U.S. patent application number 13/389864 was filed with the patent office on 2012-06-07 for low volatility auxin herbicide formulations.
This patent application is currently assigned to MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC. Invention is credited to Ronald J. Brinker, Eric J. Roskamp, Daniel R. Wright.
Application Number | 20120142532 13/389864 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 43067096 |
Filed Date | 2012-06-07 |
United States Patent
Application |
20120142532 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Wright; Daniel R. ; et
al. |
June 7, 2012 |
LOW VOLATILITY AUXIN HERBICIDE FORMULATIONS
Abstract
Low volatility dicamba herbicide formulations are described. In
some embodiments, concentrate formulations comprising dicamba
monoethanolamine salt, dicamba potassium salt, or mixed dicamba
salts are provided. In other embodiments, a dicamba salt is
combined with a polybasic polymer.
Inventors: |
Wright; Daniel R.; (St.
Louis, MO) ; Roskamp; Eric J.; (Chesterfield, MO)
; Brinker; Ronald J.; (St. Louis, MO) |
Assignee: |
MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC
St. Louis
MO
|
Family ID: |
43067096 |
Appl. No.: |
13/389864 |
Filed: |
August 9, 2010 |
PCT Filed: |
August 9, 2010 |
PCT NO: |
PCT/US10/44873 |
371 Date: |
February 10, 2012 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
61232710 |
Aug 10, 2009 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
504/144 ;
504/324 |
Current CPC
Class: |
A01N 25/22 20130101;
A01N 37/40 20130101; A01N 25/32 20130101; A01N 57/20 20130101; A01N
25/32 20130101; A01N 37/40 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
504/144 ;
504/324 |
International
Class: |
A01N 37/10 20060101
A01N037/10; A01P 13/00 20060101 A01P013/00 |
Claims
1. An aqueous herbicidal solution concentrate formulation useful
for killing or controlling the growth of unwanted plants, the
formulation comprising an auxin herbicide component consisting
essentially of auxin herbicide salts and comprising at least 300
grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba monoethanolamine
salt.
2. The formulation of claim 1 wherein the auxin herbicide component
consists essentially of dicamba monoethanolamine salt.
3. The formulation of claim 1 wherein the solution comprises at
least 600 grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba
monoethanolamine salt.
4. The formulation of claim 1 further comprising at least one salt
of dicamba other than the monoethanolamine salt, wherein the weight
ratio of dicamba monoethanolamine salt to the total dicamba salts
other than dicamba monoethanolamine salt is from about 20:1 to 1:1
and wherein the total dicamba concentration on an acid equivalent
basis is at least 600 grams per liter.
5. The formulation of claim 4 wherein the dicamba salt other than
the dicamba monoethanolamine salt is the sodium, potassium,
diethanolamine, isopropylamine, diglycolamine or dimethylamine
salt.
6-13. (canceled)
14. The formulation of claim 1 wherein the pH is from about 4 to
about 11.
15-16. (canceled)
17. The formulation claim 1 further comprising at least one
surfactant wherein the weight ratio of dicamba monoethanolamine
salt acid equivalent to surfactant is from 1:1 to 20:1.
18. The formulation of claim 17 wherein the surfactant is selected
from alkoxylated tertiary etheramines, alkoxylated quaternary
etheramines, alkoxylated etheramine oxides, alkoxylated tertiary
amines, alkoxylated quaternary amines, alkoxylated polyamines,
sulfates, sulfonates, phosphate esters, alkyl polysaccharides,
alkoxylated alcohols, and combinations thereof.
19. The formulation of claim 1 further comprising at least one
co-herbicide.
20. The formulation of claim 19 wherein the co-herbicide is
selected from the group consisting of auxin herbicides and salts
thereof; acetyl CoA carboxylase (ACCase) inhibitors, acetolactate
synthase (ALS) or acetohydroxy acid synthase (AHAS) inhibitors,
photosystem II inhibitors, photosystem I inhibitors,
protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO or Protox) inhibitors, carotenoid
biosynthesis inhibitors, enolpyruvyl shikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP)
synthase inhibitor, glutamine synthetase inhibitor, dihydropteroate
synthetase inhibitor, mitosis inhibitors, synthetic auxins, auxin
transport inhibitors, nucleic acid inhibitors, and salts and esters
thereof; racemic mixtures and resolved isomers thereof; and
combinations thereof.
21. The formulation of claim 20 wherein the co-herbicide is
selected from: 2,4-D, aminocyclopyrachlor, mecoprop, mecoprop-P and
triclopyr and salts thereof; and acetochlor, acifluorfen, alachlor,
atrazine, azafenidin, bifenox, butachlor, butafenacil,
carfentrazone-ethyl, diuron, dithiopyr, flufenpyr-ethyl,
flumiclorac-pentyl, flumioxazin, fluoroglycofen, fluthiacet-methyl,
fomesafen, glyphosate, glufosinate, imazethapyr, lactofen,
metazochlor, metolachlor (and S-metolachlor), oxadiargyl,
oxadiazon, oxyfluorfen, pretilachlor, propachlor, propisochlor,
pyraflufen-ethyl, sulfentrazone and thenylchlor, and salts and
esters thereof; racemic mixtures and resolved isomers thereof, and
combinations thereof.
22. The formulation of any claim 21 wherein the total herbicide
concentration is at least 500 grams acid equivalent per liter.
23. The formulation of any one of claims 19 to 22 wherein the
weight ratio of dicamba monoethanolamine salt to total co-herbicide
is from about 50:1 to about 1:1 on an acid equivalent basis.
24. (canceled)
25. The formulation of claim 17 further comprising glyphosate
co-herbicide, or a salt or ester thereof, wherein the surfactant
comprises amidoalkylamine.
26-27. (canceled)
28. The formulation of claim 1 wherein the concentration of
volatilized dicamba in the vapor phase surrounding the aqueous
herbicidal solution concentrate formulation is less than the
concentration of volatilized dicamba in the vapor phase surrounding
a reference formulation formulated from dimethylamine dicamba,
isopropylamine dicamba, or combinations thereof, but otherwise
having the same formulation as the aqueous herbicidal solution
concentrate formulation, wherein the concentration of volatilized
dicamba in the vapor phase is measured by independently passing an
air stream for one day over each of the samples and analyzing the
air for dicamba content, wherein the air stream to which each
sample is exposed is essentially of the same composition,
temperature, pressure and flow rate, and wherein the air flow rate
is from about 0.1 to 10 L air/min-mL.
29-65. (canceled)
66. An aqueous herbicidal solution concentrate formulation useful
for killing or controlling the growth of unwanted plants, the
formulation comprising an auxin herbicide component consisting
essentially of auxin herbicide salts and comprising at least 550
grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba potassium salt.
67-94. (canceled)
95. An aqueous herbicidal solution concentrate formulation useful
for killing or controlling the growth of unwanted plants, the
formulation comprising an auxin herbicide component consisting
essentially of auxin herbicide salts and comprising at least 50
grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba diethanolamine salt.
96-123. (canceled)
124. A method of using dicamba herbicide to control
auxin-susceptible plants growing in and/or adjacent to a field of
crop plants, the method comprising the steps of (i) preparing an
aqueous herbicidal application mixture by diluting with water an
aqueous herbicidal solution concentrate formulation comprising an
auxin herbicide component consisting essentially of auxin herbicide
salts comprising at least 300 grams acid equivalent per liter of
dicamba monoethanolamine salt, and (ii) applying the aqueous
herbicidal application mixture to the foliage of the
auxin-susceptible plants.
125-166. (canceled)
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0001] The present invention generally relates to low volatility
auxin herbicide formulations.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0002] Auxin herbicides have proven to be effective and highly
beneficial for control of unwanted plants. Auxin herbicides include
2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid), 2,4-DB
(4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butanoic acid), dichloroprop
(2-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)propanoic acid), MCPA
((4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acid), MCPB
(4-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)butanoic acid), aminopyralid
(4-amino-3,6-dichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid), clopyralid
(3,6-dichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid), fluoroxypyr
([(4-amino-3,5-dichloro-6-fluoro-2-pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid),
triclopyr ([(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid),
diclopyr, mecoprop (2-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)propanoic acid) and
mecoprop-P, dicamba (3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid), picloram
(4-amino-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid), quinclorac
(3,7-dichloro-8-quinolinecarboxylic acid), aminocyclopyrachlor
(6-amino-5-chloro-2-cyclopropyl-4-pyrimidinecarboxylic acid),
agriculturally acceptable salts of any of these herbicides, racemic
mixtures and resolved isomers thereof, and mixtures thereof.
Dicamba has proven to be a particularly effective auxin herbicide
and is typically formulated as the sodium, dimethylamine,
isopropylamine or diglycolamine salt.
[0003] Volatility and drift problems are commonly associated with
auxin herbicides. Volatile auxin herbicides can, under certain
conditions of application, vaporize into the surrounding atmosphere
and thereby migrate from the application site to adjacent crop
plants, such as soybeans and cotton, where contact damage to
sensitive plants can occur. Spray drift can be attributed to
volatility as well as to the physical movement of small particles,
such as spray droplet particles, from the target site to adjacent
crop plants.
[0004] Prior art solutions to volatility and drift have failed to
successfully regulate off-target dicamba movement from the
application site. Attempts to reduce volatility have been made by
formulating dicamba in the form of various mineral or amine salts.
For example, the commercial product CLARITY.RTM. (available from
BASF) is a formulation comprising the diglycolamine salt of dicamba
and the commercial product BANVEL.RTM. (available from BASF) is a
formulation comprising the dimethylamine salt of dicamba.
Problematically however, crop plants such as soybean and cotton or
sensitive plants such as vegetables and flowers located in an area
wherein CLARITY or BANVEL has been applied can still exhibit
symptoms of injury such as leaf cupping, leaf malformation, leaf
necrosis, terminal bud kill and/or delayed maturity.
[0005] Other attempts to reduce dicamba volatilization have focused
on encapsulation. In one approach, dicamba is absorbed into solid
phase natural or synthetic polymers. However, the resulting
particle sizes are typically not suitable for spray application
therefore limiting use to granular drop application.
Microencapsulation in a polymer shell is also known in the art, but
the relatively high solubility of dicamba and its salts precludes
successful use of that technology in aqueous suspensions and
commercial dicamba microencapsulation products have not been
developed.
[0006] A need persists for low volatility auxin herbicide
formulations that are efficacious, yet non-phytotoxic to sensitive
crops located in areas adjacent to the target site, and for auxin
formulations that are less prone to volatility and physical
drift.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0007] Among the various aspects of the present invention may be
noted the provision of auxin herbicide formulations exhibiting low
volatility and/or drift and methods for their use.
[0008] Briefly, therefore, the present invention is directed to an
aqueous herbicidal solution concentrate formulation useful for
killing or controlling the growth of unwanted plants, the
formulation comprising a solution comprising an auxin herbicide
component consisting essentially of auxin herbicide salts and
comprising at least 50 grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba
monoethanolamine salt.
[0009] The present invention is further directed to an aqueous
herbicidal solution concentrate formulation useful for killing or
controlling the growth of unwanted plants, the formulation
comprising a solution comprising an auxin herbicide component
consisting essentially of auxin herbicide salts and comprising at
least 550 grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba potassium
salt.
[0010] The present invention is further directed to an aqueous
herbicidal solution concentrate formulation useful for killing or
controlling the growth of unwanted plants, the formulation
comprising an auxin herbicide component consisting essentially of
auxin herbicide salts and comprising at least 50 grams acid
equivalent per liter of dicamba diethanolamine salt.
[0011] The present invention is further directed to low volatility
auxin herbicide formulations comprising an auxin herbicide
component consisting essentially of an auxin herbicide salt or a
mixture of auxin herbicide salts and a polybasic polymer or mixture
of polybasic polymers, wherein the formulation is an aqueous
solution. The polymer has a molecular weight of from 600 to
3,000,000 Daltons and has a nitrogen content of from 13 to 50
percent by weight
[0012] The present invention is further directed to a method of
using an auxin herbicide to control auxin-susceptible plants
growing in and/or adjacent to a field of crop plants. The method
comprises diluting a formulation comprising a solution of (i) at
least 50 grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba
monoethanolamine salt or dicamba diethanolamine salt or at least
550 grams acid equivalent per liter of dicamba potassium salt with
water to provide an aqueous herbicidal application mixture or (ii)
forming an aqueous application mixture from a low volatility auxin
herbicide formulation comprising an auxin herbicide component
consisting essentially of an auxin herbicide salt or a mixture of
auxin herbicide salts and a polybasic polymer or mixture of
polybasic polymers. The aqueous herbicidal application mixture is
applied to the foliage of the auxin-susceptible plants.
[0013] The present invention is further directed to a method of
reducing the volatility of auxin herbicides. The method comprises
providing a nitrogen containing polybasic polymer source for use in
preparation of an aqueous herbicidal application mixture comprising
an auxin herbicide for application to auxin susceptible plants. The
auxin herbicide content of said auxin herbicide consists
essentially of the salts of one or more auxin herbicide species.
The polybasic polymer has a molecular weight from 600 to 3,000,000
Daltons and has a nitrogen content from 10 to 50 percent by
weight.
[0014] The present invention is still further directed to a method
for controlling auxin susceptible plants. The method comprises
obtaining a nitrogen containing polybasic polymer source comprising
at least one polybasic polymer species, wherein the polybasic
polymer has an average molecular weight of from 600 to 3,000,000
Daltons and has an average nitrogen content of from 13 to 50
percent by weight and obtaining an auxin herbicide source having a
herbicide content consisting essentially of one or more auxin
herbicide salt species. The nitrogen containing polybasic polymer
source and auxin herbicide source are mixed with water to produce
an aqueous auxin application mixture that is applied to the auxin
susceptible plants.
[0015] The present invention is yet further directed to a method of
counseling a person responsible for control of auxin susceptible
plants. The method comprises (i) identifying an auxin herbicide
source to be used in the preparation of an aqueous auxin
application mixture, the auxin herbicides contained in said auxin
herbicide source consisting essentially of one or more auxin
herbicide salt species, (ii) identifying a nitrogen containing
polybasic polymer source comprising at least one polybasic polymer
species, wherein the polybasic polymer has an average molecular
weight of from 600 to 3,000,000 Daltons and has an average nitrogen
content of from 13 to 50 percent by weight and (iii) enabling said
person to prepare said aqueous auxin application mixture from
materials comprising said auxin herbicide source and said nitrogen
containing polybasic polymer source for application to said auxin
susceptible plants.
[0016] Other objects and features will be in part apparent and in
part pointed out hereinafter.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0017] FIG. 1 is a graph depicting the percent of spray volume for
prior art compositions and compositions of the present invention
having droplet particle sizes of less than 150 microns and less
than 100 microns wherein the prior art and inventive composition
solutions contained about 0.56 weight percent acid equivalent
dicamba and were sprayed at 165 kPa pressure by means of a flatfan
9501E nozzle.
[0018] Corresponding reference characters indicate corresponding
parts throughout the drawings.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS
[0019] In accordance with the present invention, auxin herbicide
formulations exhibiting low volatility, controlled droplet particle
size, reduced physical and reduced vapor drift are provided. As
compared to auxin formulations known in the art, it is believed
that the formulations of the present invention provide enhanced
protection from crop injury to auxin tolerant or resistant crops
while maintaining comparably effective herbicidal efficacy on
unwanted plants located in the target area. Throughout the
remainder of the description of the invention, where reference to
the auxin herbicide dicamba is made, one skilled in the art will
understand that the principles of the present invention apply
generally to auxin herbicides, including those described above, and
the invention is not limited to dicamba herbicidal
formulations.
[0020] In some embodiments of the present invention, formulations
and methods are provided that effectively control auxin herbicide
release to give both commercially acceptable weed control and a
commercially acceptable rate of crop injury. In some other
embodiments, the formulations provide enhanced crop protection in
over the top application to plants.
[0021] In accordance with the present invention, a "commercially
acceptable rate of weed control" varies with the weed species,
degree of infestation, environmental conditions, and the associated
crop plant. Typically, commercially effective weed control is
defined as least about 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, or
even greater than 95%. Although it is generally preferable from a
commercial viewpoint that 80-85% or more of the weeds be destroyed,
commercially significant weed control can occur at much lower
levels, particularly with some very noxious, herbicide-resistant
plants. "Weed control," as used herein, refers to any observable
measure of control of plant growth, which can include one or more
of the actions of (1) killing, (2) inhibiting growth, reproduction
or proliferation, and (3) removing, destroying, or otherwise
diminishing the occurrence and activity of plants. Weed control can
be measured by any of the various methods known in the art. For
example, weed control can be determined as a percentage as compared
to untreated plants following a standard procedure wherein a visual
assessment of plant mortality and growth reduction is made by one
skilled in the art specially trained to make such assessments. In
another control measurement method, control is defined as an
average plant weight reduction percentage between treated and
untreated plants. Preferably, commercial weed control is achieved
at no greater than 30 days after treatment (DAT), such as from 18
to 30 DAT.
[0022] A "commercially acceptable rate of crop injury" for the
present invention likewise varies with the crop plant species.
Typically, a commercially acceptable rate of crop injury is defined
less than about 20%, 15%, 10% or even less than about 5%. Crop
damage can be measured by any means known in the art, such as those
describe above for weed control determination. Preferably, crop
damage appears no more than from 10% to 20% at no greater than 30
DAT, such as from 3 to 21 or from 3 to 30 DAT.
[0023] The auxin-susceptible plants can be weeds or crop plants.
Crop plants include, for example, vegetable crops, grain crops,
flowers, root crops and sod. Crop plants of the present invention
include hybrids, inbreds, and transgenic or genetically modified
plants.
[0024] In some embodiments, the crop plants are auxin tolerant
species that are not susceptible to auxin herbicides or are a
transgenic species that contain an auxin (e.g., dicamba) resistant
trait. Examples include dicamba resistant corn, cotton or soybean.
Dicamba resistant crops can further comprise one or more additional
traits including, without limitation: herbicide resistance (e.g.,
resistance to other auxin herbicides (e.g., 2,4-D or fluoroxypyr),
glyphosate, glufosinate, acetolactate synthase inhibitor herbicides
(e.g., imazamox, imazethapyr, imazaquin and imazapic), acetyl CoA
carboxylase inhibitors (e.g., sethoxydim and clethodim), etc.);
insect resistance such as Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt); high oil;
high lysine; high starch; nutritional density; and/or drought
resistance. In some other embodiments, the weeds and/or crop plants
are glyphosate tolerant or contain a glyphosate resistant trait.
Examples include glyphosate resistant corn, cotton or soybean. In
other embodiments, the crop plants comprise stacked traits such as
dicamba and glyphosate resistance; dicamba and glufosinate
resistance; dicamba and acetolactate synthase (ALS) or acetohydroxy
acid synthase (AHAS) resistance; dicamba, glyphosate and
glufosinate resistance; dicamba, glyphosate and ALS or AHAS
resistance; dicamba, glufosinate and ALS or AHAS resistance; or
dicamba, glyphosate, glufosinate and ALS or AHAS resistance. In
other embodiments, the plants can additionally include other
herbicide, insect and disease resistance traits, as well as
combinations of those traits. For instance, the plants can have
dicamba, 2,4-D or fluoroxypyr resistant traits.
[0025] In some embodiments, low volatility commercially acceptable
formulations of auxin herbicides are achieved by combining 2,4-D,
2,4-DB, dichloroprop, MCPA, MCPB, aminopyralid, clopyralid,
fluoroxypyr, triclopyr, diclopyr, mecoprop, mecoprop-P, dicamba,
picloram, quinclorac, aminocyclopyrachlor, agriculturally
acceptable salts of any of these herbicides, racemic mixtures or
resolved isomers thereof, or mixtures thereof (i) in aqueous
solution with one or more soluble polybasic polymers such as, for
example, a polymeric polyamine and/or (ii) by raising the pH of
aqueous solutions thereof. Cations for the formation of auxin
herbicide salts include, without limitation, sodium, potassium,
ammonium, lithium, diammonium, monoethanolamine, diethanolamine,
triethanolamine, triisopropanolamine, dimethylamine, diethylamine,
triethylamine, methylamine, ethylamine, diglycolamine, propylamine,
butylamine, pentylamine, hexylamine, heptylamine, octylamine,
decylamine and dodecylamine, and mixtures thereof.
[0026] In accordance with the present invention, it has yet been
further discovered that the concentration of volatilized auxin
herbicide in the vapor phase surrounding a low volatility auxin
herbicide formulation comprising an auxin herbicide salt and one or
more polybasic polymers is less than the concentration of
volatilized auxin herbicide in the vapor phase surrounding a
reference formulation formulated in the absence of the polybasic
polymer(s), but otherwise having the same formulation as the low
volatility auxin herbicide formulation. Based on experimental
evidence, the concentration of volatilized dicamba herbicide in the
vapor phase surrounding the low volatility dicamba herbicide
formulations of the present invention comprising a polybasic
polymer has been discovered to be less than 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, 0.6,
0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 or 0.1 that of the concentration of volatilized
dicamba herbicide in the vapor phase surrounding a similarly
formulated reference formulation but not containing the polybasic
polymer.
[0027] Volatilization can be measured by means known to those
skilled in the art such as by distilling auxin herbicide
compositions and analyzing the distillation condensate and/or
distilled composition for auxin content. In another method, a gas
stream can be passed over auxin formulations into which the auxin
herbicide volatilizes from the formulation. The gas stream can then
be quantitatively analyzed for dicamba content by methods known in
the art.
