9 level factor | Canals MVS1, SPS1, SPS2, SPS3, RNIS1, RNIS2, MVIS7, SPIS8, and RNIS9 | ||
Dead end spur indicator | 2 level factor | Yes or no, depending if canal was a dead-end spur | ||
Variables | ||||
Length of canal treated (excluding upstream; km) | 1.4 | 0.3 | 7.9 | |
Length of canal treated (including upstream; km) | 5.5 | 0.7 | 13.4 | |
Amount of imazapyr applied (excluding upstream; g km−1) | 331 | 23 | 2612 | |
Amount of imazapyr applied (including upstream; g km−1) | 440 | 129 | 2612 | |
Initial concentration (µg L−1) | 17 | 1 | 53 | |
Days after spraying until recharge (dewatered period) | 30 | 8 | 55 | |
Number of days between start and end of application (excluding upstream) | 1 | 0 | 40 | |
Number of days between start and end of application (including upstream) | 7 | 1 | 40 | |
Days drawdown period after application | 30 | 8 | 55 | |
Total imazapyr (g a.i.) applied excluding upstream | 548 | 14 | 5060 | |
Total imazapyr (g a.i.) applied including upstream | 1952 | 253 | 9688 | |
Volume (ML) to recharge pool excluding upstream | 6.4 | 1.5 | 67.4 | |
Days drawdown before application | 24 | 1 | 60 | |
Days with rainfall before application including upstream | 7 | 0 | 20 | |
Days with rainfall during application including upstream | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
Days with rainfall during drawdown after application | 8 | 0 | 11 | |
Days with rainfall during drawdown before application excluding upstream | 8 | 0 | 11 | |
Days with rainfall during drawdown and during application excluding upstream | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
Days with rainfall during drawdown after application including upstream | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
Rainfall (mm) during drawdown after application excluding upstream | 38 | 1 | 61 | |
Rainfall (mm) during drawdown before application excluding upstream | 15 | 0 | 56 | |
Rainfall (mm) during drawdown and during application excluding upstream | 0 | 0 | 37 | |
Rainfall (mm) during drawdown after application including upstream | 38 | 1 | 61 | |
Rainfall (mm) during drawdown before application including upstream | 15 | 0 | 56 | |
Rainfall (mm) during drawdown and during application including upstream | 0 | 0 | 37 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during drawdown after application excluding upstream | 8.1 | 7.4 | 8.6 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during drawdown before application excluding upstream | 8.5 | 7.8 | 11.1 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during drawdown and during application excluding upstream | 7.8 | 4.5 | 9.7 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during drawdown after application including upstream | 8.1 | 7.4 | 8.6 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during drawdown before application including upstream | 8.5 | 7.8 | 11.1 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during drawdown and during application including upstream | 7.8 | 4.5 | 9.7 | |
Air temperature (℃) during drawdown after application excluding upstream | 12.9 | 12.3 | 15.0 | |
Air temperature (℃) during drawdown before application excluding upstream | 15.2 | 14.4 | 21.1 | |
Air temperature (℃) during drawdown and during application excluding upstream | 13.9 | 11.8 | 20.4 | |
Air temperature (℃) during drawdown after application including upstream | 12.9 | 12.3 | 15.0 | |
Air temperature (℃) during drawdown before application including upstream | 15.2 | 14.4 | 21.1 | |
Air temperature (℃) during drawdown and during application including upstream | 13.9 | 11.8 | 21.1 | |
Recharge to first sample (days) during ponding excluding upstream | 8 | 1 | 44 | |
Recharge to first sample (days) during ponding including upstream | 8 | 1 | 44 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during recharge excluding upstream | 8.2 | 6.8 | 9.2 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) during recharge including upstream | 8.2 | 6.8 | 9.2 | |
Recharge start date | 29 July | 3 July | 5 August | Included as number of days since start of year |
Herbicide application end date | 30 June | 20 May | 20 July | |
Herbicide application start date | 10 June | 19 May | 10 July |
Term | Median | Min. | Max. | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Pool characteristics | ||||
Irrigation district | 3 level factor | Murray Valley, Shepparton, and Central Goulburn | ||
Canal name | 9 level factor | Canals MVS1, SPS1, RNIS1, RNIS2 and RNIS9 | ||
Dead end spur indicator | 2 level factor | Yes or no, depending if canal was a dead-end spur | ||
Variables | ||||
Concentration of initial sample (µg L−1) | 20.7 | 2.2 | 53.5 | |
Average solar exposure during observation period (AvSolar; MJ m−2) | 8.6 | 8 | 11.4 | |
Solar exposure (MJ m−2) in first 5 days following initial sample (or up to final sample if less than 5 days ponding period) | 8.2 | 7.9 | 11.4 | |
Days between initial and final sample | 9 | 3 | 28 | |
Date of initial sample (days after 1/7/15) | 35 | 12 | 55 | |
Date of final sample (days after 1/7/15) | 45 | 15 | 62 | |
Estimated water depth (cm) | 74 | 57 | 108 | |
Estimated sediment depth (cm) | 46 | 16 | 108 |
Average Solar Radiation (MJ m−2) | Half-Life during Dewatered Period (Days) | Half-Life during Ponding (Days) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Estimate | LCL | UCL | Estimate | LCL | UCL | |
8 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | No dissipation a | 9.7 | No dissipation a |
8.5 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 35.6 | 7.0 | No dissipation a |
9 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 10.6 | 5.1 | No dissipation a |
9.5 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 6.2 | 3.8 | 17.4 |
10 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 4.4 | 2.9 | 9.5 |
10.5 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 3.4 | 2.3 | 7.0 |
11 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 5.7 |
11.5 | 15.6 | 9.8 | 38.0 | 2.3 | 1.5 | 4.9 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Dugdale, T.M.; Butler, K.L.; Finlay, M.J.; Liu, Z.; Rees, D.B.; Clements, D. Residues and Dissipation of the Herbicide Imazapyr after Operational Use in Irrigation Water. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2421. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072421
Dugdale TM, Butler KL, Finlay MJ, Liu Z, Rees DB, Clements D. Residues and Dissipation of the Herbicide Imazapyr after Operational Use in Irrigation Water. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(7):2421. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072421
Chicago/Turabian StyleDugdale, Tony M., Kym L. Butler, Mark J. Finlay, Zhiqian Liu, David B. Rees, and Daniel Clements. 2020. "Residues and Dissipation of the Herbicide Imazapyr after Operational Use in Irrigation Water" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 7: 2421. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072421