Transcript Insect Identification - Montana State University

Pesticide Formulations and
Adjuvants
Montana State University
Pesticide Safety Education Program
What is a formulation?
How a pesticide is packaged.
Contains:
– Active Ingredient
– Inert Ingredient
Active Ingredients
Has the pesticide effect
Its on the label
Properties of the a.i. influences the type of
formulation
Inert Ingredients
“Inactive”
ingredients mixed with a.i. To make
formulation easier to handle or store.
Toxic or non-toxic
Types of Formulations
Wet
– More easily absorbed
Dry
– More easily inhaled
Liquid Formulations (Wet)
EC – emulsifiable concentrate
S – soluble
Soluble
Advantage:
– ☺ Will not separate or settle out when
mixed with water.
– ☺ Not as harmful to non-target plants
and animals
Disadvantage:
– Not many disadvantages.
– Readily absorbs into skin
Emulsified Concentrates
ADVANTAGES
– ☺ Little agitation required. Won’t settle out when equipment
is turned off.
– ☺ Relatively non-abrasive.
– ☺ Easy to handle, store and transport
DISADVANTAGES
– Because of the solvents and emulsifiers, EC’s are a hazard
to non-target plants and animals.
– Easily absorbed through skin of plants and humans.
– Solvents may cause rubber or plastic hoses & gaskets to
deteriorate.
Dry Formulations
WP – Wettable powder
F or DF – Dry Flowable
WDG – Water Dispersible Granule
D -Dust
P or G – Pellets or Granules
M or ME – Micro-Encapsulated
Wettable Powders
ADVANTAGES
– ☺ Easy to store & transport. Smaller packaging. Won’t
freeze.
– ☺ Less inert ingredients in formulation.
– ☺ Lower toxicity to plants than liquid formulations.
– The inert ingredients, clay or talc, are generally harmless to
plants
DISADVANTAGES
– Inhalation hazard when pouring and mixing. It’s dry!
– Needs vigorous & constant agitation in the spray tank.
– Abrasive to many pumps and nozzles.
Flowable
ADVANTAGES
☺ Easy to handle and apply
☺ Seldom clogs nozzles. Finer ground
carrier.
DISADVANTAGES
May leave visible residue.
Requires agitation
Effects of Different Formulations
Formulations
Hazards Phytox
Equipment
Agitate
Compactable
M or ME
G or P
D
S
F or FL
EC
WP
Dermal
Inhale
Inhale
Dermal
Dermal
Dermal
Inhale
ok
NA
NA
Non-abrasive
abrasive
Seals, gaskets
abrasive
Yes
NA
NA
No
Yes
No
Yes
Fair
NA
NA
Fair
Fair
Fair
High
Safe
Safe
Safe
Safe
Maybe
Maybe
Safe
Interaction problems with
combining Formulations
Additive effects
Synergistic responses
Antagonism
Enhancement
Adjuvants
Additives that are added to a spray solution
in order to enhance or modify the
performance of the spray mixture.
#1 - Surfactants/wetting agents
#2 - Oils
#3 - Fertilizers
#4 – Utility
Anti-foaming agents
Compatibility agents
Drift control agents
Emulsification aids
Suspension aids
#1 – Surfactants / Oils
A broad category of adjuvants that
facilitate and enhance the absorbing,
emulsifying, dispersing, spreading,
sticking, wetting and penetrating
properties of pesticides.
Some pesticides like Roundup Pro
already have surfactants added. (14.5
%)
Why Surfactants
Because of the high surface tension of
water, spray mixture droplets maintain
their roundness and can sit on the leaf
hairs or leaf surface without much of
the mixture actually contacting the leaf.
Surfactants reduce angle and promote
more absorption
Tips continued
Costs
– Generally, non-ionic surfactants and crop oil
concentrates are the least expensive
– Nitrogen surfactants, esterified crop oils,
organosilicones (most expensive)
What conditions follow an application?
– Max rainfastness: esterified seed oils, organosilicones, nitrogen surfactants
– Not all surfactants have the same amount of
rainfastness
What formulation is this?