[0028] In is believed, without being bound to any particular
theory, that polybasic polymers reduce auxin salt volatility
because dissociated auxin salt forms ionic bonds with the polybasic
polymer and binds the auxin in solution. Any residue from a
herbicidal application of the auxin, is therefore inhibited from
dissociating to the free acid. In the case of dicamba, the free
acid is about 100 times more volatile than bound dicamba acid or
salt. Furthermore, it is believed that additional localization of
an auxin in or around the polymer matrix may be achieved through
cation-pi complexation. It is known that ammonium salts form stable
cation-pi complexes with the pi systems of aromatic rings. In this
case, the ammonium ions of the polymer can form cation-pi or
pi-cation-pi complexes with the auxin. This additional complex
interaction may further contribute to reduction in volatilization
of the auxin. In some embodiments, reduced dicamba volatility in
combination with relatively fast dicamba release from the polymer
can be achieved by formulating dicamba salts with a polybasic
polymer having a relatively weak ion exchange capability. It is
believed that low ion exchange capacity polymers retard dicamba
salt disassociation to the free acid form thereby reducing
volatility, but those polymers do not bind the dicamba strongly
enough to retard release rate to an extent that efficacy is
reduced. It is further believed that dicamba bound to polymers
having relatively strong ion exchange capability would likewise
have a reduced volatilization rate as compared to a similarly
formulated formulation, but not containing the polymer.
[0029] Experimental evidence to date indicates that the polymers do
not inhibit dicamba herbicidal effectiveness (i.e., do not decrease
the availability of the herbicide to the plant). Even with the
auxin herbicide molecule held by either an acid-base and/or
cation-pi electron complex, it has been discovered that the
biological activity of dicamba is increased as compared to
application of the herbicide with no surfactant and is, in fact,
generally equivalent to application of the herbicide with a
surfactant. This suggests that polymers may increase the
availability of dicamba to the plant.
[0030] It has been discovered, in some embodiments of the present
invention, that polybasic polymers are effective auxin herbicide
drift control agents because these polymers, when utilized in
aqueous auxin formulations, can reduce the number of spray drops
having a diameter of less than about 200 microns, 150 microns, or
even 100 microns. It is believed, without being bound to any
particular theory, that in addition to reducing auxin volatility,
polybasic polymers also function as thickeners or rheological
property modifying agents that increase solution viscosity
resulting in a greater number of large spray droplet particles in
the size distribution and restricting the generation of small
droplet particles. For a given velocity, wind will move large
droplet particles a shorter distance as compared to smaller droplet
particles. Notably, an increase in average spray drop size from
about 10 microns to about 150 microns can decrease the lateral
distance a droplet particle travels in a light wind after normal
spraying by about 300 to 500 meters. Spray droplet particle size
can be measured by methods known to those skilled in the art such
as phase doppler droplet particle analysis (PDPA).
[0031] In order to achieve the benefits of reduced auxin volatility
and/or enhanced auxin drift control, polybasic polymers, having
from 4 to about 100,000 nitrogen atoms per molecule, from about 15
to about 100,000 nitrogen atoms per molecule, from about 25 to
about 100,000 nitrogen atoms per molecule, from about 50 to about
100,000 nitrogen atoms per molecule, or even from about 100 to
about 100,000 nitrogen atoms per molecule, or mixtures of polybasic
polymers having an average number of nitrogen atoms within the
above ranges, are preferred. For polybasic polymers or a
combination of polymers, an average nitrogen content of from 10% to
about 50% by weight, from 13% to about 50%, from 15% to about 50%,
from about 20% to about 50%, from about 30% to about 45% by weight,
or even about 30% to about 40% by weight is preferred. Examples of
typical polymer molecular weights, or average molecular weight for
polymer mixtures, (in Daltons) for the practice of the present
invention include 600, 800, 1,300, 1,500, 2,000, 2,500, 5,000,
10,000, 20,000, 50,000, 75,000, 100,000, 250,000, 500,000, 750,000,
1,000,000, 1,250,000, 1,500,000, 1,750,000, 2,000,000, 2,250,000,
1,500,000, 1,750,000, 2,000,000, 2,250,000, 2,500,000, 2,750,000 or
even 3,000,000, and ranges thereof. Polybasic polymers suitable for
the practice of the present invention are preferably hydrophilic
and have an aqueous solubility of at least 5% v/v, more preferably
at least 10% v/v.
[0032] Formulations comprising an auxin herbicide salt are
generally compatible with polybasic polymers in tank mixes as well
as in concentrate formulations. Advantageously therefore, the
polybasic polymers of the present invention do not require separate
addition into a spray tank. Alternatively however, the polybasic
polymers of the present invention can be combined with auxin
herbicide formulations before use on plants such as by addition to
auxin herbicide concentrate compositions or auxin herbicide tank
mixes, or by introducing an auxin herbicide composition and a
polybasic polymer or polymer combination as separate feed streams
to a spraying or application system so that the feed streams are
co-mixed immediately prior to use. A weight ratio of dicamba acid
equivalent (a.e.) to polybasic polymer or combination of polymers
of from 1:100 to about 100:1, from about 1:50 to about 50:1, from
about 1:1 to about 100:1, from about 1:1 to about 50:1, from about
1:1 to about 25:1, from about 1:1 to about 10:1, from about 3:1 to
about 10:1 or from about 5:1 to about 10:1 is preferred. In some
embodiments of the present invention, formulations contain from
about 1% to about 10% v/v total polybasic polyamine and from about
360 to about 750, from about 400 to about 750, from about 450 to
about 750, from about 460 to about 750, from about 470 to about
750, from about 480 to about 750, from about 490 to about 750, or
from about 500 to about 750 grams a.e. per liter (g a.e./L)
dicamba.
[0033] Combinations of the above-described polymer nitrogen
content, molecular weights, solubilities, concentrations and ratios
are within the scope of the present invention.
[0034] Auxin herbicide salts are generally preferred as compared to
the acid form for combination with polybasic polymers. Suitable
cations for auxin herbicide salts include, for example and without
restriction, DMA, MEA, DEA, triethanolamine (TEA), potassium,
sodium, IPA and DGA. In some embodiments of the present invention,
the auxin herbicide component of the formulation consists
essentially of auxin herbicide salts. In dicamba embodiments, MEA,
DEA and potassium dicamba are preferred because they are believed
to be compatible with polybasic polymers such as polymeric
polyamines, such that high concentrations in aqueous solution can
be achieved while volatility is low as compared to other dicamba
salt formulations that do not contain the polymer and without
requiring the pH of the formulation to be 9 or greater.
[0035] In other embodiments, in the case of dicamba, low volatility
can be achieved by formulating dicamba as the monoethanolamine or
diethanolamine salt. It has been discovered that the MEA and
diethanolamine (DEA) salts of dicamba are less volatile than other
dicamba salts, such as the DMA and IPA salts, known in the art. In
particular, the concentration of volatilized dicamba in the vapor
phase surrounding the aqueous dicamba MEA or DEA concentrate
formulation is less than the concentration of volatilized dicamba
in the vapor phase surrounding a reference formulation formulated
from dicamba salts known in the art such as dimethylamine dicamba,
isopropylamine dicamba, or mixtures thereof, but otherwise having
the same composition as the dicamba MEA concentrate formulation.
Distillation studies of solutions of the MEA, sodium, potassium,
DGA and IPA dicamba salts show that dicamba salts having relatively
volatile cations, such as or IPA, have comparably greater dicamba
volatilization than do dicamba salts having less volatile cations,
such as sodium, potassium, MEA or DEA. The concentration of
volatilized dicamba herbicide in the vapor phase surrounding an MEA
dicamba formulation has been discovered to be from 0.05, 0.1, 0.2,
0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, or ranges thereof, that of the
concentration of volatilized dicamba herbicide in the vapor phase
surrounding similarly formulated IPA dicamba. Experimental
measurements of dicamba concentration in the gas phase above
dicamba salt aqueous solutions show that the gas phase dicamba
concentration associated with an MEA dicamba aqueous solution is
typically less than the gas phase concentration associated with a
comparative solution of dicamba acid or the IPA or DMA dicamba
salts, wherein the comparative solution otherwise has the same
formulation as the MEA dicamba salt solution. In particular, it has
been discovered that the gas phase dicamba concentration associated
with MEA dicamba is about 2, 5, 10, 15 or 20 times less than the
gas phase dicamba concentration associated with DMA dicamba and
about 7 to 8 times less than the gas phase dicamba concentration
associated with IPA dicamba in otherwise similarly formulated
formulations.
[0036] It is further believed that the amount of dicamba
volatilizing from an aqueous solution of the sodium, potassium, MEA
or DEA salt can also be a function of pH, with volatilization
varying inversely with pH. In general, dicamba volatility decreases
with increasing pH. Without being bound to any particular theory
and based on experimental evidence to date, the pH dependent trend
may be explained by the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation, (pH=pKa+log
[HA/A-]) where HA represents the concentration of acidic species
with an associated hydrogen and A.sup.- represents the
concentration of the deprotonated basic species. As the pH is
increased, there is more ionization of dicamba acid (more
dissociation) resulting in a lower vapor pressure. This helps to
explain the disparity observed in the volatility between dicamba
acid and the dicamba salts, and also the difference in volatility
between salts at low pH versus salts at high pH. The increased
ionization with the salts and the increased dissociation at the
higher pHs may lead to a lower vapor pressure and therefore lower
volatility. A pH of from about 4 to about 11, from about 5 to about
10, or from about 7 to about 9 is preferred for any of the various
dicamba salts. It is believed that the polybasic polymers of the
present invention function as pH buffers thereby maintaining a
nearly constant pH value in the dicamba compositions of the present
invention, even upon the addition of a small amount of acid. The
buffering effect therefore assists in maintaining low vapor
pressure and low volatility by resisting pH changes into the acidic
range.
[0037] In accordance with the present invention, and based on
experimental evidence, it has been further discovered that the
monoethanolamine (MEA) salt of dicamba provides higher aqueous
solubility and lower viscosity as compared to dicamba acid and
other dicamba salts known in the art, such as the dimethylamine
(DMA) and isopropylamine (IPA) salts. As indicated in Table A
below, MEA salt aqueous solubility at 20.degree. C. is about 66.1
weight percent a.e. (wt % a.e.), or about 885 grams acid equivalent
per liter (g a.e./L) as compared to 54.6 wt % a.e. (720 g a.e./L)
and 56.5 wt % a.e. (700 g a.e./L) for potassium dicamba and
diglycolamine (DGA) dicamba, respectively. The DMA salt of dicamba
is believed to have a solubility at 20.degree. C. of about 45 wt %
a.e. (600 g a.e./L).
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE A wt % a.e. Approximate Dicamba @20.degree. C.
g a.e./L @20.degree. C. acid 0.4 4.5 sodium salt 36.3 364 potassium
salt 54.6 720 DGA salt 56.5 700 MEA salt 66.1 885
[0038] In some embodiments of the present invention, MEA, potassium
and DEA dicamba tank mix formulations are provided. The tank mix
formulations preferably comprise from about 0.1 to about 50 g
a.e./L, such as 0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 25 or 50 g a.e./L, and ranges
thereof.
[0039] In some other embodiments, of the present invention, MEA
dicamba concentrate formulations are provided. The concentrate
formulations preferably comprise at least 50 g a.e./L, such as from
about 50 to about 885, from about 100 to about 885, from about 200
to about 885, from about 300 to about 885, from about 400 to about
885, from about 500 to about 885, from about 550 to about 885, or
from about 600 to about 885 g a.e./L MEA dicamba. For example, 50,
100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600, 650, 700,
750, 800, 850 or 885 g a.e./L, and ranges thereof.
[0040] In some other embodiments, of the present invention,
potassium dicamba concentrate formulations are provided. The
concentrate formulations preferably comprise at least 550 g a.e./L,
such as from about 550 to about 720, or from about 600 to about 720
g a.e./L potassium dicamba. For example, 550, 600, 650, 700 or 720
g a.e./L, and ranges thereof.
[0041] In some other embodiments, of the present invention, DEA
dicamba concentrate formulations are provided. The concentrate
formulations preferably comprise at least 50 g a.e./L, from about
50 to about 720, from about 100 to about 720, from about 200 to
about 720, from about 300 to about 720, from about 400 to about
720, from about 500 to about 720, from about 550 to about 720, or
from about 600 to about 720 g a.e./L DEA dicamba. For example, 50,
100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600, 650, 700, or
720 g a.e./L, and ranges thereof.
[0042] In still other embodiments of the present invention, mixed
dicamba salt compositions comprising at least one of the MEA, DEA
or potassium salt are provided. In addition to the MEA, DEA and
potassium dicamba salts, suitable salts include the sodium,
ammonium, lithium, diammonium, triethanolamine,
triisopropanolamine, DMA, diethylamine, triethylamine, methylamine,
ethylamine, DGA, propylamine (such as IPA or n-propyl), butylamine,
pentylamine, hexylamine, heptylamine, octylamine, dodecylamine and
decylamine dicamba salts. More preferably, the mixed salts include
two or more dicamba salts selected from the MEA, DEA, sodium,
potassium, IPA, DGA and DMA salts, wherein at least one salt is the
MEA, DEA or potassium salt of dicamba. A weight ratio of the MEA,
DEA and/or potassium dicamba salt to the sum of the other salts of
no greater than about 20:1, such as 20:1, 10:1, 5:1, 3:1, 1:1, 1:3,
1:5, 1:10 and ranges thereof, is preferred, more preferably from
20:1 to about 1:10, from about 20:1 to about 1:5, from about 20:1
to 1:1, or from about 20:1 to about 5:1. The total dicamba
concentration for the mixed salt compositions on an acid equivalent
basis is at least about 52.5, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400,
450, 480, 500, 520, 540, 560, 575, 580, 600, 620, 640, 660, 680 or
700 grams per liter, and ranges thereof. For any given dicamba salt
and concentration thereof, one skilled in the art can readily
determine using routine experimentation a minimum ratio of the
dicamba salts (i.e. a lower limit from the upper limit of 20:1)
that is necessary to achieve the objects of the invention in view
of the other components of the formulation, such as a co-herbicide
component, polybasic polymer component and/or surfactant component
and their respective concentrations.
[0043] It has yet been further discovered that MEA dicamba
concentrate formulations are only moderately irritating to eyes at
a pH of about 8. Eye irritation measurement can be done according
to the methods provided in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Health
Effects Test Guidelines (for example, OPPTS 870.2400 Acute Eye
Irritation, August 1998). MEA dicamba formulations are generally
classified in the eye irritation (rabbit) FIFRA (Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act) category III (moderate
irritation).
[0044] In some embodiments of the present invention, the polybasic
polymer is a polymeric polyamine, polymeric polyimine,
nitrogen-substituted vinyl polymer, polyoxazoline, polymeric
polypeptide, polymeric polyamide, polypropyleneimine dendrimer,
polyethyleneimine dendrimer or a polyamidoamine dendrimer.
Combinations thereof are also within the scope of the present
invention.
[0045] In some embodiments of the present invention, the polybasic
polymer is a polymeric polyamine. Polymeric polyamines include, for
instance, polyethyleneimines, polyalkoxylated polyamines, and
combinations thereof. Particular polymeric polyamines include
benzylated polyamines, ethoxylated polyamines, propoxylated
polyamines, alkylated polyamines, esterified polyamines and
combinations thereof.
[0046] In some embodiments of the present invention, the polymeric
polyamines have structure (1):
##STR00001##
wherein each R.sub.1 is independently hydrogen, a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl group having from 1 to 20 carbon atoms, an
aryl group, or a cyclic group; each R.sub.2 is independently an
alkylene having from 1 to 4 carbon atoms or an aryl, each R.sub.3
is independently hydrogen or a hydrocarbyl having from 1 to 4
carbon atoms and x is a degree of polymerization of from about 1 to
about 70,000. R.sub.1 is preferably independently hydrogen or an
alkyl having from 1 to 12 carbon atoms, R.sub.2 is preferably
independently ethylene or C.sub.6 arylene, R.sub.3 is preferably
independently hydrogen or an alkyl having from 1 to 4 carbon atoms
and x is preferably selected to give a linear polyimine having a
molecular weight of from 600 to 3,000,000 Daltons. Examples of
polymeric polyamines include polyaniline wherein R.sub.2 is C.sub.6
arylene and R.sub.3 is hydrogen and polyethylene imine) wherein
R.sub.2 is ethylene and R.sub.3 is hydrogen
[0047] In some embodiments of the present invention, the polymeric
polyamine is a polymeric polyimine compound (hereafter referred to
as "polyimines") selected from linear polyimines and branched
polyimines having a molecular weight of from about 800 to about
3,000,000 Daltons.
[0048] Linear polyimines typically have structure (2):
##STR00002##
wherein each R.sub.10 is independently hydrogen, a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl group having from 1 to 20 carbon atoms or
an aryl group; each R.sub.20 is independently an alkylene having
from 1 to 4 carbon atoms; each R.sub.30 is independently hydrogen
or a hydrocarbyl having from 1 to 4 carbon atoms wherein R.sub.30
substitution occurs at any of the R.sub.20 carbon atoms; and x is a
degree of polymerization of from about 1 to about 70,000. R.sub.10
is preferably independently hydrogen or an alkyl having from 1 to
12 carbon atoms, R.sub.20 is preferably ethylene, R.sub.30 is
preferably independently hydrogen or an alkyl having from 1 to 4
carbon atoms and x is preferably selected to give a linear
polyimine having a molecular weight of from 800 to 3,000,000
Daltons.
[0049] Branched polyimines typically have structure (3):
##STR00003##
wherein each R.sub.10 is independently hydrogen, a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl group having from 1 to 20 carbon atoms or
an aryl group; each R.sub.20 is independently an alkylene having
from 1 to 4 carbon atoms; and y is a degree of polymerization of
from about 1 to about 70,000. Each R.sub.30 is independently
hydrogen or an amine of formula (4):
--R.sub.40--NR.sub.41R.sub.42 (4)
wherein at least one R.sub.30 is of formula (4) and wherein
R.sub.40 is an alkylene having from 1 to 4 carbon atoms, and
R.sub.41 and R.sub.42 are independently selected from hydrogen, a
hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl having from 1 to 20 carbon
atoms, and an amine of formula (5):
##STR00004##
wherein R.sub.50 is an alkylene having from 1 to 4 carbon atoms,
R.sub.51 and R.sub.52 are independently selected from hydrogen and
a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl having from 1 to 20 carbon
atoms, and each z is independently from 0 to 5. R.sub.50 is
preferably ethylene, R.sub.51 and R.sub.52 are preferably
independently hydrogen or a hydrocarbyl having from 1 to 12 carbon
atoms. The sum of y and z are preferably selected to give a
branched polyimine having a molecular weight of from 800 to
3,000,000 Daltons.
[0050] Also included within the scope of polymeric polyimines are
polynitriles of structure (6):
##STR00005##
wherein each R.sub.60 is independently hydrogen, a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl group having from 1 to 20 carbon atoms or
an aryl group; each R.sub.61 is independently hydrogen or a
hydrocarbyl having from 1 to 6 carbon atoms; and x is a degree of
polymerization of from about 1 to about 70,000 selected to yield a
molecular weight of from 600 to 3,000,000 Daltons.
[0051] Representative polyimines and polymeric polyimines include,
but are not limited to, compounds of structures (7) and (8):
##STR00006##
wherein x is the degree of polymerization. Formula (8) is generally
representative of Lupasol.RTM. polyimine polymers available from
BASF.
[0052] Representative commercially available polyimines are shown
in Table B below where Epomin.RTM. is commercially available from
Aceto Corp.; "MW" refers to the average molecular weight in
Daltons; "Visc." refers to viscosity in mPa at 20.degree. C.; "Pour
Pt." refers to the pour point in .degree. C.; "Density" refers to
the density in grams per mL measured at 20.degree. C.; and "Ratio"
refers to the ratio of primary:secondary:tertiary amine
nitrogens:
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE B Pour Polyimine MW Visc. Pt. Density Ratio
LUPASOL FG 800 800 -3 1.09 1:0.82:0.53 LUPASOL 20 1,300 5,000 -16
1.03 1:0.91:0.64 wfr LUPASOL PR 2,000 75,000 -9 1.05 1:0.92:0.70
8515 LUPASOL WF 25,000 200,000 -3 1.1 1:1.2:0.76 LUPASOL FC 800 250
-24 1.08 1:0.86:0.42 LUPASOL G20 1,300 350 -24 1.08 1:0.9:0.64
LUPASOL G35 2,000 450 -18 1.08 1:0.94:0.67 LUPASOL G100 5,000 1,200
-18 1.08 1:1.05:0.76 LUPASOL G500 25,000 1,000 No Data No Data No
Data LUPASOL HF 25,000 14,000 -20 1.08 1:1.2:0.76 LUPASOL P 750,000
500,000 -3 1.09 1:1.07:0.77 LUPASOL PS 750,000 1,400 -5 No Data
1:1.07:0.77 LUPASOL SK 2,000,000 750 0 1.06 No Data LUPASOL SNA
1,000,000 500 0 1.06 No Data LUPASOL HEO1 13,000 200 No Data No
Data No Data LUPASOLPN50 1,000,000 6,000 No Data NoData No Data
LUPASOL 5,000 300 No Data NoData No Data PO100 EPOMIN 006 600 No
Data No Data NoData No Data EPOMIN 012 1,200 No Data No Data NoData
No Data EPOMIN 018 1,800 No Data No Data NoData No Data EPOMIN 1000
100,000 No Data No Data NoData No Data Aldrich 25,000 No Data No
Data 1.03 No Data 408727
[0053] In some embodiments, polyalkylenimines can be functionalized
by reaction with one or more alkylene oxides to form the
hydroxyalkylated derivative. As described in U.S. Pat. No.
