| Literature DB >> 25587790 |
Changpeng Zhang1, Xiuqing Hu2, Jinyan Luo3, Zhiyi Wu4, Li Wang5, Bin Li6, Yanli Wang7, Guochang Sun8.
Abstract
Glyphosate formulations that are used as a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide have been widely applied in agriculture, causing increasing concerns about residues in soils. In this study, the degradation dynamics of glyphosate in different types of citrus orchard soils in China were evaluated under field conditions. Glyphosate soluble powder and aqueous solution were applied at 3000 and 5040 g active ingredient/hm2, respectively, in citrus orchard soils, and periodically drawn soil samples were analyzed by high performance liquid chromatography. The results showed that the amount of glyphosate and its degradation product aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) in soils was reduced with the increase of time after application of glyphosate formulations. Indeed, the amount of glyphosate in red soil from Hunan and Zhejiang Province, and clay soil from Guangxi Province varied from 0.13 to 0.91 µg/g at 42 days after application of aqueous solution. Furthermore, the amount of glyphosate in medium loam from Zhejiang and Guangdong Province, and brown loam from Guizhou Province varied from less than 0.10 to 0.14 µg/g, while the amount of AMPA varied from less than 0.10 to 0.99 µg/g at 42 days after application of soluble powder. Overall, these findings demonstrated that the degradation dynamics of glyphosate aqueous solution and soluble powder as well as AMPA depend on the physicochemical properties of the applied soils, in particular soil pH, which should be carefully considered in the application of glyphosate herbicide.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25587790 PMCID: PMC6272633 DOI: 10.3390/molecules20011161
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Recovery percentage of glyphosate and its metabolite AMPA from soils in Zhejiang Province.
| Concentration of Glyphosate (mg/kg) | Recovery Percentage (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Glyphosate | AMPA | |
| 0.05 | 95.60 ± 3.23 | 97.60 ± 4.83 |
| 0.50 | 96.40 ± 3.67 | 98.20 ± 4.72 |
| 5.00 | 98.82 ± 4.16 | 99.60 ± 4.91 |
Mean of five replicates.
Figure 1Standard curves of glyphosate and AMPA (a) ddH2O and (b) soil samples.
Figure 2Chromatogram of glyphosate and AMPA standard and soil samples in 2008 field experiments.
Degradation dynamics of glyphosate soluble powder in different type of soils.
| Days after Spraying | Residue of Glyphosate (mg/kg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Medium Loam (Zhejiang) | Medium Loam
| Brown Loam
| |
| 1 | 1.32 ± 0.11 | 1.25 ± 0.10 | 2.07 ± 0.16 |
| 3 | 0.92 ± 0.09 | 0.60 ± 0.03 | 2.01 ± 0.16 |
| 7 | 0.56 ± 0.18 | 0.40 ± 0.02 | 1.92 ± 0.18 |
| 14 | 0.38 ± 0.10 | 0.32 ± 0.01 | 0.75 ± 0.11 |
| 21 | 0.18 ± 0.05 | 0.26 ± 0.01 | 0.32 ± 0.03 |
| 28 | 0.18 ± 0.03 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | 0.30 ± 0.03 |
| 35 | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.25 ± 0.04 |
| 42 | 0.13 ± 0.01 | <0.10 | 0.14 ± 0.03 |
| T1/2 (day) | 12.6 | 11.7 | 10.0 |
| Equation | Ct = 0.9501e−0.0550t (R2 = 0.8926) | Ct = 0.8452e−0.0594t (R2 = 0.8996) | Ct = 2.2562e−0.0690t (R2 = 0.9446) |
Degradation dynamics of glyphosate soluble powder AMPA in different type of soils.
| Days after Spraying | Residue of Glyphosate AMPA (mg/kg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Medium Loam
| Medium Loam
| Brown Loam
| |
| 1 | 2.99 ± 0.16 | <0.10 | 3.21 ± 0.34 |
| 3 | 1.85 ± 0.08 | <0.10 | 2.25 ± 0.21 |
| 7 | 1.72 ± 0.11 | <0.10 | 1.34 ± 0.16 |
| 14 | 1.52 ± 0.03 | <0.10 | 1.08 ±0.18 |
| 21 | 1.43 ± 0.04 | <0.10 | 0.97 ± 0.25 |
| 28 | 1.41 ± 0.13 | <0.10 | 0.91 ± 0.16 |
| 35 | 1.26 ± 0.09 | <0.10 | 0.62 ± 0.09 |
| 42 | 0.99 ± 0.01 | <0.10 | 0.33 ± 0.03 |
| T1/2 (day) | 36.9 | / | 10.0 |
| Equation | Ct = 2.2347e−0.0188t (R2 = 0.7811) | / | Ct = 2.5019e−0.0444t (R2 = 0.9041) |
Figure 3Chromatogram of glyphosate (a) ddH2O and (b) soil samples in 2011 field experiments.
Degradation dynamics of glyphosate aqueous solution in different type of soils.
| Days after Spraying | Residue of Glyphosate (µg/g) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Soil
| Clay
| Red Soil
| |
| 1 | 9.10 ± 0.16 | 6.33 ± 0.17 | 6.22 ± 0.17 |
| 3 | 8.59 ± 0.09 | 5.30 ±0.23 | 5.43 ± 0.11 |
| 7 | 1.89 ± 0.09 | 4.91 ± 0.11 | 4.79 ± 0.05 |
| 14 | 1.09 ± 0.05 | 3.24 ± 0.04 | 2.06 ± 0.10 |
| 21 | 0.84 ± 0.03 | 2.50 ± 0.21 | 1.64 ± 0.25 |
| 28 | 0.77 ± 0.03 | 1.95 ± 0.18 | 1.41 ± 0.18 |
| 35 | 0.31 ± 0.02 | 1.39 ± 0.14 | 1.04 ± 0.09 |
| 42 | 0.13 ± 0.01 | 0.35 ± 0.06 | 0.91 ± 0.06 |
| T1/2 (day) | 7.5 | 11.8 | 14.2 |
| Equation | Ct = 6.9105e−0.0929t (R2= 0.9140) | Ct = 7.3944e−0.0587t (R2= 0.8968) | Ct = 5.7277e−0.0488t (R2= 0.9630) |
Characteristics of orchard soils that were sprayed with glyphosate soluble powder.
| Soil Type | Site | pH | CEC (cmol/kg) | Organic Matter (g/kg) | Soil Texture | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sand (%) | Silt (%) | Clay (%) | |||||
| Medium loam | Jiande, Zhejiang | 5.61 | 6.81 | 19.1 | 40.22 | 44.50 | 15.30 |
| Medium loam | Guangzhou, Guangdong | 7.30 | 23.21 | 26.5 | 47.60 | 14.20 | 38.20 |
| Brown loam | Guiyang, Guizhou | 4.26 | 10.10 | 46.9 | 14.80 | 67.10 | 18.10 |
CEC: Cation exchange capacity.
Characteristics of orchard soils that were sprayed with glyphosate aqueous solution.
| Soil type | Site | pH | CEC
| Organic Matter
| Soil Texture | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sand (%) | Silt (%) | Clay (%) | |||||
| Red soil | Hangzhou, Zhejiang | 6.34 | 14.20 | 3.72 | 35.50 | 34.00 | 29.50 |
| Clay | Nanning, Guangxi | 5.38 | 20.64 | 3.23 | 23.79 | 34.29 | 36.85 |
| Red soil | Changsha, Hunan | 5.50 | 6.90 | 0.81 | 16.74 | 76.69 | 6.57 |
CEC: Cation exchange capacity.