FLOWABLE
DERMAL ABSORPTION
Examples:
Bravo 720 F fungicide
Furadan 4 F insecticide
Question #2
What formulation is this?
Powdered Hand Soap
Wettable Powder
Easily Inhaled
Examples:
Sevin 50 W insecticide
Kerb 50 W herbicide
Sniper 50 W insecticide
READ THE LABEL
This will give you an idea of what type of
adjuvant if any should be used.
Questions
What is this?
Bhopal, India Disaster
Union Carbide Pesticide Manufacturing Plant
December 3rd, 1984
8,000 initial dead
15,000 more within 10 years
500,000 suffer injuries
water wells near the site show overall chemical
contamination to be 500 times higher than the
maximum limits recommended by the World
Health Organization.
cancer, genetic defects (birth defects), and liver
and kidney damage.
Any Problems?
How does this relate to you
We drink well water
– 50% of Montana Citizens drink well water
– 95% of those living in agricultural
communities
Restricted Use Applicators of Major
Concern in Montana Ag. Areas
– You are the greatest risk factor for your own
health
Spill – What do we do?
Stepped Concerns
–
–
–
–
–
Safety
Control
Containment
Reporting
Cleanup
Have On Hand
–
–
–
–
Absorbent
Shovel
Bags
Emergency Contacts
How do we reduce risk?
#1 – Mixing & Loading Locations
#2 - Filling Tanks
#3 – Read Label
Mixing/Loading Sites
Back Siphonage
Read Label
Proper Mixing and Storage
What factors are at play in
groundwater contamination?
#1 – Pesticide Factors
-Persistence
-Mobility
-Rate
#2 – Soil Factors
-Texture/OM/Cracked Soil
#3 – Site Conditions
-Weather
-Shallow Groundwater
RATE and Infiltration
Infiltration and Texture
Types of Soil Texture &
Permeability
Texture
Sand, Loamy Sand
Sandy Loam
Loam, Silt Loam
Sandy Clay Loam
Clay Loam, Silty Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Silty Clay, Clay
Permeability
Very Rapid and Rapid
Moderately Rapid
Moderate
Moderately Slow
Moderately Slow
Moderately Slow
Slow and Very Slow
Adsorption to Organic Matter
Leaching Potential
Herbicide
2,4-D acid
Solubility Half-life Koc Leaching
(ppm)
(days) (ml/g) Potential
890
10
80 medium
clopyralid
1,000
<30
6
high
dicamba
6,500
20
8
high
glyphosate
metsulfuron*
picloram
90,000
50 24,000 very low
6,000
30
40
low
430
30-200
16
high
Runoff Risk
Leachability
medium
Runoff
Potential
medium
clopyralid
high
low
dicamba
high
low
very low
high
metsulfuron
low
medium
picloram
high
low
Herbicide
2,4-D amine
glyphosate
Detected in Montana?
Leachability
medium
Runoff
Potential
medium
clopyralid
high
low
dicamba
high
low
very low
high
metsulfuron
low
medium
picloram
high
low
Herbicide
2,4-D amine
glyphosate
Detected
In Water
yes
yes
yes
Picloram
What are variables are
Site
Best Case
Worst Case
Type
valley bottom road by stream
Rate (lbs/ac)
0.25
1.0
Soil Texture
loam
sandy loam
Sand
33%
61%
C Horizon
32-59 in.
8-20 in
Organic Matter
2-4%
0.8-2%
Groundwater
30 ft.
3-9 ft.
Surface Water
1/3 mile
3 to 110 ft.
Slope
<1%
4.5 - 15%
Check your rates
Case Study – Tordon 1pt/A
Case Study – Tordon 2qt/A
Fish at risk as well!
Some chemicals are labeled for
use on Riparian areas
2.4-D Aquatic
Rodeo
Banvel
Escort, Tellar
Krenite
Plateau
Roundup
Don’t be complacent
Can happen to anyone in many
situations
Bhopal RECAP
Groundwater contamination has many
affects varying on contaminant involved
– Elderly, and children at most risk
Contact Information
MSU Pesticide Safety Education Program
www.pesticides.montana.edu