7,431,845 (to Manek et al.), a hydroxyalkylated derivative may be
prepared by heating an aqueous solution of polyalkylenimine with
the desired amount of alkylene oxide at a temperature of about
80.degree. C. to about 135.degree. C., optionally in the presence
of an alkali metal catalyst such as sodium methoxide, potassium
tert-butoxide, potassium or sodium hydroxide. In some embodiments,
the polyalkylenimine is functionalized by reaction with ethylene
oxide and/or optionally propylene oxide. In other embodiments, the
polyalkylenimine is functionalized by reaction with about 1 to
about 100 molar equivalents of ethylene oxide per ethylene unit in
the polyalkylenimine. In still other embodiments, the
polyalkylenimine is functionalized by reaction with about 1 to
about 100 molar equivalents of ethylene oxide and about 1 to about
100 molar equivalents of propylene oxide per ethylene unit in the
polyalkylenimine. In yet other embodiments, the polyalkylenimine is
reacted first with the propylene oxide and subsequently with the
ethylene oxide. For example, in some embodiments, the
polyalkylenimine is functionalized by reaction with about 5 to
about 25 molar equivalents of ethylene oxide and about 85 to about
98 molar equivalents of propylene oxide per ethylene unit in the
polyalkylenimine.
[0054] Examples of commercial oxyalkylated polyalkylenimines
include Lupasol SC-61B and Lupasol SK (available from BASF), and
Kernelex 3550X, 3423X, 3546X, D600 and 3582X (available from
Uniquema, New Castle, Del., USA).
[0055] Lupasol SC-61B is believed to be a hydroxylated
(ethoxylated) polyethylenimine of formula (9):
##STR00007##
wherein R.sub.90 is hydrogen or a continuation of the polymer chain
and x is a value required to yield a molecular weight of about
110,000 Daltons.
[0056] In some embodiments of the present invention the polybasic
polymers are dendritic polymers (for example, starburst polymers),
characterized as repeatedly branched molecules having attached
functional groups distributed on the periphery of the branches
thereby providing a highly functionalized surface. Preferred
dendritic polymers are polypropyleneimine dendrimers,
polyethyleneimine dendrimers, and polyamidoamine dendrimers. A
molecular weight of from about 1000 to about 1,000,000 is
preferred, representing from 1 to about 10 generation growth
steps.
[0057] In some embodiments of the present invention, the polybasic
polymer is a nitrogen-substituted vinyl polymer.
[0058] Vinyl polymers include polyvinyl acrylamides of formula
(10):
##STR00008##
wherein each R.sub.100 is independently hydrogen, a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl group having from 1 to 20 carbon atoms or
an aryl group; R.sub.101 is a nitrogen-containing moiety; and x is
a degree of polymerization of from about 1 to about 70,000. In some
embodiments, R.sub.101 is acrylamide (--C(O)NH.sub.2), allylamine
(--CH.sub.2NH.sub.2), pyridine, pyrazine, pyrazole or pyrazoline.
The polyacrylamides can comprise cationic monomers such as, for
example, dimethyl aminoethyl acrylate methyl chloride, dimethyl
aminoethyl methacrylate methyl chloride, acrylamidopropyl trimethyl
ammonium chloride, methacryl amodopropyl trimethyl ammonium
chloride, and diallyl dimethyl ammonium chloride.
[0059] Examples of vinyl polymers include poly(vinyl pyridine),
depicted in formula (12) comprising the monomer poly(2-vinyl
pyridine):
##STR00009##
and polyvinyl acrylamide comprising the monomer depicted in formula
(13):
##STR00010##
[0060] In some other embodiments of the present invention, the
polybasic polymer is a polyamide.
[0061] Polyamide polymers include polymeric acrylamides comprising
the repeating unit of general formula (14):
##STR00011##
wherein each R.sub.140 is independently hydrogen or a hydrocarbyl
having from 1 to 6 carbon atoms, each R.sub.141 is independently
alkylene having from 1 to 8 carbon atoms or arylene, each r is
independently 0 or 1, and x is a degree of polymerization of from
about 1 to about 70,000.
[0062] Examples of polyamide polymers include polyisocyanates
comprising the repeating unit of formula (15):
##STR00012##
and polylactams comprising the repeating unit of formula (16):
##STR00013##
wherein m is from 1 to 6.
[0063] In some other embodiments of the present invention, the
polybasic polymer material is a polyoxazoline comprising the
repeating unit of formula (17):
##STR00014##
wherein R.sub.170 is a substituted or unsubstituted alkylene group
containing 1 to about 4 carbon atoms; R.sub.171 is a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl that does not significantly decrease the
water-solubility of the polymer; and n is an integer which provides
the polymer with a molecular weight of from 600 to 3,000,000
Daltons. R.sub.170 may be substituted with hydroxy, amide or
polyether. R.sub.170 is preferably methylene, ethylene, propylene,
isopropylene or butylene. R.sub.170 is most preferably ethylene.
R.sub.171 is preferably alkyl or aryl; R.sub.171 may be substituted
with hydroxy, amide or polyether. Preferably R.sub.171 is methyl,
ethyl, propyl, isopropyl, butyl, or isobutyl. Most preferably
R.sub.170 is ethylene and R.sub.171 is ethyl.
[0064] In some other embodiments of the present invention, the
polybasic polymer is a polymeric polypeptide (poly .alpha.-amino
acid) comprising the repeating unit of formula (18):
##STR00015##
wherein each R.sub.180 is independently selected from a side chain
specific to amino acids, indicated in parentheses below. For
instance, R.sub.180 may be hydrogen (glycine), --CH.sub.3
(alanine), --CH(CH.sub.3).sub.2 (valine),
--CH.sub.2CH(CH.sub.3).sub.2 (leucine),
--CH(CH.sub.3)(CH.sub.2CH.sub.3) (isoleucine),
--(CH.sub.2).sub.4NH.sub.2 (lysine), --CH.sub.2OH (serine),
--CH(OH)(CH.sub.3) (threonine), etc., and x is selected to provide
a molecular weight between 600 and 3,000,000 Daltons. In some
embodiments, polar R.sub.180 groups are preferred to provide
greater water solubility. Polar amino acids include arginine,
aspargine, aspartic acid, cysteine (slightly polar), glutamic acid,
glutamine, histidine, lysine, serine, threonine, tryptophan
(slightly polar) and tyrosine.
[0065] Any of the polymers described above for formulae (7) through
(18) can be terminated with a head group independently selected
from hydrogen, a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl group
having from 1 to 20 carbon atoms or an aryl group.
[0066] In some embodiments of the present invention, surfactants
can optionally be used in auxin herbicide formulations to
effectively enhance herbicidal effectiveness. In some other
embodiments, solubilizers can be optionally be used to enhance
polybasic polymer aqueous solubility. In some embodiments, a
compound can function as both an efficacy enhancer and a
solubilizer. Typically, at low concentrations relative to the auxin
herbicide component (i.e., a high weight ratio of auxin a.e. to
surfactant, for example in excess of about 20:1), such compounds
may enhance polybasic polymer solubility but not effectively
provide herbicidal efficacy enhancement. Conversely, at higher
concentrations relative to the auxin herbicide component, such
compound may both enhance herbicidal efficacy and polyamine polymer
solubility.
[0067] Surfactants are optionally included in auxin (dicamba)
formulations to facilitate dicamba retention, uptake and
translocation into the plant foliage and thereby enhance herbicidal
effectiveness. It has been discovered that the polymeric polyamines
of the present invention are at least as effective as surfactants
for foliar retention, uptake and translocation of dicamba.
Efficacious dicamba formulations containing polymeric polyamines or
other polybasic polymers, with or without a surfactant, are
therefore within the scope of the present invention.
[0068] In some embodiments of the present invention, one or more
herbicidal efficacy enhancing surfactants known in the art can
optionally be formulated with dicamba. It has been discovered that
MEA dicamba formulations are compatible with most water soluble
surfactants. A weight ratio of dicamba a.e. to surfactant of from
1:1 to 20:1. from 2:1 to 10:1 or from 3:1 to 8:1 is preferred.
[0069] Alkoxylated tertiary etheramine surfactants for use in the
herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the general
structure (19):
##STR00016##
wherein R.sub.191 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms; each R.sub.192 is a
hydrocarbylene independently having 2, 3, or 4 carbon atoms; m is
an average number from about 1 to about 10; R.sub.193 and R.sub.194
are each independently hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4 carbon
atoms; and the sum of x and y is an average value ranging from
about 2 to about 60.
[0070] R.sub.191 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 18
carbon atoms, from about 10 to about 16 carbon atoms, or from about
12 to about 18 carbons atoms, or from about 10 to about 14 carbon
atoms. Sources of the R.sub.191 group include, for example, coco or
tallow, or R.sub.191 may be derived from synthetic hydrocarbyls,
such as decyl, dodecyl, tridecyl, tetradecyl, hexadecyl, or
octadecyl groups. Each R.sub.192 may independently be propylene,
isopropylene, or ethylene, and m is preferably from about 1 to 5,
such as 2 to 3. R.sub.193 and R.sub.194 may be ethylene, propylene,
isopropylene, and are preferably ethylene. The sum of x and y is
preferably an average value ranging from about 2 to about 22, such
as from about 2 to 10, or about 2 to 5. In some embodiments, the
sum of x and y is preferably between about 10 and about 20, for
example, about 15.
[0071] Specific alkoxylated tertiary etheramine surfactants for use
in the herbicidal formulation of the present invention include, for
example, any of the TOMAH E-Series surfactants, such as TOMAH
E-14-2 (bis-(2-hydroxyethyl) isodecyloxypropylamine), TOMAH E-14-5
(poly (5)oxyethylene isodecyloxypropylamine), TOMAH E-17-2, TOMAH
E-17-5 (poly (5) oxyethylene isotridecyloxypropyl amine), TOMAH
E-19-2, TOMAH E-18-2, TOMAH E-18-5 (poly (5)oxyethylene
octadecylamine), TOMAH E-18-15, TOMAH E-19-2 (bis-(2-hydroxyethyl)
linear alkyloxypropylamine), TOMAH E-S-2, TOMAH E-S-15, TOMAH E-T-2
(bis-(2-hydroxyethyl) tallow amine), TOMAH E-T-5 (poly (5)
oxyethylene tallow amine), and TOMAH E-T-15 (poly (15) oxyethylene
tallow amine). Another example is Surfonic AGM 550 available from
Huntsman Petrochemical Corporation wherein, for formula (9),
R.sub.191 is C.sub.12-14, R.sub.192 is isopropyl, m is 2, R.sub.193
and R.sub.194 are each ethylene, and x+y is 5.
[0072] Alkoxylated quaternary etheramine surfactants for use in the
herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the general
structure (20):
##STR00017##
wherein R.sub.201 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms; Each R.sub.202 is
independently a hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4 carbon atoms; m is
an average number from about 1 to about 10; R.sub.203 and R.sub.204
are each independently hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4 carbon
atoms; and the sum of x and y is an average value ranging from
about 2 to about 60. R.sub.205 is preferably a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl having from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms, more
preferably methyl. A is a charge balancing counter-anion, such as
sulfate, chloride, bromide, nitrate, among others.
[0073] R.sub.201 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 18
carbon atoms, from about 10 to about 16 carbon atoms, or from about
12 to about 18 carbons atoms, or from about 12 to about 14 carbon
atoms. Sources of the R.sub.201 group include, for example, coco or
tallow, or R.sub.201 may be derived from synthetic hydrocarbyls,
such as decyl, dodecyl, tridecyl, tetradecyl, hexadecyl, or
octadecyl groups. Each R.sub.202 may independently be propylene,
isopropylene, or ethylene, and m is preferably from about 1 to 5,
such as 2 to 3. R.sub.203 and R.sub.204 may be ethylene, propylene,
isopropylene, and are preferably ethylene. The sum of x and y is
preferably an average value ranging from about 2 to about 22, such
as from about 2 to 10, or about 2 to 5. In some embodiments, the
sum of x and y is preferably between about 10 and about 20, for
example, about 15.
[0074] Specific alkoxylated quaternary etheramine surfactants for
use in the herbicidal formulation of the present invention include,
for example, TOMAH Q-14-2, TOMAH Q-17-2, TOMAH Q-17-5, TOMAH
Q-18-2, TOMAH Q-S, TOMAH Q-S-80, TOMAH Q-D-I, TOMAH Q-DT-HG, TOMAH
Q-C-15, and TOMAH Q-ST-50.
[0075] Alkoxylated etheramine oxide surfactants for use in the
herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the general
structure (21):
##STR00018##
wherein R.sub.211 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms; Each R.sub.212 is
independently a hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4 carbon atoms; m is
an average number from about 1 to about 10; R.sub.213 and R.sub.214
are each independently hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4 carbon
atoms; and the sum of x and y is an average value ranging from
about 2 to about 60.
[0076] R.sub.211 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 18
carbon atoms, from about 10 to about 16 carbon atoms, or from about
12 to about 18 carbons atoms, or from about 12 to about 14 carbon
atoms. Sources of the R.sub.211 group include, for example, coco or
tallow, or R.sub.211 may be derived from synthetic hydrocarbyls,
such as decyl, dodecyl, tridecyl, tetradecyl, hexadecyl, or
octadecyl groups. R.sub.212 may be propylene, isopropylene, or
ethylene, and m is preferably from about 1 to 5, such as 2 to 3.
Each R.sub.213 and R.sub.214 is independently ethylene, propylene,
isopropylene, and are preferably ethylene. The sum of x and y is
preferably an average value ranging from about 2 to about 22, such
as from about 2 to 10, or about 2 to 5. In some embodiments, the
sum of x and y is preferably between about 10 and about 20, for
example, about 15.
[0077] Specific alkoxylated etheramine oxide surfactants for use in
the herbicidal formulation of the present invention include, for
example, any of the TOMAH AO-series of surfactants, such as TOMAH
AO-14-2, TOMAH AO-728, TOMAH AO-17-7, TOMAH AO-405, and TOMAH
AO-455.
[0078] Alkoxylated tertiary amine oxide surfactants for use in the
herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the general
structure (22):
##STR00019##
wherein R.sub.221 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms, R.sub.222 and
R.sub.223 are each independently hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4
carbon atoms, and the sum of x and y is an average value ranging
from about 2 to about 50.
[0079] R.sub.221 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 18
carbon atoms, and still more preferably from about 12 to about 18
carbons atoms, for example coco or tallow. R.sub.221 is most
preferably tallow. R.sub.222 and R.sub.223 are preferably ethylene.
The sum of x and y is preferably an average value ranging from
about 2 to about 22, more preferably between about 10 and about 20,
for example, about 15.
[0080] Specific alkoxylated tertiary amine oxide surfactants for
use in the herbicidal formulations of the present invention
include, for example, any of the AROMOX series of surfactants,
including AROMOX C/12, AROMOX C/12W, AROMOX DMC, AROMOX DM16,
AROMOX DMHT, and AROMOX T/12 DEG.
[0081] Alkoxylated tertiary amine surfactants for use in the
herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the general
structure (23):
##STR00020##
wherein R.sub.231 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms, R.sub.232 and
R.sub.233 are each independently hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4
carbon atoms, and the sum of x and y is an average value ranging
from about 2 to about 50.
[0082] R.sub.231 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 18
carbon atoms, and still more preferably from about 12 to about 18
carbons atoms, for example coco or tallow. R.sub.1 is most
preferably tallow. R.sub.232 and R.sub.233 are preferably ethylene.
The sum of x and y is preferably an average value ranging from
about 2 to about 22, more preferably between about 10 and about 20,
for example, about 15.
[0083] Specific alkoxylated tertiary amine surfactants for use in
the herbicidal formulations of the present invention include, for
example, Ethomeen T/12, Ethomeen T/20, Ethomeen T/25, Ethomeen
T/30, Ethomeen T/60, Ethomeen C/12, Ethomeen C/15, and Ethomeen
C/25, each of which are available from Akzo Nobel.
[0084] Alkoxylated quaternary amine surfactants for use in the
herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the general
structure (24):
##STR00021##
wherein R.sub.241, R.sub.242, R.sub.243, x and y are as described
above for the alkoxylated tertiary amine surfactants of structure
(II), i.e., R.sub.241 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms, R.sub.242 and
R.sub.243 are each independently hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4
carbon atoms, and the sum of x and y is an average value ranging
from about 2 to about 50. R.sub.244 is preferably a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl having from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms, more
preferably methyl. X is a charge balancing counter-anion, such as
sulfate, chloride, bromide, nitrate, among others.
[0085] R.sub.241 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 18
carbon atoms, and still more preferably from about 12 to about 18
carbons atoms, for example coco or tallow. R.sub.241 is most
preferably tallow. R.sub.242 and R.sub.243 are preferably ethylene.
The sum of x and y is preferably an average value ranging from
about 2 to about 22, more preferably between about 10 and about 20,
for example, about 15. Specific alkoxylated quaternary amine
surfactants for use in the herbicidal formulation of the present
invention include, for example, Ethoquad T/12, Ethoquad T/20,
Ethoquad T/25, Ethoquad C/12, Ethoquad C/15, and Ethoquad C/25,
each of which are available from Akzo Nobel.
[0086] An example of an alkoxylated polyamine surfactant for use in
the herbicidal formulations of the present invention is a
surfactant having the general structure (25):
##STR00022##
wherein R.sub.251 is an alkyl or alkenyl radical containing 6 to 25
carbon atoms and from 0 to 3 carbon-carbon double bonds; R.sub.252
is --OCH.sub.2CH.sub.2CH.sub.2--, --C(.dbd.O)OCH.sub.2CH.sub.2--,
--C(.dbd.O)NHCH.sub.2CH.sub.2CH.sub.2--, or --CH.sub.2--; each
occurrence of R.sub.254 is independently --H, --OC(.dbd.O)R.sub.1,
--SO.sub.3.sup.-A.sup.+ or --CH.sub.2C(.dbd.O)O.sup.-A.sup.+
wherein A.sup.+ is an alkali metal cation, ammonium or H.sup.-;
each occurrence of a is from 3 to 8; each R.sub.253 is
independently ethyl, isopropyl or n-propyl; d, e, f and g are each
independently from 1 to 20, b is from 0 to 10, c is 0 or 1, the sum
of (c+d+e+f) is from (3+b) to 20, and the molecular weight is no
more than about 800. The surfactants of formula (25) can optionally
be in the form of a cation where one or more nitrogen atoms is
additionally substituted with hydrogen, methyl, ethyl, hydroxyethyl
or benzyl and one or more anions, equal in number to the number of
said additionally substituted nitrogen atoms and being selected
from chloride, methylsulfate and ethylsulfate. The surfactants of
formula (25) can further optionally be in the form of amine
oxides.
[0087] Examples of specific alkoxylated polyamine surfactants for
use in the herbicidal formulation of the present invention are
described in described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,028,046 (to Arif).
Alkoxylated polyamine surfactants include, for example, ethoxylates
of Adogen 560 (N-coco propylene diamine) containing an average of
from 2EO to 20EO, for example, 4.8, 10 or 13.4EO; ethoxylates of
Adogen 570 (N-tallow propylene diamine) containing an average of
form 2EO to 20EO, for example, 13EO; and ethoxylates of Adogen 670
(N-tallow propylene triamine) containing an average of from 3EO to
20EO, for example, 14.9EO all of which are available from Witco
Corp.
[0088] Other polyamine surfactants for use in the herbicidal
formulations of the present invention have the general structure
(26):
##STR00023##
wherein R.sub.261 is C.sub.8-20, R.sub.262 is C.sub.14 and n is 2
or 3. Examples of polyamines for use in the formulations and
methods of the present invention include Triamine C(R.sub.261 is
coco (C.sub.10-14)), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 2 and amine number
(total mg KOH/g) is 500-525), Triamine OV (R.sub.261 is oleyl
(vegetable oil), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 2 and amine number
(total mg KOH/g) is 400-420), Triamine T (R.sub.261 is tallow
(C.sub.16-18), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 2 and amine number (total
mg KOH/g) is 415-440), Triamine YT (R.sub.261 is tallow
(C.sub.16-18), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 2 and amine number (total
mg KOH/g) is 390-415), Triameen Y12D (R.sub.261 is dodecyl
(C.sub.12), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 2 and amine number (total mg
HCl/g is 112-122), Triameen Y12D-30 (R.sub.261 is dodecyl
(C.sub.12), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 2 and amine number (total mg
HCl/g is 335-365), Tetrameen OV (R.sub.261 is oleyl (vegetable
oil), R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 3 and amine number (total mg
KOH/g) is 470-500), Tetrameen T (R.sub.261 is tallow (C.sub.16-18),
R.sub.262 is C.sub.3, n is 3 and amine number (total mg KOH/g) is
470-495), wherein each is available from Akzo Nobel.
[0089] Sulfate surfactants for use in the herbicidal formulations
of the present invention have the general structure (27a-c):
##STR00024##
wherein compounds of formula (27a) are alkyl sulfates, compounds of
formula (27b) are alkyl ether sulfates and compounds of formula
(27c) are alkyl aryl ether sulfates. R.sub.271 is a hydrocarbyl or
substituted hydrocarbyl having from about 4 to about 22 carbon
atoms, each R.sub.272 is independently ethyl, isopropyl or n-propyl
and n is from 1 to about 20. M is selected from an alkali metal
cation, ammonium, an ammonium compound or H.sup.+. Examples of
alkyl sulfates include sodium C.sub.8-10 sulfate, sodium
C.sub.10-16 sulfate, sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium C.sub.14-16
sulfate, diethanolamine lauryl sulfate, triethanolamine lauryl
sulfate and ammonium lauryl sulfate. Examples of alkyl ether
sulfates include sodium C.sub.12-15 pareth sulfate (1 EO), ammonium
C.sub.6-10 alcohol ether sulfate (3 EO), sodium C.sub.6-10 alcohol
ether sulfate (3 EO), isopropylammonium C.sub.6-10 alcohol ether
sulfate (3 EO), ammonium C.sub.10-12 alcohol ether sulfate (3 EO),
sodium lauryl ether sulfate (3 EO). Examples of alkyl aryl ether
sulfates include sodium nonylphenol ethoxylate sulfate (4 EO),
sodium nonylphenol ethoxylate sulfate (10 EO), Witcolate.TM.
1247H(C.sub.6-10, 3EO, ammonium sulfate), WITCOLATE 7093
(C.sub.6-10, 3EO, sodium sulfate), WITCOLATE 7259 (C.sub.8-10
sodium sulfate), WITCOLATE 1276 (C.sub.10-12, 5EO, ammonium
sulfate), WITCOLATE LES-60A (C.sub.12-14, 3EO, ammonium sulfate),
WITCOLATE LES-60C(C.sub.12-14, 3EO, sodium sulfate), WITCOLATE 1050
(C.sub.12-15, 10EO, sodium sulfate), WITCOLATE WAQ (C.sub.12-16
sodium sulfate), WITCOLATE D-51-51 (nonylphenol 4EO, sodium
sulfate) and WITCOLATE D-51-53 (nonylphenol 10EO, sodium
sulfate).
[0090] Sulfonate surfactants for use in the herbicidal formulations
of the present invention correspond to sulfate structures (27a)
through (27c) above except the R-substituted moiety is attached
directly to the sulfur atom, for instance R.sub.271SO.sub.3.sup.-.
Examples of sulfonate surfactants include, for example,
Witconate.TM. 93S (isopropylamine of dodecylbenzene sulfonate),
WITCONATE NAS-8 (octyl sulfonic acid, sodium salt), WITCONATE AOS
(tetradecyl/hexadecyl sulfonic acid, sodium salt), WITCONATE 60T
(linear dodecylbenzene sulfonic acid, triethanolamine salt) and
WITCONATE 605a (branched dodecylbenzene sulfonic acid, N-butylamine
salt).
[0091] Phosphate esters of alkoxylated alcohol surfactants for use
in the herbicidal formulations of the present invention have the
general monoester structure (28a) and the general diester structure
(28b):
##STR00025##
wherein R.sub.281 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from about 4 to about 22 carbon atoms; R.sub.282 is a
hydrocarbylene having 2, 3, or 4 carbon atoms; m is an average
number from about 1 to about 60; and R.sub.283 and R.sub.284 are
each independently hydrogen or a linear or branched chain alkyl
having from 1 to about 6 carbon atoms.
[0092] R.sub.281 is preferably an alkyl having from about 4 to
about 22 carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 20
carbon atoms, or an alkylphenyl having from about 4 to about 22
carbon atoms, more preferably from about 8 to about 20 carbon
atoms. Sources of the R.sub.281 group include, for example, coco or
tallow, or R.sub.281 may be derived from synthetic hydrocarbyls,
such as decyl, dodecyl, tridecyl, tetradecyl, hexadecyl, or
octadecyl groups. R.sub.282 may be propylene, isopropylene, or
ethylene, and is preferably ethylene. m is preferably from about 9
to about 15. R.sub.283 and R.sub.284 are preferably hydrogen.
[0093] Specific phosphate esters of alkoxylated alcohol surfactants
for use in the herbicidal formulation of the present invention
include, for example, EMPHOS CS-121, EMPHOS PS-400, and WITCONATE
D-51-29, available from Witco Corp. Other examples are indicated in
table C below for the Phospholan produces (available from Akzo
Nobel) wherein the surfactants may comprise a mixture of the
monoester and diester forms and wherein R.sub.284 is not present in
the diester as indicated and "prop." refers to proprietary and "NR"
refers to not reported. In some embodiments, the phosphate esters
of the general monoester structure (28a) and the general diester
structure (28b) are not alkoxylated, i.e., m is 0. Examples of
commercial products include Phospholan PS-900 and Phospholan
3EA.
TABLE-US-00003 TABLE C mono and Tradename R.sub.281 R.sub.282
R.sub.283/R.sub.284 m di forms Phospholan nonyl phenol C.sub.2 H 6
mono & di CS-131 Phospholan nonyl phenol C.sub.2 H 6 high mono
CS-1361 & di Phospholan nonyl phenol C.sub.2 H 10 mono & di
CS-141 Phospholan nonyl phenol C.sub.2 H 8 mono & di CS-147
Phospholan prop. prop. prop. prop. mono KPE4 Phospholan tridecyl
C.sub.2 H NR NR PS-131 Phospholan decyl/tetradecyl C.sub.2 H 30
mono & di PS-220 Phospholan dodecyl/ C.sub.2 H 3 mono & di
PS-222 pentadecyl Phospholan decyl/dodecyl C.sub.2 H 7 mono &
di PS-236 Phospholan tridecyl alcohol -- H -- mono & di PS-900
Phospholan phenyl C.sub.2 H 7 mono & di TS-230 Phospholan
triethanolamine -- H -- mono 3EA amine
[0094] Alkyl polysaccharide surfactants for use in the herbicidal
formulations of the present invention have the general structure
(29):
R.sub.291--O-(sug).sub.u (29)
wherein R.sub.291 is a straight or branched chain substituted or
unsubstituted hydrocarbyl selected from alkyl, alkenyl,
alkylphenyl, alkenylphenyl having from about 4 to about 22 carbon
atoms, wherein sug and u are as defined above. In various
particular embodiments the polysaccharide surfactant may be an
alkyl polyglucoside of formula (29) wherein: R.sub.291 is a
branched or straight chain alkyl group preferably having from 4 to
22 carbon atoms, more preferably from 8 to 18 carbon atoms, or a
mixture of alkyl groups having an average value within the given
range; sug is a glucose residue; and u is between 1 and about 5,
and more preferably between 1 and about 3.
[0095] Examples of surfactants of formula (29) are known in the
art. Representative surfactants are presented in Table D below
wherein for each surfactant sug is a glucose residue.
TABLE-US-00004 TABLE D Trade name R.sub.291 U APG 225 C.sub.8-12
alkyl 1.7 APG 325 C.sub.9-11 alkyl 1.5 APG 425 C.sub.8-16 alkyl 1.6
APG 625 C.sub.12-16 alkyl 1.6 GLUCOPON 600 C.sub.12-16 alkyl 1.4
PLANTAREN 600 C.sub.12-14 alkyl 1.3 PLANTAREN 1200 C.sub.12-16
alkyl 1.4 PLANTAREN 1300 C.sub.12-16 alkyl 1.6 PLANTAREN 2000
C.sub.8-16 alkyl 1.4 Agrimul PG 2076 C.sub.8-10 alkyl 1.5
(synonymous with AGNIQUE PG 8105) Agrimul PG 2067 C.sub.8-10 alkyl
1.7 (synonymous with AGNIQUE PG 8107) Agrimul PG 2072 C.sub.8-16
alkyl 1.6 (synonymous with AGNIQUE PG 816) Agrimul PG 2069
C.sub.9-11 alkyl 1.6 (synonymous with AGNIQUE PG 9116) Agrimul PG
2062 C.sub.12-16 alkyl 1.4 (synonymous with AGNIQUE PG 264) Agrimul
PG 2065 C.sub.12-16 alkyl 1.6 (synonymous with AGNIQUE PG 266)
BEROL AG6202 2-ethyl-1-hexyl
[0096] Alkoxylated alcohol surfactants for use in the herbicidal
formulations of the present invention have the general structure
(30):
R.sub.301O--(R.sub.302O).sub.xR.sub.303 (30)
wherein R.sub.301 is hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl having
from 1 to about 30 carbon atoms, R.sub.302 in each of the
(R.sub.302O).sub.x groups is independently C.sub.2-C.sub.4
alkylene, R.sub.303 is hydrogen, or a linear or branched alkyl
group having from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms, and x is an average
number from 1 to about 60. In this context, preferred R.sub.301
hydrocarbyl groups are linear or branched alkyl, linear or branched
alkenyl, linear or branched alkynyl, aryl, or aralkyl groups.
Preferably, R.sub.301 is a linear or branched alkyl or linear or
branched alkenyl group having from about 8 to about 30 carbon
atoms, R.sub.302 in each of the (R.sub.302O).sub.x groups is
independently C.sub.2-C.sub.4 alkylene, R.sub.303 is hydrogen,
methyl or ethyl, and x is an average number from about 5 to about
50. More preferably, R.sub.301 is a linear or branched alkyl group
having from about 8 to about 25 carbon atoms, R.sub.302 in each of
the (R.sub.302O).sub.x groups is independently ethylene or
propylene, R.sub.303 is hydrogen or methyl, and x is an average
number from about 8 to about 40. Even more preferably, R.sub.301 is
a linear or branched alkyl group having from about 12 to about 22
carbon atoms, R.sub.302 in each of the (R.sub.302O).sub.x groups is
independently ethylene or propylene, R.sub.303 is hydrogen or
methyl, and x is an average number from about 8 to about 30.
Preferred commercially available alkoxylated alcohols include:
Emulgin.TM. L, Procol.TM. LA-15 (from Protameen); Brij T.TM. 35,
Brij 56, Brij T.TM. 76, Brij T.TM. 78, Brij T.TM. 97, Brij T.TM. 98
and Tergitol.TM. XD (from Sigma Chemical Co.); Neodol.TM. 25-12 and
Neodol.TM. 45-13 (from Shell); Hetoxol.TM. CA-10, Hetoxol.TM.
CA-20, Hetoxol.TM. CS-9, Hetoxol.TM. CS-15, Hetoxol.TM. CS-20,
Hetoxol.TM. CS-25, Hetoxol.TM. CS-30, Plurafac A38 and Plurafac.TM.
LF700 (from BASF); ST-8303 (from Cognis); Arosurf.TM. 66 E10 and
Arosurf.TM. 66 E20 (from Witco/Crompton); ethoxylated (9.4 EO)
tallow, propoxylated (4.4 EO) tallow and alkoxylated (5-16 EO and
2-5 PO) tallow (from Witco/Crompton). Also preferred are;
SURFONIC.TM. NP95 of Huntsman (a polyoxyethylene (9.5)
nonylphenol); TERGITOL series from Dow and commercially available
from Sigma-Aldrich Co. (Saint Louis, Mo.), including
TERGITOL-15-S-5, TERGITOL-15-S-9, TERGITOL-15-S-12 and
TERGITOL-15-S-15 (made from secondary, linear C.sub.11 to C.sub.15
alcohols with an average of 5 moles, 9 moles, 12.3 moles and 15.5
moles of ethoxylation, respectively); the SURFONIC LF-X series from
Huntsman Chemical Co. (Salt Lake City, Utah), including L12-7 and
L12-8 (made from linear C.sub.10 to C.sub.12 alcohols with an
average of 7 moles and 8 moles, respectively, of ethoxylation),
L24-7, L24-9 and L24-12 (made from linear C.sub.12 to C.sub.14
alcohols with an average of 7 moles, 9 moles and 12 moles of
ethoxylation, respectively), L68-20 (made from primary, linear
C.sub.16-18 alcohols with an average of 20 moles of ethoxylation)
and L26-6.5 (made from linear C.sub.12 to C.sub.16 alcohols with an
average of 6.5 moles of ethoxylation); and Ethylan 68-30
(C.sub.16-18 with an average of 20 moles of ethoxylation) available
from Akzo Nobel.
[0097] In some embodiments of the present invention, the surfactant
is selected from alkoxylated tertiary etheramines, alkoxylated
quaternary etheramines, alkoxylated etheramine oxides, alkoxylated
tertiary amines, alkoxylated quaternary amines, alkoxylated
polyamines, sulfates, sulfonates, phosphate esters, alkyl
polysaccharides, alkoxylated alcohols, and combinations
thereof.
[0098] In some other embodiments, amidoalkylamine surfactants can
optionally be formulated in compositions of the present invention
comprising glyphosate co-herbicide. Amidoalkylamine surfactants for
use in such herbicidal formulations of the present invention have
the general structure (31):
##STR00026##
wherein R.sub.311 is a hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl
having from 1 to about 22 carbon atoms, R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are
each independently hydrocarbyl or substituted hydrocarbyl having
from 1 to about 6 carbon atoms and R.sub.314 is hydrocarbylene or
substituted hydrocarbylene having from 1 to about 6 carbon
atoms.
[0099] R.sub.311 is preferably an alkyl or substituted alkyl having
an average value of carbon atoms between about 4 to about 20 carbon
atoms, preferably an average value between about 4 and about 18
carbon atoms, more preferably an average value from about 4 to
about 12 carbon atoms, more preferably an average value from about
5 to about 12 carbon atoms, even more preferably an average value
from about 6 to about 12 carbon atoms, and still more preferably an
average value from about 6 to about 10 carbon atoms. The R.sub.311
alkyl group may be derived from a variety of sources that provide
alkyl groups having from about 4 to about 18 carbon atoms, for
example, the source may be butyric acid, valeric acid, caprylic
acid, capric acid, coco (comprising mainly lauric acid), myristic
acid (from, e.g., palm oil), soy (comprising mainly linoleic acid,
oleic acid, and palmitic acid), or tallow (comprising mainly
palmitic acid, oleic acid, and stearic acid). In some embodiments,
the amidoalkylamine surfactant component may comprise a blend of
amidoalkylamines having alkyl chains of various lengths from about
5 carbon atoms to about 12 carbon atoms. For example, depending
upon the source of the R.sub.311 alkyl group, an amidoalkylamine
surfactant component may comprise a blend of surfactants having
R.sub.311 groups that are 5 carbon atoms in length, 6 carbon atoms
in length, 7 carbon atoms in length, 8 carbon atoms in length, 9
carbon atoms in length, 10 carbon atoms in length, 11 carbon atoms
in length, and 12 carbon atoms in length, longer carbon chains, and
combinations thereof. In other embodiments, the amidoalkylamine
surfactant component may comprise a blend of surfactants having
R.sub.311 groups that are 5 carbon atoms in length, 6 carbon atoms
in length, 7 carbon atoms in length, and 8 carbon atoms in length.
In some alternative embodiments, the amidoalkylamine surfactant
component may comprise a blend of surfactants having R.sub.1 groups
that are 6 carbon atoms in length, 7 carbon atoms in length, 8
carbon atoms in length, 9 carbon atoms in length, and 10 carbon
atoms in length. In other embodiments, the amidoalkylamine
surfactant component may comprise a blend of surfactants having
R.sub.311 groups that are 8 carbon atoms in length, 9 carbon atoms
in length, 10 carbon atoms in length, 11 carbon atoms in length,
and 12 carbon atoms in length.
[0100] R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are independently preferably an
alkyl or substituted alkyl having from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms.
R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are most preferably independently an alkyl
having from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms, and most preferably methyl.
R.sub.314 is preferably an alkylene or substituted alkylene having
from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms. R.sub.314 is most preferably an
alkylene having from 1 to about 4 carbon atoms, and most preferably
n-propylene. When R.sub.314 is n-propylene, the amidoalkylamine
surfactants are termed amidopropylamine (APA) surfactants.
[0101] In one preferred amidoalkylamine surfactant, R.sub.311 is
C.sub.6-10, i.e., an alkyl group having 6 carbon atoms, 7 carbon
atoms, 8 carbon atoms, 9 carbon atoms, 10 carbon atoms, or a blend
of any of these, i.e., from about 6 carbon atoms to about 10 carbon
atoms; R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are each methyl; and R.sub.314 is
n-propylene (i.e., C.sub.6-10 amidopropyl dimethylamine).
[0102] Examples of APA surfactants include Armeen APA 2 (where
R.sub.311 is C.sub.2 and R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are each
hydrogen), Armeen APA 6 (where R.sub.311 is C.sub.6 and R.sub.312
and R.sub.313 are each methyl), Armeen APA 8, 10 (where R.sub.311
is C.sub.8-10 and R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are each methyl), Armeen
APA 12 (where R.sub.311 is C.sub.12 and R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are
each methyl), ACAR 7051 (where R.sub.311 is C.sub.5-9 and R.sub.312
and R.sub.313 are each methyl), ACAR 7059 (where R.sub.311 is
2-ethyl hexyl and R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are each methyl) and
Adsee C80W (where R.sub.311 is Coco and R.sub.312 and R.sub.313 are
each methyl).
[0103] In some embodiments of the present invention, certain
polybasic amine polymers may precipitate from solution in acidic
aqueous formulations. It has been discovered that certain
solubilizers improve amine polymer solubility in such formulations
and function to prevent or inhibit precipitation. Under one theory,
and without being bound to any particular theory, it is believed
that the solubilizers help to maintain amine site hydration thereby
inhibiting collapse of the polymer three-dimensional structure and
associated precipitation from solution. It has been discovered that
amine surfactants can function as both herbicidal efficacy
enhancers and solubilizers.
[0104] Such solubilizers include, for example, amine surfactants
such as alkoxylated tertiary etheramines, alkoxylated quaternary
etheramines, alkoxylated etheramine oxides, alkoxylated tertiary
amine oxides, alkoxylated tertiary amines, alkoxylated quaternary
amines, polyamines, alkoxylated polyamines and betaines.
Solubilizers may also include primary, secondary or tertiary
C.sub.4 to C.sub.16 alkyl or aryl amine compounds, or the
corresponding quaternary ammonium compounds. A weight ratio of
polymer to solubilizer of from about 1:1 to about 50:1 is
preferred, more preferably from about 2:1 to about 25:1.
[0105] In one embodiment, compounds which enhance polymer
solubility include amines or quaternary ammonium salt compounds
having the general structures (32) and (33)
##STR00027##
wherein R.sub.320 is linear or branched alkyl or aryl having from
about 4 to about 16 carbon atoms, R.sub.321 is hydrogen, methyl or
ethyl, R.sub.322 is hydrogen, methyl or ethyl; R.sub.323 is
hydrogen or methyl; and A.sup.- is an agriculturally acceptable
anion. Non-limiting examples include, mixed C.sub.8-16 alkyl amine
(Armeen C), dimethylcocoamine (Arquad DMCD), cocoammonium chloride
(Arquad C), of which are manufactured by Akzo Nobel, hexylamine,
dimethylhexylamine, octylamine, dimethyloctylamine,
dodecyltrimethyl amide and C.sub.4-8 trialkyl amines.
[0106] In some embodiments of the present invention,
amidoalkylamine surfactants, as described above, can optionally be
formulated as a solubilizer in compositions of the present
invention comprising glyphosate co-herbicide.
[0107] Alkoxylated tertiary etheramines, alkoxylated quaternary
etheramines, alkoxylated tertiary amines, alkoxylated quaternary
amines, and octylamines are generally preferred stabilizers and,
based on experimental evidence to date, provide greater polymer
solubility and stability on a weight ratio basis than do
amidoalkylamines.
[0108] The formulations of the invention may further comprise other
additives such as conventional drift control agents, safeners,
thickeners, flow enhancers, antifoaming agents, freeze protectants
and/or UV protectants. Suitable drift control agents are known to
those skilled in the art and include the commercial products
Gardian.RTM., Gardian Plus.RTM., Dri-Gard.RTM., Pro-One XL.TM.,
Array.TM., Compadre.TM., In-Place.RTM., Bronc.RTM. Max EDT, EDT
Concentrate.TM., Coverage.RTM. and Bronc.RTM. Plus Dry EDT.
Safeners are likewise known to those skilled in the art and include
isoxadifen, benoxacor and dichlormid.
[0109] In some embodiments of the present invention, the dicamba
formulations of the present invention are used in the preparation
of concentrate, tank mix or ready to use (RTU) formulations further
comprising one or more additional co-herbicides. Co-herbicides
include auxin herbicide salts other than dicamba salts (as
previously described). Co-herbicides also include acetyl CoA
carboxylase (ACCase) inhibitors, acetolactate synthase (ALS) or
acetohydroxy acid synthase (AHAS) inhibitors, photosystem II
inhibitors, photosystem I inhibitors, protoporphyrinogen oxidase
(PPO or Protox) inhibitors, carotenoid biosynthesis inhibitors,
enolpyruvyl shikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) synthase inhibitor,
glutamine synthetase inhibitor, dihydropteroate synthetase
inhibitor, mitosis inhibitors, synthetic auxins, auxin transport
inhibitors and nucleic acid inhibitors, salts and esters thereof,
and combinations thereof.
[0110] Included within the scope of co-herbicides are racemic
mixtures and resolved isomers. Typical cations for the co-herbicide
salts of the present invention include potassium, MEA, DMA, IPA,
trimethylsulfonium (TMS) diethylammonium (DEA), lithium, and
ammonium. Typical anions for the formation of co-herbicide salts
include chlorine, bromine, fluorine and acetate. Typical esters
include methyl, ethyl, propyl, isopropyl, butyl, isobutyl, pentyl,
isooctyl, ethylhexyl, ethoxyethyl, butoxyethyl, butoxypropyl and
octanoate.
[0111] Examples of ACCase inhibitors include clethodim, clodinafop,
fenoxaprop-P, fluazifop-P, quizalofop-P and sethoxydim. Examples of
ALS or AHAS inhibitors include flumetsulam, imazamethabenz-m,
imazamox, imazapic, imazapyr, imazaquin, imazethapyr, metsulfuron,
prosulfuron and sulfosulfuron. Examples of photosystem I inhibitors
include diquat and paraquat. Examples of photosystem II inhibitors
include atrazine, cyanazine and diuron. Examples of PPO inhibitors
include acifluorofen, butafenacil, carfentrazone-ethyl,
flufenpyr-ethyl, fluthiacet, flumiclorac, flumioxazin, fomesafen,
lactofen, oxadiazon, oxyfluorofen and sulfentrazone. Examples of
carotenoid biosynthesis inhibitors include aclonifen, amitrole,
diflufenican and sulcotrione. Glyphosate is an EPSP inhibitor,
glufosinate is a glutamine synthetase inhibitor and asulam is a
dihydropteroate synthetase inhibitor.
[0112] Examples of mitosis inhibitors include acetochlor, alachlor,
dithiopyr, S-metolachlor and thiazopyr. Naptalam is an example of a
auxin transport inhibitor. Examples of nucleic acid inhibitors
include difenzoquat, fosamine, metham and pelargonic acid.
[0113] Examples of suitable water-soluble herbicides include,
without restriction, 2,4-D, aminopyralid, clopyralid, fluoroxypyr,
MCPA, and salts thereof; 2,4-DB salts, dichlorprop salts, MCPB
salts, mecoprop salts, picloram salts, quinclorac salts, and
triclopyr salts; and water soluble acids, salts and esters of
acifluorfen, alloxydim, aminocarbazone, amidosulfuron, amitrole,
asulam, azafenidin, azimsulfuron, beflubutamid, benazolin,
bentazon, bensulfuron-methyl, bispyribac, bromacil, carbetamide,
carfentrazone-ethyl, chlorimuron-ethyl, chlorsulfuron,
cinosulfuron, clomazone, dalapon, dazomet, dicamba, dichlormid,
diclofop, diclopyr, difenzoquat, deflufenzopyr, dimethachlor,
dimethenamid, dimethipin, diquat dibromide, DNOC, DSMA, endothall,
exasulfuron, flazasulfuron, floramsulfuron, florasulam,
flucarbazone-sodium, flupropanate, fluthiacet, fomesafen,
foramsulfuron, fosamine, glyphosate, glufosinate, glufosinate-P,
hexazinone, imazamethabenz-methyl, imazamox, imazapic-ammonium,
imazapyr, imazaquin-ammonium, imazethapyr-ammonium, iodosulfuron,
mesotrione, metam, metamitron, metham, metosulam, metribuzin,
metsulfuron-methyl, molinate, monolinuron, MSMA, water soluble
salts of oleic acid, naptalam, oxasulfuron, paraquat dichloride,
water-soluble salts of pelargonic acid, penoxsulam, prometon,
propoxycarbazone-sodium, prosulfuron, pyrithiobac-sodium,
quinmerac, rimsulfuron, sethoxydim, sulfosulfuron, TBA,
tebuthiuron, terbacil, thifensulfuron-methyl, tralkoxydim,
triasulfuron, tribenuron-methyl, triclopyr, and trifloxysulfuron;
racemic mixtures and resolved isomers thereof; and mixtures
thereof.
[0114] Examples of suitable water-insoluble herbicides include,
without restriction, acetochlor, acifluorfen, aclonifen, alachlor,
ametryn, anilofos, atrazine, azafenidin, benfluralin,
bensulfuron-methyl, bensulide, benzofenap, bifenox, bromoxynil,
butachlor, butroxydim, butylate, cafenstrole, chlomethoxyfen,
chlorbromuron, chloridazon, chlornitrofen, chlorotoluron,
chlorthal-dimethyl, chlorthiamid, cinmethylin, clethodim,
clodinafop-propargyl, cloransulam-methyl, cyanazine, cycloate,
cyclosulfamuron, cycloxydim, cyhalofop-butyl, desmedipham,
desmetryn, dichlobenil, diclosulam, diflufenican, dimefuron,
dimepiperate, dimethachlor, dinitramine, dinoterb, dithiopyr,
diuron, EPIC, esprocarb, ethalfluralin, ethametsulfuron-methyl,
ethofumesate, ethoxysulfuron, fenoxaprop-ethyl, fentrazamide,
fluazifop-butyl, flucetosulfuron, fluchloralin, flufenacet,
flufenpyr-ethyl, flumetsulam, flumiclorac-pentyl, flumioxazin,
fluometuron, fluorochloridone, fluoroglycofen,
flupyrsulfuron-methyl-sodium, fluridone,
fluoroxypyr-1-methylheptyl, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl,
fomesafen, foramsulfuron, furyloxyfen, halosulfuron-methyl,
haloxyfop-methyl, imazosulfuron, ioxynil, isoproturon, isoxaben,
isoxaflutole, lactofen, lenacil, linuron, mefenacet, metazachlor,
methabenzthiazuron, metobromuron, metolachlor, metosulam,
metoxuron, metribuzin, molinate, monolinuron, napropamide,
niocosulfuron, nitrofen, nitrofluorfen, norflurazon, oryzalin,
oxadiargyl, oxadiazon, oxasulfuron, oxyfluorfen, pebulate,
pelargonic acid, pendimethalin, phenmedipham, pretilachlor,
primisulfuron-methyl, prodiamine, prometon, prometryn, propachlor,
propanil, propaquizafop, propisochlor, propyzamide, prosulfocarb,
pyraflufen-ethyl, pyrazolynate, pyrazon, pyrazosulfuron-ethyl,
pyrazoxyfen, pyribenoxim, pyridate, quinclorac, quinmerac,
quizalofop-ethyl, rimsulfuron, siduron, simazine, simetryn,
sulcotrione, sulfentrazone, sulfometuron, terbacil, terbumeton,
terbuthylazine, terbutryn, thenylchlor, thiazopyr, thiobencarb,
triallate, trietazine, trifluralin, triflusulfuron-methyl, and
vernolate, agriculturally acceptable salts or esters of any of
these herbicides, racemic mixtures and resolved isomers thereof,
and combinations thereof.
[0115] Some preferred water-soluble herbicides include 2,4-D and
salts thereof, acifluorfen salts, carfentrazone-ethyl, fomesafen
salts, glyphosate and salts thereof, glufosinate and salts thereof,
imazamethabenz and salts and esters thereof, imazamox and salts and
esters thereof, imazapic and salts and esters thereof, imazapyr and
salts and esters thereof, imazaquin and salts and esters thereof,
imazethapyr and salts and esters thereof, mecoprop salts, triclopyr
salts, racemic mixtures and resolved isomers thereof, and
combinations thereof. Some preferred water-insoluble herbicides
include acetochlor, alachlor, atrazine, azafenidin, bifenox,
butachlor, butafenacil, diuron, dithiopyr, flufenpyr-ethyl,
flumiclorac-pentyl, flumioxazin, fluoroglycofen, fluthiacet-methyl,
lactofen, metazochlor, metolachlor (and S-metolachlor), oxadiargyl,
oxadiazon, oxyfluorfen, pretilachlor, propachlor, propisochlor,
pyraflufen-ethyl, sulfentrazone and thenylchlor, racemic mixtures
and resolved isomers thereof, and combinations thereof.
[0116] Tank mix and RTU co-herbicide formulations of the present
invention typically comprise from about 0.1 g a.e./L to about 50 g
a.e./L total herbicide loading while co-herbicide concentrate
formulations of the present invention typically comprise from about
50 to about 750 g a.e./L, from about 300 to about 750 g a.e./L,
from about 350 to about g a.e./L, from about 400 to about 750 g
a.e./L, from about 450 to about 750 g a.e./L, or even from about
500 to about 750 g a.e./L. For example, 50, 51, 55, 100, 150, 200,
250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 577.5, 600, 650, 700, or even
750 g a.e./L, and ranges thereof. In co-herbicide formulations, a
weight ratio on an acid equivalent basis of the auxin herbicide to
the total co-herbicide of no greater than about 50:1, for example,
about 50:1, 25:1, 10:1, 5:1, 3:1, 2:1, 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, 1:5 or even
about 1:10 and ranges thereof, for example, from about 50:1 to
about 1:10, from about 50:1 to about 1:5, from about 50:1 to about
1:1, from about 50:1 to about 3:1, from about 50:1 to about 5:1,
from about 50:1 to about 10:1, from about 25:1 to about 1:1, or
from about 25:1 to about 3:1, are preferred. For any given auxin
herbicide and concentration thereof, one skilled in the art can
readily determine using routine experimentation a minimum ratio of
that auxin herbicide to any co-herbicide or combination of
co-herbicides that is necessary to achieve the objects of the
invention in view of the other components of the formulation, such
as a polybasic polymer component and/or surfactant component and
their respective concentrations.
[0117] In some embodiments of the present invention, an auxin
herbicide (e.g., dicamba) is combined with a co-herbicide selected
from glyphosate, glufosinate (or glufosinate-P), an ALS inhibitor,
salts and esters thereof, or combinations thereof, for application
to transgenic plants comprising an auxin (e.g., dicamba, 2,4-D or
fluoroxypyr) resistant trait, a glyphosate resistant trait, a
glufosinate resistant trait, an ALS resistant trait, or
combinations thereof.
[0118] Crop tolerance to specific herbicides can be conferred by
engineering genes into crops which encode appropriate herbicide
metabolizing enzymes and/or insensitive herbicide targets.
Technology for introduction of a DNA molecule (genes) into cells is
well known to those of skill in the art. Methods and materials for
transforming plant cells by introducing a DNA construct into a
plant genome in the practice of this invention can include any of
the well-known and demonstrated methods including, but not limited
to: [0119] (1) chemical methods (Graham and Van der Eb, Virology,
54(2):536-539 (1973) and Zatloukal, et al., Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.,
660: 136-153 (1992)); [0120] (2) physical methods such as
microinjection (Capecchi, Cell, 22(2):479-488 (1980)),
electroporation (Wong and Neumann, Biochim. Biophys. Res. Commun.,
107(2):584-587 (1982); Fromm, et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,
82(17):5824-5828 (1985); U.S. Pat. No. 5,384,253) particle
acceleration (Johnston and Tang, Methods Cell Biol., 43(A):353-365
(1994); Fynan, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,
90(24):11478-11482 (1993)): and microprojectile bombardment (as
illustrated in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,015,580; 5,550,318; 5,538,880;
6,160,208; 6,399,861; and 6,403,865); [0121] (3) viral vectors
(Clapp, Clin. Perinatol., 20(1):155-168 (1993); Lu, et al., J. Exp.
Med., 178(6):2089-2096 (1993); Eglitis and Anderson, Biotechniques,
6(7):608-614 (1988)); [0122] (4) receptor-mediated mechanisms
(Curiel et al., Hum. Gen. Ther., 3(2):147-154 (1992) and Wagner, et
al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 89(13):6099-6103 (1992); [0123]
(5) bacterial mediated mechanisms such as Agrobacterium-mediated
transformation (as illustrated in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,824,877;
5,591,616; 5,981,840; and 6,384,301); direct introduction into
pollen by injecting a plant's reproductive organs (Zhou, et al.,
Methods in Enzymology, 101:433, (1983); [0124] (6) Hess, Intern
Rev. Cytol., 107:367 (1987); Luo, et al., Plant Mol Biol. Reporter,
6:165 (1988); Pena, et al., Nature, 325:274 (1987)); [0125] (7)
protoplast transformation (as illustrated in U.S. Pat. No.
5,508,184); and [0126] (8) injection into immature embryos
(Neuhaus, et al., Theor. Appl. Genet., 75:30 (1987)).
[0127] Any of the above described methods may be utilized to
transform a plant cell.
[0128] Methods for transforming dicotyledonous plants, primarily by
use of Agrobacterium tumefaciens and obtaining transgenic plants
have been published for cotton (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,004,863;
5,159,135; and 5,518,908); soybean (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,569,834 and
5,416,011; see also, McCabe, et al., Biotechnolgy, 6:923 (1988) and
Christou et al., Plant Physiol. 87:671-674 (1988)); Brassica (U.S.
Pat. No. 5,463,174); peanut (Cheng et al., Plant Cell Rep.,
15:653-657 (1996) and McKently et al., Plant Cell Rep., 14:699-703
(1995)); papaya; and pea (Grant et al., Plant Cell Rep., 15:254-258
(1995)).
[0129] Transformations of monocotyledon plants using
electroporation, particle bombardment, and Agrobacterium have also
been reported. Transformation and plant regeneration have been
achieved in asparagus (Bytebier, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
(USA), 84:5354 (1987); barley (Wan and Lemaux, Plant Physiol,
104:37 (1994)); maize (Rhodes, et al., Science 240:204 (1988),
Gordon-Kamm, et al., Plant Cell, 2:603-618 (1990), Fromm, et al.,
Bio/Technology, 8:833 (1990), Koziel et al., Bio/Technology, 11:194
(1993), and Armstrong, et al., Crop Science, 35:550-557 (1995));
oat (Somers, et al., Bio/Technology, 10:1589 (1992)); orchard grass
(Horn, et al., Plant Cell Rep. 7:469 (1988)); rye (De la Pena, et
al., Nature, 325:274 (1987)); sugarcane (Bower and Birch, Plant
Journal, 2:409 (1992)); tall fescue (Wang, et al., Bio/Technology,
10:691 (1992)); and wheat (Vasil, et al., Bio/Technology, 10:667
(1992) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,631,152).
[0130] The regeneration, development, and cultivation of plants
from transformed plant protoplast or explants is well known in the
art (see, for example, Weissbach and Weissbach, Methods for Plant
Molecular Biology, (Eds.), Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, Calif.
(1988) and Horsch et al., Science, 227:1229-1231 (1985)).
Transformed cells are generally cultured in the presence of a
selective media, which selects for the successfully transformed
cells and induces the regeneration of plant shoots and roots into
intact plants (Fraley, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 80:
4803 (1983)). Transformed plants are typically obtained within two
to four months.
[0131] The regenerated transgenic plants are self-pollinated to
provide homozygous transgenic plants. Alternatively, pollen
obtained from the regenerated transgenic plants may be crossed with
non-transgenic plants, preferably inbred lines of agronomically
important species. Descriptions of breeding methods that are
commonly used for different traits and crops can be found in one of
several reference books, see, for example, Allard, Principles of
Plant Breeding, John Wiley & Sons, NY, U. of CA, Davis, Calif.,
50-98 (1960); Simmonds, Principles of crop improvement, Longman,
Inc., NY, 369-399 (1979); Sneep and Hendriksen, Plant breeding
perspectives, Wageningen (ed), Center for Agricultural Publishing
and Documentation (1979); Fehr, Soybeans: Improvement, Production
and Uses, 2nd Edition, Monograph., 16:249 (1987); Fehr, Principles
of variety development, Theory and Technique, (Vol 1) and Crop
Species Soybean (Vol 2), Iowa State Univ., Macmillian Pub. Co., NY,
360-376 (1987). Conversely, pollen from non-transgenic plants may
be used to pollinate the regenerated transgenic plants.
[0132] The transformed plants may be analyzed for the presence of
the genes of interest and the expression level and/or profile
conferred by the regulatory elements of the present invention.
Those of skill in the art are aware of the numerous methods
available for the analysis of transformed plants. For example,
methods for plant analysis include, but are not limited to Southern
blots or northern blots, PCR-based approaches, biochemical
analyses, phenotypic screening methods, field evaluations, and
immunodiagnostic assays. The expression of a transcribable
polynucleotide molecule can be measured using TaqMan.RTM. (Applied
Biosystems, Foster City, Calif.) reagents and methods as described
by the manufacturer and PCR cycle times determined using the
TaqMan.RTM. Testing Matrix. Alternatively, the Invader.RTM. (Third
Wave Technologies, Madison, Wis.) reagents and methods as described
by the manufacturer can be used transgene expression.
[0133] The seeds of the plants of this invention can be harvested
from fertile transgenic plants and be used to grow progeny
generations of transformed plants of this invention including
hybrid plant lines comprising the construct of this invention and
expressing a gene of agronomic interest.
[0134] Genetically engineered crop plants of the present include,
for example, cotton, soybeans, sugar beet, sugar cane, plantation
crops, tobacco, rape, maize and rice. Examples of crops having
herbicidal resistance given by a genetic engineering technique
include corn, soybean and cotton having resistance to glyphosate
(Roundup Ready.RTM.) and glufosinate (Liberty Link.RTM.). Other
examples of herbicide resistant crop plants include dicamba, 2,4-D,
dicamba or sethoxydim resistant corn, cotton and soybean;
imidazolinone (imazethapyr and imazapyr) resistant corn
(Imi-Corn.RTM.) and soybeans; and glyphosate and glufosinate
resistant corn (SmartStax.RTM.).
[0135] In some embodiments of the present invention, dicamba (or a
salt thereof) is combined with glyphosate co-herbicide (or a salt
or ester thereof), the crop plant comprises a glyphosate-resistant
trait and the crop plant is further either (i) a plant species not
susceptible to auxin herbicides or (ii) comprises a dicamba
resistant trait. Such compositions are useful to control (i)
glyphosate susceptible plants and (ii) glyphosate resistant, but
auxin susceptible, volunteer crop plants and/or weeds growing in a
field of (iii) glyphosate and auxin resistant or tolerant crop
plants.
[0136] In some other embodiments of the present invention, the
auxin co-herbicide is an ALS-inhibitor herbicide (or a salt or
ester thereof), the crop plant comprises an ALS-resistant trait and
the crop plant is further either (i) a plant species not
susceptible to auxin herbicides or (ii) comprises a dicamba
resistant trait. Such compositions are useful to control (i) ALS
susceptible plants and (ii) ALS resistant, but auxin susceptible,
volunteer crop plants and/or weeds growing in a field of (iii) ALS
and auxin resistant or tolerant crop plants.
[0137] Some preferred ALS herbicides include amidosulfuron,
azimsulfuron, florasulam, halosulfuron (-methyl), imazamethabenz,
imazamox, imazapic, imazapyr, imazaquin, imazethapyr,
imazosulfuron, iodosulfuron, metsulfuron (-methyl), nicosulfuron,
primisulfuron (-methyl), prosulfuron, rimsulfuron, sulfosulfuron,
thifensulfuron (-methyl), triasulfuron, tribenuron (-methyl),
trifloxysulfuron and triflusulfuron (-methyl), salts and esters
thereof, and racemic mixtures and resolved isomers thereof.
[0138] In some other embodiments of the present invention, the
auxin co-herbicide is glufosinate (or glufosinate-P) (or a salt or
ester thereof), the crop plant comprises a glufosinate-resistant
trait and the crop plant is further either (i) a plant species not
susceptible to auxin herbicides or (ii) comprises a dicamba
resistant trait. Such compositions are useful to control (i)
glufosinate susceptible plants and (ii) glufosinate resistant, but
auxin susceptible, volunteer crop plants and/or weeds growing in a
field of (iii) glufosinate and auxin resistant or tolerant crop
plants.
[0139] In yet other embodiments of the present invention,
glyphosate and glufosinate (or glufosinate-P) co-herbicides (or
salts or esters thereof) are combined with an auxin herbicide, the
crop plant is a species that comprises a glyphosate-resistant trait
and a glufosinate-resistant trait, and the crop plant is further
either (i) a plant species not susceptible to auxin herbicides or
(ii) comprises a dicamba resistant trait.
[0140] In still other embodiments of the present invention,
glyphosate and at least one ALS inhibitor herbicide (or salts or
esters thereof) are combined with an auxin herbicide, the crop
plant is a species that comprises a glyphosate-resistant trait and
an ALS-resistant trait, and the crop plant is further either (i) a
plant species not susceptible to auxin herbicides or (ii) comprises
a dicamba resistant trait.
[0141] In yet other embodiments of the present invention,
glufosinate (or glufosinate-P) and at least one ALS inhibitor
herbicide (or salts or esters thereof) are combined with an auxin
herbicide, the crop plant is a species that comprises a
glufosinate-resistant trait and an ALS-resistant trait, and the
crop plant is further either (i) a plant species not susceptible to
auxin herbicides or (ii) comprises a dicamba resistant trait.
[0142] In still other embodiments of the present invention,
glyphosate, glufosinate (or glufosinate-P) and ALS inhibitor
co-herbicides (or salts or esters thereof) are combined with an
auxin herbicide (e.g., dicamba) and the crop plant possesses
glyphosate, glufosinate and ALS resistant traits and the crop plant
is further either (i) a plant species not susceptible to auxin
herbicides or (ii) comprises a dicamba resistant trait.
[0143] In herbicidal methods of the present invention of using a
formulation of the invention, an application mixture, typically
comprising from about 0.1 to about 50 g a.e./L herbicide, is formed
and then applied to the foliage of a plant or plants at an
application rate sufficient to give a commercially acceptable rate
of weed control. Application mixtures are typically prepared from
aqueous concentrate formulations by dilution with water to achieve
the desired concentration. This application rate is usually
expressed as amount of auxin herbicide per unit area treated, e.g.,
grams acid equivalent per hectare (g a.e./ha). Depending on plant
species and growing conditions, the period of time required to
achieve a commercially acceptable rate of weed control can be as
short as a week or as long as three weeks, four weeks or 30 days.
Typically a period of about two to three weeks is needed for the
auxin herbicide to exert its full effect.
[0144] The formulations of the present invention can be applied
pre-planting of the crop plant, such as from about 2 to about 3
weeks before planting auxin-susceptible crop plants or crop plants
not having a dicamba-resistant trait. Crop plants that are not
susceptible to certain auxin herbicides, such as corn, or plants
having the dicamba-resistant trait typically have no pre-planting
restriction and the formulations of the present invention can be
applied immediately before planting such crops.
[0145] The formulations of the present invention can be applied at
planting or post-emergence to crop plants having a
dicamba-resistant trait to control auxin-susceptible weeds in a
field of the crop plants and/or adjacent to a field of the crop
plants. The formulations of the present invention can also be
applied post-emergence to crop plants and/or adjacent to crop
plants not having a dicamba resistant trait, such as corn, but that
are not susceptible to auxin herbicides.
[0146] When a maximum or minimum "average number" is recited herein
with reference to a structural feature such as oxyethylene units of
a surfactant, or molecular weight or nitrogen content of a
polybasic polymer, it will be understood by those skilled in the
art that the integer number of such units in individual molecules
typically varies over a range that can include integer numbers
greater than the maximum or smaller than the minimum "average
number". The presence in a formulation of individual molecules
having an integer number of such units outside the stated range in
"average number" does not remove the formulation from the scope of
the present invention, so long as the "average number" is within
the stated range and other requirements are met.
[0147] Having described the invention in detail, it will be
apparent that modifications and variations are possible without
departing from the scope of the invention defined in the appended
claims.
EXAMPLES
[0148] The following non-limiting examples are provided to further
illustrate the present invention.
[0149] The herbicidal effectiveness data set forth herein report
"inhibition" as a percentage following a standard procedure in the
art which reflects a visual assessment of plant mortality and
growth reduction by comparison with untreated plants, made by
technicians specially trained to make and record such observations.
In all cases, a single technician makes all assessments of percent
inhibition within any one experiment or trial. Such measurements
are relied upon and regularly reported by Monsanto Technology LLC
in the course of its herbicide business.
[0150] The selection of application rates that are biologically
effective for a specific auxin herbicide is within the skill of the
ordinary agricultural scientist. Those of skill in the art will
likewise recognize that individual plant conditions, weather and
growing conditions, as well as the specific exogenous chemical and
formulation thereof selected, will affect the weed efficacy and
associated crop injury achieved in practicing this invention.
Useful application rates for the auxin herbicides employed can
depend upon all of the above conditions. With respect to the use of
the method of this invention, much information is known about
appropriate auxin application rates, and a weed control
practitioner can select auxin application rates that are
herbicidally effective on particular species at particular growth
stages in particular environmental conditions.
[0151] Effectiveness in greenhouse tests, usually at exogenous
chemical rates lower than those normally effective in the field, is
a proven indicator of consistency of field performance at normal
use rates. As illustrated in the Examples herein, a pattern of
enhancement emerges over a series of greenhouse tests; when such a
pattern is identified this is strong evidence of biological
enhancement that will be useful in the field.
[0152] The formulations of the present invention can be applied to
plants by spraying, using any conventional means for spraying
liquids, such as spray nozzles, atomizers, or the like.
Formulations of the present invention can be used in precision
farming techniques, in which apparatus is employed to vary the
amount of exogenous chemical applied to different parts of a field,
depending on variables such as the particular plant species
present, soil composition, and the like. In one embodiment of such
techniques, a global positioning system operated with the spraying
apparatus can be used to apply the desired amount of the
formulation to different parts of a field.
[0153] The formulation, at the time of application to plants, is
preferably dilute enough to be readily sprayed using standard
agricultural spray equipment. Preferred application rates for the
present invention vary depending upon a number of factors,
including the type and concentration of active ingredient and the
plant species involved. Useful rates for applying an aqueous
formulation to a field of foliage can range from about 25 to about
1,000 liters per hectare (1/ha) by spray application. The preferred
application rates for aqueous solutions are in the range from about
50 to about 300 l/ha.
[0154] Many exogenous chemicals (including auxin herbicides) must
be taken up by living tissues of the plant and translocated within
the plant in order to produce the desired biological (e.g.,
herbicidal) effect. Thus, it is important that an herbicidal
formulation not be applied in such a manner as to excessively
injure and interrupt the normal functioning of the local tissue of
the plant so quickly that translocation is reduced. However, some
limited degree of local injury can be insignificant, or even
beneficial, in its impact on the biological effectiveness of
certain exogenous chemicals.
[0155] The experiments were carried out in greenhouse testing. The
herbicidal formulations were applied postemergence to weeds having
a height of about 10-15 cm using plot sprayers. Test formulations
were applied at a spray volume 93 L/ha applied by means of a
Flatfan 9501E nozzle (Spraying Systems Co., Wheaton, Ill., USA) at
165 kPa pressure. The greenhouse temperature was 21-29.degree. C.
at approximately 30% relative humidity. Evaluation was done by
visual scoring. The effects on the plant species were estimated in
comparison with untreated control plots using a percentage scale
(0-100%).
[0156] The components in Table 1 below are used in the
Examples.
TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 1 Component Description Surf1 Tallowamine
ethoxylate 10EO surfactant Surf2 5:2:1:1 ratio of tallowamine
ethoxylate (10.5EO) surfactant (Ethomeen T105 tallowamine
ethoxylate):tridecanol phosphate (4EO) surfactant (Emphos PS-121
HM):polyethylene glycol (PEG400/600):dipropylene glycol Surf3
Surfonic AGM 550 surfactant Surf4 Witconate AOK (sodium C.sub.14-16
olefin sulfonate) Surf5 Tergitol 15-S-12 surfactant Surf6 Ethylan
68-30 surfactant Surf7 Phosphalan PS-131 Surf8 Agrimul 2067 APG
surfactant Surf9 Ethomeen YT (12EO) (Tallow Y-amine 12EO) Surf10
Ethoduomeen CD (3EO) (Alkoxylated N-coco-1,3- diaminopropane)
Surf11 Adogen 570 (13EO) Surf12 Ethomeen YT (16EO) Surf13 Triamine
Y/12 (Alkoxylated N- tallowalkyldipropylenetriamine) Surf14
Ethomeen Y/12 (8EO) (Alkoxylated N- tallowalkylamine) Surf15
Ethomeen YT (8EO) Surf16 Adogen 560 (4.8EO) Surf17 Ethomeen YT
(20EO) Surf18 Ethomeen Y/12 (12EO) Surf19 Adogen 560 (10EO) Surf20
Adogen 560 (13.4EO) Surf21 Tetrameen T (4.9EO) Surf22 Corsamine TRT
(19.2EO) (Alkoxylated N- tallowalkyldipropylenetriamine) Surf23
Ethomeen Y/12 (16EO) Surf24 Heptamine YT (8EO) Surf25 Adogen 670
(14.9EO) Surf26 Ethomeen Y/12 (4EO) Surf27 Ethomeen Y/12 (20EO)
Surf28 Ethomeen YT (4EO) Surf29 Agnique PG 8107 Surf30 Tallowamine
15EO Surf31 Surfonic L12-8 Surf32 Surfonic L24-9 Surf33 Surfonic
L24-12 Surf34 Neodol 45-13 Surf35 Tergitol 15-S-5 Surf36 Polyvinyl
alcohol (77,000 to 79,000 molecular weight-CAS No. 9002-89-5)
Surf37 Tomah E-17-5 Surf38 Witconate 93-S Surf39 Phospholan PS-236
Surf40 Surfonic L68-20 Surf41 Armeen APA 2 Surf42 Armeen APA 6
Surf43 Armeen APA 8, 10 Surf44 Armeen APA 12 Surf45 ACAR 7051
Surf46 ACAR 7059 Surf47 Adsee C80W Surf48 Tallowamine ethoxylate
(15EO) and glycerin Surf49 Ethomeen T/20H Poly1 Lupasol P (750,000
Dalton molecular weight) Poly2 Lupasol FG (800 Dalton molecular
weight) Poly3 Aldrich Polyamine (molecular weight 25,000 Catalog
No. 408727) Poly4 Lupasol SC-61-B (110,000 Dalton molecular weight)
Poly5 Lupasol SK (2,000,000 Dalton molecular weight) Poly6
Polyvinylpyrrolidone K30 (molecular weight 40,000, TCI cat no.
P0472) Poly7 Quadrol Polyol Poly8 Lupasol HF (25,000 Dalton
molecular weight)
Example 1
[0157] An experiment was performed to determine the efficacy of
experimental application mixtures prepared by aqueous dilution of
experimental MEA dicamba salt formulations containing a surfactant
relative to comparative application mixtures prepared by dilution
of the commercial products CLARITY and BANVEL.
[0158] Aqueous formulations comprising MEA dicamba were typically
prepared by mixing water and monoethanolamine for 5 min followed by
addition of dicamba acid (98.3% purity) in one portion. The
resulting suspensions were stirred until all of the solids had
dissolved by visual inspection, typically between 60 min and
overnight. Relative amounts of dicamba and MEA used to give 61% by
wt solutions of dicamba are reported in Table 1a. These and MEA
dicamba solutions prepared using this procedure were subsequently
used in preparation of MEA dicamba formulations containing
polyimine polymers and/or surfactants.
TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 1a Dicamba Water MEA Dicamba mol eq wt % (g)
(g) (g) MEA:dicamba 61 108.28 81.45 310.27 0.95 61 103.99 85.74
310.27 1.00 61 99.7 90.02 310.27 1.05 61 57.27 56.58 186.15
1.10
[0159] The formulation of the experimental dicamba aqueous
formulations are indicated in Table 1b below where the dicamba
concentrations are reported on a weight percent active equivalent
(wt % a.e.) basis unless otherwise indicated. CLARITY contains 56.8
wt % active ingredient (a.i.) (38.5 wt % a.e.) of the diglycolamine
salt of dicamba. BANVEL contains 48.2 wt % a.i. of the
dimethylamine salt of dicamba.
TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 1b Dicamba Comp. Form. concentration Component
conc. 925S3J 48 wt % Surf1 10 wt % MEA dicamba 926Y7O 48 wt % Surf2
10 wt % MEA dicamba 931F5L 40 wt % Poly1 4.2 wt % MEA dicamba
956N5T 48 wt % Surf3 10 wt % MEA dicamba 933C3S 40 wt % Poly5 4.2
wt % MEA dicamba 942T3R 55 wt % None -- DGA Dicamba 944L8M 40 wt %
None -- DGA dicamba 957Y2S 61 wt % None -- MEA dicamba 959C9L 48 wt
% Surf4 10 wt % MEA dicamba 960U4V 40 wt % Surf5 10 wt % MEA
dicamba 961X6A 48 wt % Surf6 10 wt % MEA dicamba 962P0H 40 wt %
None -- MEA dicamba 963E2Z 48 wt % Surf7 10 wt % MEA dicamba 968Q3W
48.5 wt % None -- MEA dicamba 416B5G 48 wt % Surf8 14.3 wt % MEA
dicamba 955C3D 40 wt % surf3 10 wt % MEA dicamba 403E5Y 45 wt %
None -- MEA dicamba 416U7M 48 wt % surf8 10 wt % MEA dicamba 802R2X
48.1 wt % surf7 10 wt % MEA dicamba 929P6H 40 wt % poly5 17.3 wt %
MEA dicamba 908D1S 40 wt % poly5 17.3 wt % MEA dicamba surf2 8 wt %
066P9C 39.5 wt % poly6 3 wt % MEA dicamba 068I4B 39.5 wt % poly6 10
wt % MEA dicamba 070J7X 48 wt % poly6 8 wt % MEA dicamba 071Q5H 48
wt % poly6 4 wt % MEA dicamba 532U3W 47.9 wt % poly7 5 wt % MEA
dicamba 580Q7N 40 wt % Poly2 4 wt % DGA dicamba 7601W8J 40 wt %
Poly2 1 wt % DGA dicamba 7602G5V 40 wt % Poly2 2 wt % DGA dicamba
7603A1D 40 wt % Poly2 3 wt % DGA dicamba 7604P0K 40 wt % Poly2 4 wt
% DGA dicamba 7605L6Y 40 wt % Poly2 5 wt % DGA dicamba 7606M4R 40
wt % Poly2 6 wt % DGA dicamba 7191U4V 40 wt % Poly2 1 wt %
potassium dicamba 7192E8K 40 wt % Poly2 2 wt % potassium dicamba
7193E3C 40 wt % Poly2 3 wt % potassium dicamba 7194R5X 40 wt %
Poly2 4 wt % potassium dicamba 7195O7T 40 wt % Poly2 5 wt %
potassium dicamba 7196M9K 40 wt % Poly2 6 wt % potassium dicamba
1381X4R 40 wt % Poly8 1 wt % potassium dicamba 1382P2H 40 wt %
Poly8 2 wt % potassium dicamba 1383T5B 40 wt % Poly8 3 wt %
potassium dicamba 1384U5U 40 wt % Poly8 4 wt % potassium dicamba
1385A4S 40 wt % Poly8 5 wt % potassium dicamba 1386J7G 40 wt %
Poly8 6 wt % potassium dicamba 8145A6B 40 wt % Surf2 12 wt % DGA
dicamba 8145B7U 40 wt % Surf2 8 wt % DGA dicamba 8145C2Z 40 wt %
Surf2 4 wt % DGA dicamba 8146A8A 40 wt % Surf49 12 wt % DGA dicamba
8146B2K 40 wt % Surf49 8 wt % DGA dicamba 8146C9K 40 wt % Surf49 4
wt % DGA dicamba 8147A1E 40 wt % Surf48 12 wt % DGA dicamba 8147B8N
40 wt % Surf48 8 wt % DGA dicamba 8147C4F 40 wt % Surf48 4 wt % DGA
dicamba Na-Dicamba 42 wt % -- -- Sodium Dicamba MEA-Dicamba 45 wt %
-- -- MEA dicamba K-dicamba 53 wt % -- -- Potassium Dicamba
[0160] Formulations from Table 1b and CLARITY were sprayed over the
top of soybeans having both dicamba resistant and Roundup
Ready.RTM. (RR) traits to investigate any possible injury at
application rates of 561 (the labeled rate), 1120 and 2244 grams
acid equivalent per hectare (kg a.e./ha) in the equivalent of 93
liters per hectare (L/ha) water. Ratings were taken at 4 days after
treatment (DAT). The data is presented in Table 1c in an ANOVA
summary of formulations mean comparisons by rate.
TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 1c 1120 g a.e./ha 2240 g a.e./ha 4480 g
a.e./ha CLARITY 1.2 3.2 5.2 925S3J 1 4.5 11.3 926Y7O 0 4 12.7
956N5T 2.3 12.5 21.7 959C9L 0.8 3.2 20 960U4V 1.8 11.7 32.5 961X6A
1.2 6.5 20.8 962P0H 0.5 2.8 4.2 963E2Z 0.5 7.3 31.7 416B5G 1.5 6.5
23.3 LSD 2.4 5 7.6
[0161] At the label use rate (1120 g a.e./ha), no significant
injury was noted. The 4.times. label application rate of 4480 g
a.e./ha indicated crop injury, particularly for formulation 960U4V
containing an alcohol ethoxylate surfactant. Overall, at normal use
rates, none of the formulations appear to be overly injurious to
soybeans having dicamba resistant and RR traits.
[0162] The efficacy of application mixtures prepared from the Table
1b formulations, CLARITY and BANVEL were evaluated on velvetleaf
(ABUTH); common ragweed (AMBEL); pitted morningglory (IPOLA); and
common waterhemp (AMATA). For each trial, dicamba was applied at
rates of 140, 280 and 561 grams a.e./ha in the equivalent of 93
L/ha of water. Ratings were taken at 18 to 21 days after treatment
DAT. The results of all rates were combined in a pair-wise T-test
for each rating for the overall ratings.
[0163] The result of the efficacy trials on ABUTH, AMBEL and IPOLA
is reported in Table 1d as t-test pairwise mean difference
comparisons of CLARITY versus the experimental formulations and
BANVEL and in Table 1e as t-test pairwise mean difference
comparisons of BANVEL versus the experimental formulations and
CLARITY. A negative difference value indicates that the
experimental formulation provided increased efficacy relative to
the comparative formulations. For instance, in Table 1c,
formulation 956N5T gave significantly higher combined weed control
as compared to CLARITY.
TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 1d CLARITY Combined Data ABUTH versus
Difference n Difference n 956N5T -11.9.sup.a 126 -13.5.sup.a 108
963E2Z -9.7.sup.a 90 -12.sup.a 72 926Y7O -9.2.sup.a 153 -12.2.sup.a
108 960U4V -8.8.sup.a 153 -12.4.sup.a 108 959C9L -8.7.sup.a 153
-13.5.sup.a 108 961X6A -7.3.sup.a 153 -11.9.sup.a 108 925S3J
-6.9.sup.a 153 -9.5.sup.a 108 Na-Dicamba -6.5.sup.a 36 -6.5.sup.a
36 955C3D -6.3.sup.a 135 -11.2.sup.a 90 K-Dicamba -4.9.sup.a 36
-4.9.sup.a 36 BANVEL -4.6.sup.a 135 -7.5.sup.a 90 416B5G -3.9.sup.a
135 -8.8.sup.a 90 MEA- -3.4.sup.a 108 -4.sup.a 90 Dicamba CLARITY
AMBEL IPOLA versus Difference n Difference n 956N5T -- --
-2.4.sup.c 18 963E2Z -- -- -0.6.sup.c 18 926Y7O -3.0.sup.c 27
-0.8.sup.c 18 960U4V 0.3.sup.c 27 -1.1.sup.c 18 959C9L 4.4.sup.c 27
0.4.sup.c 18 961X6A 5.9.sup.c 27 0.7.sup.c 18 925S3J -0.4.sup.c 27
-0.6.sup.c 18 Na-Dicamba -- -- -- -- 955C3D 5.9.sup.c 27 -0.2.sup.c
18 K-Dicamba -- -- -- -- BANVEL 2.6.sup.c 27 -1.0.sup.c 18 416B5G
9.0.sup.d 27 1.2.sup.c 18 MEA- -- -- -0.4.sup.c 18 Dicamba
.sup.aFormulation is significantly more efficacious than the
standard (p < 0.01) .sup.bFormulation is significantly more
efficacious than the standard (p < 0.05) .sup.cFormulation
cannot be distinguished from the standard (p .gtoreq. 0.05)
.sup.dFormulation is significantly less efficacious than the
standard (p < 0.05) .sup.eFormulation is significantly less
efficacious than the standard (p < 0.01)
TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 1e BANVEL Combined Data ABUTH versus
Difference n Difference n 956N5T -4.8.sup.a 108 -5.5.sup.a 90
926Y7O -3.7.sup.a 135 -4.sup.a 90 959C9L -3.6.sup.a 135 -6.2.sup.a
90 960U4V -3.6.sup.a 135 -4.6.sup.a 90 963E2Z -3.3.sup.a 72
-4.5.sup.a 54 961X6A -2.0.sup.c 135 -4.4.sup.a 90 925S3J -1.9.sup.b
135 -2.1.sup.a 90 955C3D -1.7.sup.b 135 -3.7.sup.a 90 416B5G
0.7.sup.c 135 -1.3.sup.c 90 Na-Dicamba 2.4.sup.d 36 2.4.sup.d 36
MEA- 3.3.sup.e 90 4.sup.e 72 Dicamba K-Dicamba 3.9.sup.d 36
3.9.sup.d 36 CLARITY 4.6.sup.e 135 7.5.sup.e 90 CLARITY AMBEL IPOLA
versus Difference n Difference n 956N5T -- -- -1.4.sup.c 18 926Y7O
-5.5.sup.c 27- 0.2.sup.c 18 959C9L 1.9.sup.c 27 1.4.sup.c 18 960U4V
-2.3.sup.c 27 -0.1.sup.c 18 963E2Z -- -- 0.4.sup.c 18 961X6A
3.4.sup.c 27 1.7.sup.c 18 925S3J -2.9.sup.c 27 0.4.sup.c 18 955C3D
3.3.sup.c 27 0.8.sup.c 18 416B5G 6.5.sup.c 27 2.2.sup.c 18
Na-Dicamba -- -- -- -- MEA- -- -- 0.6.sup.c 18 Dicamba K-Dicamba --
CLARITY -2.6.sup.c 27 1.0.sup.c 18
[0164] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control at 17 DAT,
on AMATA is reported in Table 1f.
TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 1f Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 59.2 68 72 962P0H 55 70.8 75 925S3J 57 76 94.2
926Y7O 62 79 91.3 956N5T 65 78 94.7 959C9L 64 75 95 960U4V 63.3
72.5 93 961X6A 67.5 70 96.7 963E2Z 67.5 87.5 99 929P6H 71.7 80.8
93.8 908D1S 63.3 72.5 100 LSD 8.7 11 7
[0165] At the highest application rate of 561 g a.e./ha all
experimental formulations gave superior efficacy as compared to MEA
dicamba (962P0H) and CLARITY. At the application rate of 280 g
a.e./ha, formulations 963E2Z and 929P6H were more efficacious than
CLARITY. At the lowest application rate of 140 g a.e./ha,
formulation 929P6H was more efficacious than CLARITY. In general,
the formulations containing polyimine polymers (Formulations 929P6H
and 908D1S) provided equivalent herbicide performance as compared
to formulations comprising a surfactant.
[0166] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control, on CHEAL is
reported in Table 1g. The CHEAL was at the 9-12 leaf growth stage
and was 10-15 cm in height.
TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 1g Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 27.5 50 68.3 962P0H 34.2 50 70.8 925S3J 75.8 89.2
96 926Y7O 79.2 89.7 93.2 956N5T 77.5 81.7 85.5 959C9L 58.3 80 89.3
960U4V 58.3 81.7 86.7 961X6A 57.5 75.8 86.7 963E2Z 55.8 75 84.2
929P6H 53.3 61.7 87.5 908D1S 59.2 77.5 86.7 LSD 7.8 6.5 5.5
[0167] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate, all dicamba
formulations were superior to the MEA dicamba salt formulation
(962P0H) and CLARITY. Among the highest efficacy formulations at
that rate were 925S3J, 926Y7O and 956N5T. At the 280 g a.e./ha
application rate, all dicamba formulations were superior to the MEA
dicamba salt formulation (962P0H) and CLARITY. The highest efficacy
formulations at that rate were 925S3J and 926Y7O. At the 561 g
a.e./ha application rate, all dicamba formulations except were
superior to the MEA dicamba salt formulation (962P0H) and CLARITY.
The highest efficacy formulations at that rate were 925S3J and
926Y7O.
[0168] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control, on IPOLA is
reported in Table 1h. The IPOLA was at the 1-2 leaf growth stage
and was 5-10 cm in height.
TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 1h Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 83.3 98.8 99.5 403E5Y 83.8 99.5 99.7 BANVEL 85
99.8 99.8 925S3J 85.5 98 100 926Y7O 89.7 94.8 99.5 955C3D 85 97.5
99.8 956N5T 89.2 100 99.7 959C9L 82.5 98 100 960U4V 85 99.8 100
961X6A 81.7 98.2 99.7 416U7M 80.8 97.3 100 802R2X 83.3 100 100 LSD
9.6 3.2 0.5
[0169] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate, 926Y7O was slightly
less efficacious than the other formulations.
[0170] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control at 15 DAT,
on IPOLA is reported in Table 11. The IPOLA was at the 1-2 leaf
growth stage and was 5-10 cm in height.
TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 1i Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 83.3 98.8 99.5 403E5Y 83.8 99.5 99.7 BANVEL 85
99.8 99.8 925S3J 85.5 98 100 926Y7O 89.7 94.8 99.5 955C3D 85 97.5
99.8 956N5T 89.2 100 99.7 959C9L 82.5 98 100 960U4V 85 99.8 100
961X6A 81.7 98.2 99.7 416U7M 80.8 97.3 100 802R2X 83.3 100 100 LSD
9.6 3.2 0.5
[0171] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate, 926Y7O was slightly
less efficacious than the other formulations.
[0172] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control at 18 DAT,
on ABUTH is reported in Table 1j. The ABUTH was at the 5-6 leaf
growth stage and was 10-15 cm in height.
TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 1j Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 25 52 79 962P0H 36 58 84 929P6H 39 59 85 926Y7O
44 67 90 066P9C 39 68 82 068I4B 28 54 74 070J7X 38 58 84 071Q5H 41
65 83 532U3W 32 58 83 LSD 7.5 58 83
[0173] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate, all six formulations
of the present invention gave greater efficacy than CLARITY. At the
application rate of 280 g a.e./ha, formulations 926Y7O, 066P9C and
071Q5H were more efficacious than CLARITY. At the application rate
of 561 g a.e./ha, formulation 926Y7O was more efficacious than
CLARITY. The data appear to indicate that higher efficacy is
achieved at lower polyvinylpyrrolidone loading.
[0174] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control at 21 DAT,
on ABUTH is reported in Table 1k. The ABUTH was at the 5-6 leaf
growth stage and was 10-15 cm in height.
TABLE-US-00016 TABLE 1k Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 36.7 63.3 79.2 962P0H 36.7 64.2 82.5 925S3J 42.5
64.2 84.2 926Y7O 39.2 70 92.2 956N5T 45 72.5 88.3 959C9L 47.5 71.7
91.3 960U4V 45.8 78.3 92.2 961X6A 45.8 65.8 91.8 963E2Z 41.7 75
88.3 929P6H 44.2 75.8 90.5 908D1S 45 73.3 85 LSD 4.9 7.3 4.8
[0175] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate, all formulations of
the present invention except 926Y7O gave greater efficacy than
CLARITY. At the application rate of 280 g a.e./ha, formulations
956N5T, 959C9L, 960U4V, 963E2Z, 929P6H and 908D1S were more
efficacious than CLARITY. At the application rate of 561 g a.e./ha,
all formulations of the present invention were more efficacious
than CLARITY and MEA dicamba (962P0H).
[0176] The result of the efficacy trials, in % control at 21 DAT,
on White clover (TRFRE) is reported in Table 11. The TRFRE was at
greater than 12 leaf growth stage and was 10-15 cm in height.
TABLE-US-00017 TABLE 1l Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 45 62 76 962P0H 44 63 73 925S3J 51 74 80 926Y7O
53 62 85 956N5T 62 79 86 959C9L 52 70 78 960U4V 60 78 84 961X6A 58
67 89 963E2Z 56 73 83 929P6H 56 59 81 908D1S 55 66 83 LSD 6.5 7.5
7.1
[0177] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate, all formulations of
the present invention except 925S3J gave greater efficacy than
CLARITY and MEA dicamba. At the application rate of 280 g a.e./ha,
formulations 956N5T, 959C9L, 960U4V, 963E2Z and 925S3J were
slightly more efficacious than CLARITY. At the application rate of
561 g a.e./ha, formulations 956N5T, 926Y7O, 960U4V and 961.times.6A
were slightly more efficacious than CLARITY.
[0178] Overall, the data of Tables 1b through 1k show that the
herbicidal performance of dicamba can be improved as compared to
the commercial products CLARITY and BANVEL. The etheramine
surfactant Surfonic AGM 550 surfactant and surf2, comprising a
mixture of a cationic alkyl ether amine surfactant and an anionic
alkyl ether phosphate surfactant, provided the greatest dicamba
herbicidal activity. Of the surfactants, the alkylpolyglucoside
gave the least improvement also ABUTH control was improved as
compared to CLARITY. The data further show that polymers can give
substantially equivalent dicamba efficacy enhancement as do
surfactants.
[0179] The efficacy of application mixtures prepared from Table 1b
formulations, CLARITY, and 480 g/L MEA dicamba (formulations 943Q1H
and 944L8M) were evaluated on velvetleaf (ABUTH). For each trial,
dicamba was applied post-emergent to 10-15 cm velvetleaf at rates
of 140, 280 and 560 grams a.e./ha. The results of the efficacy
trial in % control at 22 DAT are reported in Table 1m
TABLE-US-00018 TABLE 1m Formulation 140 g ae/ha 280 g ae/ha 560 g
ae/ha 943Q1H 60.0 70.8 83.3 944L8M 65.8 78.3 85.0 7601W8J 70.0 79.2
91.7 7602G5V 61.7 69.2 80.0 7603A1D 60.0 68.3 74.2 7604P0K 58.3
68.3 79.2 7605L6Y 60.8 65.8 73.3 7606M4R 56.7 61.7 67.5 CLARITY
56.7 70.8 82.5 962P0H 63.3 66.7 74.2
[0180] The ANOVA summary of formulation mean comparisons by rate
indicated that at 140 g/L and 280 g/L 944L8M was more efficacious
than CLARITY. Formulation 7601W8J was more efficacious than CLARITY
at all 3 rates tested. At more than one rate, formulations 7605L6Y
and 7606M4R were less efficacious than CLARITY.
[0181] Potassium dicamba formulations from Table 1b, CLARITY, and
480 g/L MEA dicamba were tested for their post-emergent control of
15 cm velvetleaf at 70, 140, 280 and 560 grams a.e./ha. The results
of the efficacy trial in % control at 22 DAT are reported in Table
1n.
TABLE-US-00019 TABLE 1n 70 g 140 g 280 g 560 g Form. ae/ha ae/ha
ae/ha ae/ha 7191U4V 31.7 55.0 65.8 79.2 7192E8K 40.0 55.8 65.8 78.3
7193E3C 45.0 56.7 65.8 73.3 7194R5X 32.5 51.7 62.5 75.0 7195O7T
42.5 64.2 70.0 84.2 7196M9K 38.3 49.2 74.2 87.5 CLARITY 29.2 55.8
65.0 75.8 962P0H 37.5 55.0 67.5 76.7
[0182] All experimental formulations of potassium dicamba with
polyimine polymers from Table 1n provided equivalent or superior
control of ABUTH compared to CLARITY.
[0183] Potassium dicamba formulations from Table 1b, CLARITY,
962P0H, and 931F5L were tested for their post-emergent control of
15 cm velvetleaf at 70, 140, 280 and 560 grams a.e./ha. The results
of the efficacy trial in % control at 22 DAT are reported in Table
1o
TABLE-US-00020 TABLE 1o 70 g 140 g 280 g 560 g Form. ae/ha ae/ha
ae/ha ae/ha 1381X4R 55.8 62.5 68.3 84.2 1382P2H 52.5 62.5 65.8 80.8
1383T5B 48.3 59.2 67.5 78.3 1384U5U 50.0 62.5 67.5 80.8 1385A4S
55.8 61.7 68.3 81.7 1386J7G 54.2 65.0 66.7 81.7 CLARITY 50.8 63.3
72.5 85.8 931F5L 55.8 62.5 69.2 83.3 962P0H 50.0 65.0 70.8 85.0
[0184] The efficacy of certain application mixtures from Table 1b,
CLARITY, 962PoH and 931F5L were evaluated on velvetleaf (ABUTH).
For each trial, dicamba was applied post-emergent to 15 cm
velvetleaf at rates of 140, 280 and 560 grams a.e./ha. The results
of the efficacy trial in % control at 22 DAT are reported in Table
1p.
TABLE-US-00021 TABLE 1p Form. 140 g ae/ha 280 g ae/ha 560 g ae/ha
8145A6B 60.0 76.7 91.7 8145B7U 56.7 79.2 90.0 8145C2Z 51.7 75.0
90.0 8146A8A 64.2 79.2 92.5 8146B2K 58.3 81.7 92.5 8146C9K 64.2
73.3 90.8 8147A1E 58.3 82.5 92.5 8147B8N 58.3 79.2 92.5 8147C4F
55.8 80.0 91.7 Clarity 50.8 66.7 90.0 931F5L 61.7 75.8 90.8 962P0H
55.0 75.8 93.3
[0185] At 140 and 280 grams a.e./ha all experimental formulations
from Table 1b provided equivalent or superior control of ABUTH in
comparison to CLARITY. At 540 grams a.e./ha all experimental
formulations from Table 1p were equivalent to CLARITY.
Example 2
[0186] Aqueous formulations comprising MEA dicamba and various coco
and tallow di- and tri-amine ethoxylates were prepared as indicated
in Table 2a wherein the dicamba concentration in each formulation
was 633 g a.e./ha (47.9 wt % a.e.) and the concentration of the
other components in wt % is indicated in parenthesis.
TABLE-US-00022 TABLE 2a Formulation 504A3F 504B5T 504C8N 504D3J MEA
Dicamba 61 61 61 61 Surfactant Surf9 (10) Surf10 Surf11 Surf12 (10)
(wt %) (10) (10) Formulation 504E7C 504F2I 504G0L 504H6T MEA
Dicamba 61 61 61 61 Surfactant Surf13 Surf14 Surf15 Surf16 (10) (wt
%) (10) (10) (10) Formulation 504I8L 504J4P 504K1B 504L9O MEA
Dicamba 61 61 61 61 Surfactant Surf17 Surf18 Surf19 Surf20 (10) (wt
%) (10) (10) (10) Formulation 504M6K 504N5U 504O7X 50P1F MEA
Dicamba 61 61 61 61 Surfactant Surf21 Surf22 Surf23 Surf24 (10) (wt
%) (10) (10) (10) Formulation 504Q3D 504R6E 504S9M 504T7Q MEA
Dicamba 61 61 61 61 Surfactant Surf25 Surf26 Surf27 Surf28 (10) (wt
%) (10) (10) (10)
[0187] The formulations from Table 2a and CLARITY were sprayed over
the top of velvetleaf (ABUTH) plants evaluate herbicidal efficacy
at application rates of 140, 280 and 561 g a.e./ha in the
equivalent of 93 liters per hectare (L/ha) water. Herbicidal
efficacy was evaluated at 22 days after treatment (DAT). The data
is presented in Table 2b in an ANOVA summary of formulations mean
comparisons by rate.
TABLE-US-00023 TABLE 2b Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 42.5 59.2 79.2 926Y7O 45 58.3 79.2 504A3F 45 64.2
80 504B5T 42.5 63.3 82.5 504C8N 45 64.2 83.3 504D3J 49.2 65 83.3
504E7C 48.3 63.3 77.5 504F2I 44.2 61.7 78.3 504G0L 49.2 66.7 80.8
504H6T 49.2 63.3 78.3 504I8L 49.2 65.8 79.2 504J4P 50 68.3 81.7 LSD
4.1 4.5 4.9 CLARITY 46.7 69.2 85 926Y7O 55 71.7 89.7 504K1B 52.5
77.5 89.2 504L9O 53.3 76.7 90.5 504M6K 49.2 73.3 90.8 504N5U 51.7
80 90.5 504O7X 60 72.5 88.3 50P1F 52.5 71.7 90.5 504Q3D 55 76.7
88.3 504R6E 54.2 71.7 91 504S9M 46.7 72.5 87.5 504T7Q 53.3 71.7
87.2 LSD 5.7 3.8 4.7
[0188] The experimental formulations were generally more
efficacious than the CLARITY standard. None of the surfactants
provided a clear efficacy advantage on ABUTH at higher application
rates. At lower application rates, the Ethomeen YT series of
surfactants provided good ABUTH efficacy.
Example 3
[0189] The specific gravity and pH of potassium and MEA dicamba
aqueous solutions were evaluated. The results are reported in Table
3a wherein "Dicamba wt %" refers to weight percent acid equivalent
dicamba in solution and "SG" refers to specific gravity in grams
per mL. The pH of MEA dicamba was measured for two lots of
material.
TABLE-US-00024 TABLE 3a K Dicamba MEA Dicamba Dicamba wt % SG pH SG
pH pH g a.e./L 5 1.03 5.4 1.02 6.6 8.3 -- 10 1.05 5.4 1.05 6.7 8.4
-- 15 1.09 5.4 1.07 6.8 8.5 -- 20 1.12 5.9 1.09 6.9 8.55 -- 25 1.15
6.3 1.12 7 8.6 -- 30 1.18 6.5 1.14 7.1 8.65 291 35 1.22 6.8 1.17
7.3 8.7 391 40 1.25 7 1.2 7.4 8.8 478 45 1.29 7.3 1.23 7.5 8.85 554
50 1.33 7.6 1.25 7.6 8.9 623 55 1.36 7.8 1.28 7.7 8.95 684 60 1.4
8.1 1.31 7.8 9 741
[0190] The data indicate that solutions of potassium dicamba have a
greater specific gravity and lower pH at a given concentration than
do solutions of MEA dicamba.
[0191] In a set of experiments, the crystallization behavior of
formulations containing MEA dicamba, potassium glyphosate and a
surfactant was evaluated. The formulation of the experimental
dicamba formulations are indicated in Table 3b below where dicamba
concentration is reported in wt % a.e., the surfactant
concentration is reported in wt %, "SG" refers to specific gravity
(20/18.6), "Ratio K:MEA" refers to the ratio (a.e. basis) of
potassium glyphosate to MEA dicamba, "surf" refers to surfactant,
and "Xtals" refers to crystals. Approximately 3-5 mL of each
solution was placed into a 60 mL jar and left uncovered in a fume
hood to dry at ambient humidity and temperature. The solutions were
visually observed periodically for the presence of crystalline
residue as the water evaporated from the solution.
TABLE-US-00025 TABLE 3b Form. 957A 857A 858A 858B 859A Ratio K:MEA
0:1 1:1 3:1 1:3 1:0 K-gly wt % a.e. 0 23.6 36.1 12.1 46.3
MEA-dicamba wt % a.e. 61 23.6 12.1 36.1 0 surf. none surf3 surf3
surf3 surf3 wt % surf 0 10 10 10 10 SG 1.2606 1.2859 1.249 1.2913
Xtals @1 day no yes yes no yes Xtals @3 days no yes yes no yes
Xtals @20 days no yes yes no yes Form. 864 865 866 867 Ratio K:MEA
3:1 1:3 1:1 1:0 K-gly wt % a.e. 35 12.1 23.9 46.5 MEA-dicamba wt %
a.e. 11.6 36.1 23.9 0 surf. surf2 surf2 surf2 surf2 wt % surf 9.3
9.3 9.3 9.3 SG 1.2839 1.2589 1.276 1.3049 Xtals @1 day yes no no
yes Xtals @3 days yes no yes yes Xtals @20 days yes no yes yes
[0192] In a second set of experiments, the crystallization behavior
of formulations containing MEA dicamba, potassium glyphosate, a
surfactant and 5 wt % glycerine was evaluated. The formulation of
the experimental dicamba formulations is indicated in Table 3c. The
method described above for the date in Table 3b was used for
crystallization evaluation.
TABLE-US-00026 TABLE 3c Form 877 878 879 Ratio K:MEA 1:0 1:0 1:0
K-gly wt % a.e. 46.4 46.4 46.4 MEA-dicamba wt % a.e. 0 0 0 surf.
surf2 surf1 surf3 wt % surf 10 10 10 wt % glycerin 5 5 5 SG 1.3189
1.3227 1.3082 Xtals @3 days yes yes yes
Example 4
[0193] The volatility of the sodium, potassium, DMA, MEA, IPA and
DGA salts of dicamba contained in aqueous formulations were
measured in distillation experiments.
[0194] Solutions of each of the sodium, potassium, DMA, MEA, IPA
and DGA salts of dicamba were prepared as 10% stock solutions at a
mole ratio of approximately 1:1 dicamba acid to base. To alter the
pH, either dicamba acid was added or base was added. The pH was
measured on a standard Orion Model 320 pH meter of each neat
solution. For the distillations, the salt solutions were diluted to
obtain a dicamba concentration of 5%, 2%, and 1% a.e. while
compensating for any added base or dicamba acid to adjust pH. The
Diglycolamine salt solutions were prepared using Clarity.RTM., a
38.5% a.e. dicamba solution.
[0195] Simple distillation using a short path still was used to
collect the water distillate containing the dicamba in the vapor
phase of the salt solutions. A 50 mL distillation flask was used.
The distillation receiver was a "cow" type with four 2 mL graduated
sections. The solutions were heated at the 30% setting of the
GlassCol heating unit and the boiling point of each distillation
was noted. The first 2 ml of distillate was collected, and the
receiver rotated to avoid collection of any further distillate in
that section as the distillation flask cooled. The 2 mL sample was
quantitatively transferred by pipette to HPLC vials for later
analysis. Between each distillation the distillation apparatus was
washed with 10 volumes of tap water, 10 volumes of distilled water,
rinsed with acetone, and dried in a 60.degree. C. oven. Each
distillation was run in triplicate.
[0196] The distillate was collected and analyzed for dicamba
concentration using HPLC/Mass Spectroscopy (MS). The HPLC column
was an Agilent Zorbax Eclipse XDB-C8, 4.6.times.150 mm, 5u, PN
993967-90. Mobile phase A was 0.1% formic acid in D.I. water.
Mobile phase B was 0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile. A flow rate of
1.2 mL/min was used and an injection volume of 5, 10, 15 or 25 ul
was used depending on the dicamba level in the sample. The
following gradient was used:
TABLE-US-00027 Time % A % B 0 100 0 7.5 0 100 10 0 100 10.1 100 0
15 100 0
[0197] The MS parameters were as follows: Type SIR; ES- ion mode;
0.05 second inter channel delay; 0.05 second interscan time; 0.5
span (Da); 10 minutes elapsed time; and 6-6000 ppb calibration
range. Channel 1 mass was 175 (Da); Dwell was 0.25 (s); Cone
(V)=tune and; 0.05 (s) delay. Channel 2 mass was 177 (Da); Dwell
was 0.25 (s); Cone (V)=tune and; 0.05 (s) delay.
[0198] Differences in the amount of dicamba in the distillate of
dicamba salt solutions were found with changing cation,
concentration, and pH. Tables 4a through 4f summarize the data for
all experiments. These tables show the mean values of Dicamba
concentration in the distillate from the triplicate distillations.
The standard deviation is shown.
TABLE-US-00028 TABLE 4a Distillation and liquid chromatography/mass
spectroscopy (LC/MS) results for Na Dicamba salt solution at
varying pH and concentration. % a.e. Solution Mean Dicamba in
Standard Salt Dicamba pH Distillate (ppm) Dev Na 5% 3.36 11.57
0.498 Na 5% 4.34 2.36 0.047 Na 5% 6.32 0.77 0.186 Na 5% 10.36 0.45
0.044 Na 5% 12.15 0.22 0.071 Na 2% 3.33 5.74 0.337 Na 2% 4.29 1.39
0.486 Na 2% 6.28 0.32 0.165 Na 2% 9.93 0.16 0.074 Na 2% 11.50 0.15
0.077 Na 1% 3.31 3.42 1.174 Na 1% 4.25 0.70 0.117 Na 1% 6.19 0.13
0.013 Na 1% 9.82 0.09 0.022 Na 1% 11.15 0.06 0.020
TABLE-US-00029 TABLE 4b Distillation and LC/MS results for MEA
Dicamba salt solution at varying pH and concentration. % a.e. Mean
Dicamba in Salt Dicamba Solution pH Distillate (ppm) Standard Dev
MEA 5% 3.61 4.58 0.165 MEA 5% 4.44 1.71 0.518 MEA 5% 6.87 0.54
0.068 MEA 5% 8.03 0.27 0.054 MEA 5% 9.32 0.33 0.151 MEA 2% 2.90
12.05 NA MEA 2% 4.81 0.48 NA MEA 2% 4.89 0.36 NA MEA 2% 6.4 0.4 NA
MEA 2% 7.25 0.25 NA MEA 2% 8.03 0.18 NA MEA 2% 9.21 0.1 NA MEA 1%
3.68 1.39 0.208 MEA 1% 4.34 0.39 0.075 MEA 1% 6.81 0.37 0.218 MEA
1% 7.84 0.08 0.019
TABLE-US-00030 TABLE 4c Distillation and LC/MS results for DGA
Dicamba salt solution at varying pH and concentration % a.e. Mean
Dicamba in Salt Dicamba Solution pH Distillate (ppm) Standard Dev
DGA 5% 4.57 2.11 1.154 DGA 5% 6.35 0.75 0.174 DGA 5% 8.26 0.58
0.082 DGA 5% 9.03 0.32 0.094 DGA 2% 4.17 1.10 0.275 DGA 2% 6.44
0.31 0.081 DGA 2% 8.22 0.28 0.129 DGA 2% 8.92 0.19 0.028 DGA 1%
4.23 0.46 0.032 DGA 1% 6.48 0.18 0.009 DGA 1% 8.24 0.13 0.030 DGA
1% 8.88 0.12 0.013
TABLE-US-00031 TABLE 4d Distillation and LC/MS results for IPA
Dicamba salt solution at varying pH and concentration % a.e. Mean
Dicamba in Salt Dicamba Solution pH Distillate (ppm) Standard Dev
IPA 5% 3.44 5.85 0.785 IPA 5% 4.33 3.14 0.482 IPA 5% 4.94 3.77
1.081 IPA 5% 8.24 2.47 0.170 IPA 5% 9.28 12.57 1.502 IPA 2% 3.37
3.65 1.132 IPA 2% 4.36 1.42 0.625 IPA 2% 5.10 0.94 0.344 IPA 2%
8.13 0.75 0.118 IPA 2% 9.20 3.43 1.034 IPA 1% 3.41 1.42 0.283 IPA
1% 4.40 0.42 0.036 IPA 1% 5.13 0.37 0.082 IPA 1% 8.10 0.72 0.575
IPA 1% 9.13 1.22 0.088
TABLE-US-00032 TABLE 4e Distillation and LC/MS results for DMA
Dicamba salt solution at varying pH and concentration % a.e. Mean
Dicamba in Salt Dicamba Solution pH Distillate (ppm) Standard Dev
DMA 5% 3.18 20.10 3.212 DMA 5% 4.22 2.67 0.550 DMA 5% 5.58 2.06
1.184 DMA 5% 8.69 8.43 1.001 DMA 5% 10.17 12.34 2.335 DMA 2% 3.20
9.19 1.315 DMA 2% 4.25 1.08 0.087 DMA 2% 5.97 0.83 0.161 DMA 2%
8.66 1.98 0.104 DMA 2% 10.24 4.88 3.060 DMA 1% 3.25 4.50 0.566 DMA
1% 4.36 0.57 0.052 DMA 1% 6.11 0.30 0.103 DMA 1% 8.53 0.73 0.079
DMA 1% 10.12 1.32 0.543
TABLE-US-00033 TABLE 4f Distillation and LC/MS results for Dicamba
acid solution with varying concentration wt % a.e. dicamba pH Dist
ppm Std Dev 0.5 1.84 19.6 5.3 1 <1.2 56.5 21.4 2 <1.2 151.1
11.2
[0199] For all of the solutions studied, as the concentration of
Dicamba in the solution increased, the amount of Dicamba in the
distillate increased. The data suggests that pH significantly
affects the amount of Dicamba entering the vapor phase. In
distillations with salts of Na, K, MEA, and DGA, as the pH is
increased, the amount of Dicamba measured in the distillate is
decreased. With the IPA and DMA salts, this trend holds until the
pH is 6-7, but at a higher pH values, the amount of Dicamba
measured in the distillate is increased. The data show that the low
volatility cation salts, Na, K, MEA and DGA, all have similar
volatilities at a given pH. In one explanation, the more volatile
cations IPA and DMA show more dicamba in the distillate at higher
pH because as the solution distills, a significant amount of the
cation (DMA or IPA) is distilling from the solution. This leads to
an effectively lower pH in the solution being distilled and a
resultant higher amount of dicamba being distilled from the
solution. Another possible explanation is that the volatile cations
are co-distilling from the solutions with dicamba, particularly
when the original pH of the distillation solution is greater than
7.
[0200] To investigate the increased volatility with the DMA salt at
a pH greater than about 6 to 7, the concentration of the amine was
measured in the distillate in a separate experiment, and is shown
in Table 4g. The data shows that at higher pH there is a larger
amount of amine entering the vapor phase. It is also significant to
note that at an acidic pH (3.6) there was no detectable amine in
the distillate by HPLC analysis. The data also show a resulting
lowering of the pH from the solution in the distillation flask from
loss of amine as one might expect from distillation of the base
from the solution.
TABLE-US-00034 TABLE 4g pH and concentration of dimethylamine after
distillation of 5% a.e. DMA Dicamba solutions Starting Solution pH
Solution After ppm DMA in pH Distillation Distillate 3.60 3.58
Undetectable 8.20 7.04 400 ppm 10.10 6.4 5000 ppm
[0201] Table 4h provides a summary of dicamba in the distillate of
5% a.e. Dicamba solutions at approximately neutral pH. While it is
difficult to directly compare the values as the pH of each solution
is slightly different, the relative difference are clear that the
more volatile amine salts have a higher concentration of dicamba in
the distillate compared to the lower volatile cation salts DGA Na,
K, and MEA. These lower volatility salts also showed a pH dependent
trend of lower amounts of dicamba in the distillate as the pH
increases.
TABLE-US-00035 TABLE 4h Dicamba concentration in distillate for 5%
a.e. salt solutions at the near neutral pH Salt pH ppm Dicamba in
distillate Na 6.32 0.8 K 7.06 0.6 MEA 6.87 0.5 MEA 8.03 0.3 DGA
6.35 0.8 DGA 8.26 0.6 DMA 5.58 2.1 DMA 8.69 8.4 IPA 8.24 2.5
[0202] In a further set of experiments, measurements of dicamba
concentration in the gas phase (air) above 38.5 wt % a.e. solutions
of various dicamba salts was measured. 5 mL of each sample of
dicamba was placed into a 50 mL plastic centrifuge tube with four
holes approximately 1/8 in diameter drilled into the tube at the 10
mL line. A 22 mm.times.30 mm PUF (SKC ct. #226-124) was placed into
a glass tube of app. 20 mm diameter with parafilm wrapped around
the outside to obtain a snug fit into the top of the centrifuge
tube. A hose was connected to the other end of the glass tube
leading to a vacuum line. The air flow was regulated to app. 2
L/min using a flow controller (about 0.4 L air/min-mL sample). Air
was pulled through the tube at app. 1L/min for approximately 1 day.
Note that the air conditions of flow rate, temperature, pressure
and composition (e.g., relative humidity) are not narrowly critical
as long as the various samples are analyzed under similar
conditions. For instance, air at from about 5.degree. C. to about
40.degree. C., from about 0.5 to about 1.5 bar pressure, from about
0% to about 95% relative humidity, and at a flow rate of from about
0.1 to 10 L/min-mL sample could be suitably used for volatility
analysis. The PUF was removed from the glass tube, extracted with
20 mL methanol and the resulting solution analyzed for dicamba
concentration by LC-MS. The results are shown in Table 41 below
where "wt % a.e." refers to the dicamba concentration, ".mu.g/mL"
refers to the dicamba concentration in the distillate, ".mu.g
dicamba" refers to the total dicamba extracted from the PUF by 20
mL methanol, and "ng/L air" and "moles/L air" refer to the dicamba
concentration in the gas phase above the solution.
TABLE-US-00036 TABLE 4i wt % .mu.g ng/L moles/L Dicamba salt a.e.
.mu.g/mL dicamba air air sodium (pH 2.7) 35.8 3.55 71 9.86 4.46
.times. 10.sup.-11 potassium (pH 10.5) 35.8 0.24 4.8 0.67 3.02
.times. 10.sup.-12 MEA 35.8 0.02 0.4 0.056 2.51 .times. 10.sup.-13
BANVEL (DMA salt) 40 0.42 8.4 1.17 5.28 .times. 10.sup.-12 dicamba
acid 99 15.3 305.4 42.4 1.92 .times. 10.sup.-10
[0203] The MEA salt showed a dicamba concentration in the gas phase
above the solution lower than the acid or the sodium, potassium and
DMA salts. Notably, the MEA salt had a gas concentration on the
order of 20 times less than the commercial product BANVEL.
[0204] In a further set of experiments, measurements of dicamba
concentration in the gas phase (air) above 10 wt % a.e. solutions
of various MEA dicamba formulations and CLARITY (DGA dicamba salt)
was measured. The method was as follows:
[0205] Equipment: Polyurethane Foam (PUF) plug approximately 22
mm.times.30 mm available from SKC Inc., cat. No. CPM100108-003; 50
mL PET, Centrifuge tube, Corning cat No. 430290, with a hole
drilled into the wall app. inch above the mL line on the tube with
a 1/8 inch drill bit; Glass tube to hole the PUF app. 30 mm iD with
a nipple on one end to attach to a Tygon Tube; Ring Stand;
Parafilm; Air Pump; Constant Humidity/temperature chamber, such as
a growth chamber or Incubator; Solutions of dicamba.
[0206] Procedure: The procedure took place in a growth chamber at a
temperature of 35.degree. C. and relative humidity of 30%. A PUF
was placed into the glass tube. The top of the tube was wrapped
with parafilm such that it would fit snuggly into the top of the
centrifuge tube. 10 mL of the dicamba a.e. solution prepared to be
approximately 20% a.e. dicamba was placed into the centrifuge tube.
The tube was attached to the ring stand and held in a vertical
position. The glass tube was fitted into the top of the centrifuge
tube. A tygon tube was connected to the nipple on the glass tube.
This tube was connected to an air pump through a needle valve to
control the air flow at 2 liters per minute (about 0.2 L air/min-mL
sample). The air pump was started and air pulled through the tube
for 24 hours. After 24 hours, the pump was turned off and the PUF
removed from the glass tube. The PUF was placed into 20 mL of
methanol to extract the dicamba. The amount of dicamba was
quantified by LC/Mass Spectrometric analysis.
[0207] The results are shown in Table 4j below wherein formulations
506C3N, 5851AR and 566E7H each contained Lupasol SK polymer (poly5)
at a 1:1 weight ratio of dicamba a.e. to polymer and formulations
5851BT and 565B8I each contained dicamba MEA in the absence of
polymer. The reported results for formulation 506C3N is the average
of 6 samples, each tested in duplicate, and the remaining results
represent the average of 4 samples, each tested in duplicate. In
the table, "S.D." refers to standard deviation, "% RSD" refers to
percent relative standard deviation and "Form. pH" refers to the pH
of the dicamba formulation.
TABLE-US-00037 TABLE 4j Form. Dicamba (ng/L) Dicamba (ng/L) S.D. %
RSD Form. pH 506C3N 0.111 0.049 44.05 8.26 CLARITY 0.696 0.066 9.50
6.94 5851AR 0.036 0.010 27.42 9.43 5851BT 0.047 0.017 35.77 9.62
CLARITY 0.611 0.072 11.78 6.94 566E7H 0.138 0.088 63.61 6.92 565B8I
1.513 0.172 11.34 7.16
[0208] The data indicate that Lupasol reduced MEA dicamba
volatilization by about 25% at a pH of about 9.5 and by about 1000%
at a pH of about 7.
[0209] In a further set of experiments, measurements of dicamba
concentration in the gas phase (air) above 10 wt % a.e. solutions
of various MEA dicamba formulations, CLARITY (DGA dicamba salt) and
BANVEL (DMA dicamba salt) were measured and are reported in Table
4k below. The method was as described above for the data of Table
4j. The reported results are the average of 4 or 6 samples, each
tested in duplicate. In the table, "Form." refers to formulation
number, "ng/L" refers to the dicamba concentration above the 10 wt
% a.e. dicamba solutions, "SD" refers to standard deviation, "pH"
refers to the pH of the formulation, "Test mL" refers to the volume
of dicamba solution tested and "Ratio" refers to the weight ratio
of dicamba a.e. to polymer where the identity of the polymer is
indicated in parentheses.
TABLE-US-00038 TABLE 4k Ratio Form. ng/L SD pH Test mL (polymer)
CLARITY 0.65 0.08 6.9 10 no polymer CLARITY 1.17 0.06 6.98 20 no
polymer CLARITY 0.41 0.02 7.8 10 no polymer CLARITY 0.05 0.02 7.8
10 8:1 (poly5) BANVEL 3.43 1.59 6.14 10 no polymer BANVEL 5.68 2.21
6.38 20 no polymer BANVEL 1.53 0.32 8.1 10 no polymer 565K8T 16.53
0.94 3.2 10 no polymer 565L9U 1.78 0.20 6.06 10 no polymer 565M7G
0.88 0.12 6.12 10 no polymer 565N3K 1.22 0.10 7.08 10 no polymer
565B8X 1.51 0.17 7.16 10 no polymer 565B8X 3.56 0.59 7.17 20 no
polymer 565O2V 0.48 0.05 8.01 10 no polymer 957Y2S 0.98 0.31 8.44
20 no polymer 565C6L 0.38 0.13 8.53 20 no polymer 565D0J 0.19 0.04
9.04 20 no polymer 5851BR 0.05 0.02 9.62 10 no polymer 565CC8I7
0.21 0.04 7.09 10 8:1 (poly1) 565DD2K9 0.17 0.03 8.05 10 8:1
(poly1) 565EE3E2 0.05 0.01 9.12 10 8:1 (poly1) 565P5G 0.17 0.01
5.73 10 8:1 (poly5) 566E6Y 0.14 0.09 6.92 10 8:1 (poly5) 506C7J
0.25 0.08 8.23 20 8:1 (poly5) 506C7J 0.54 0.18 8.24 20 8:1 (poly5)
506D9P 0.18 0.05 8.74 20 8:1 (poly5) 5851AT 0.04 0.01 9.43 10 8:1
(poly5) 565Q9L 1.10 0.24 7.19 10 100:1 (poly5) 565R7F 0.31 0.09
8.03 10 100:1 (poly5) 565S3T 0.06 0.01 8.98 10 100:1 (poly5) 565T4V
0.44 0.03 7.62 10 20:1 (poly5) 565U8S 0.20 0.10 8.24 10 20:1
(poly5) 565V7M 0.05 0.02 9.25 10 20:1 (poly5) 565W0J 0.50 0.15 7.19
10 100:1 (poly2) 565Y1U 0.25 0.06 9.03 10 100:1 (poly2) 565X3Y 0.06
0.03 9.00 10 100:1 (poly2) 565Z5R 0.34 0.28 7.37 10 20:1 (poly2)
565AA3B 0.14 0.04 8.26 10 20:1 (poly2) 565BB7H 0.04 0.02 9.17 10
20:1 (poly2)
[0210] The results indicate that polymer reduces dicamba
volatility. At pH 7, even a 100:1 weight ratio of dicamba a.e. to
polymer provided a small volatility reduction.
Example 5
[0211] Aqueous formulations comprising 601 g a.e./L MEA dicamba
(48.3 wt % a.e.) were combined with from 1 to 10 wt % polyimine
polymers having a range of molecular weights as indicated in Table
5a below. Each of the formulations was a clear solution.
TABLE-US-00039 TABLE 5a Component 1 Component 2 Formulation Polymer
wt % Surfactant wt % 151J6M -- -- -- -- 152F5X -- -- Surf3 6 153P0L
Poly1 5 -- -- 154V4V Poly1 5 Surf3 6 161L8I Poly2 5 -- -- 162N4R
Poly2 5 Surf3 6 163L1K Poly3 5.7 -- -- 164A2D Poly3 5 Surf3 6
171H3P Poly4 7.6 -- -- 172G5F Poly4 7.6 Surf3 6
[0212] The formulations from Table 5a, previously described
formulations 962P0H, 926Y7O, 956N5T, formulation 962-2A (containing
480 g a.e./L (40 wt % a.e.) MEA dicamba with no surfactant, and
CLARITY were applied postemergence at rates of 140, 280 and 561 g
a.e./ha on 10-15 cm high Velvetleaf and evaluated 18 days after
treatment. The results in % control are reported in Table 5b
below.
TABLE-US-00040 TABLE 5b Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 58.3 86.7 91.8 962P0H 52.5 86.7 91.7 962-2A 70.8
87.5 93 926Y7O 65.8 85 95.7 956N5T 65.8 86.7 94.3 151J6M 70.8 87.5
93 152F5X 62.5 86.7 95.2 153P0L 70.8 87.5 93 154V4V 68.3 88.3 91.7
161L8I 72.5 85 92.2 162N4R 58.3 85 97.5 163L1K 73.3 90 91.7 164A2D
67.5 88.3 93 171H3P 66.7 85.8 93.5 172G5F 69.2 85.8 93 LSD 6.5 5.6
3.9
[0213] The bioefficacy data shows an increase in dicamba activity
at an application rate of 140 g a.e./ha and no reduction in dicamba
activity at application rates of 280 and 561 g a.e./ha for the
formulations comprising the polymers as compared to formulations
comprising a surfactant in the absence of a polymer or the
combination of a surfactant and a polymer. At an application rate
of 140 g a.e./ha, formulations 151J6M, 153P0L, 154V4V, 161L8I,
163L1K and 172G5F were significantly more efficacious than
CLARITY.
Example 6
[0214] Aqueous formulations comprising 600 g a.e./L MEA dicamba
(48.3 wt % a.e.) were prepared as indicated in Table 6a below where
"Form" refers to formulation. All of the formulations were clear,
homogeneous solutions. The formulations were evaluated for spraying
characteristics.
TABLE-US-00041 TABLE 6a Component 1 Component 2 Form polymer wt %
Surfactant wt % 019A8J Poly5 3.5 -- -- 019B6Y Poly5 3.5 Surf3 6
019C9J Poly5 6 -- --
[0215] The formulations from Table 6a, previously described
formulations 151J6M, 152F5X, 962P0H, 926Y7O and 956N5T and CLARITY
were applied postemergence at rates of 140, 280 and 561 g a.e./ha
on 10-15 cm high Velvetleaf and evaluated 18 days after treatment.
The results in % control are reported in Table 6b below.
TABLE-US-00042 TABLE 6b Formulation 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e./ha 561
g a.e./ha CLARITY 60.0 83.3 96.5 962P0H 68.3 84.2 98.5 926Y7O 71.7
87.5 97.7 956N5T 70.0 92.5 96.3 019A8J 71.7 88.3 96.3 019B6Y 72.5
91.7 98.3 019C9J 75.8 89.2 96.7 151J6M 75.0 87.5 95.5 152F5X 80.8
90.8 98.0 LSD 6.5 2.4 2.2
[0216] The formulations and the comparative formulation CLARITY
were diluted in water to a dicamba concentration of 0.77 wt % a.e.
The diluted formulations were sprayed using the method for
greenhouse efficacy testing on plant, as describe above, on water
sensitive paper that changes color (to blue) where a spray drop
contacts the paper. The CLARITY composition produced more color on
the paper as compared to experimental formulations 019A8J, 019B6Y
and 019C9J. The experimental formulations show a comparably more
consistent drop size, but still provide good coverage over the
paper. The results suggest that polyimines may result in fewer fine
droplet particles as compared to CLARITY and can therefore provide
some drift control properties to the formulations.
Example 7
[0217] The cold temperature stability of aqueous formulations
comprising 480 g a.e./L MEA dicamba and 5 wt % polymer formulated
at varied mole ratios of MEA to dicamba was evaluated. For each
test, approximately 50 mL of each formulation was placed into a
glass bottle. The bottle were placed in an oven or freezer and
evaluated after 1 and 4 weeks of storage and observed for any
layering, crystal formation or freezing. The pH was evaluated by
measurement after dilution to 1 wt % a.e. dicamba. The formulation
of the formulations and test results are reported in Table 7a below
wherein "MEA:dicamba" refers to the molar ratio of MEA base to
dicamba acid, "stable" refers to no phase separation, "Clr. Sln."
refers to clear solution, and "layer" refers to phase
separation.
TABLE-US-00043 TABLE 7a MEA:mol 0.8:1 0.9:1 1:1 1.1:1 pH 3.87 4.77
8.19 8.94 60.degree. C. Clr. Sln. Stable, Clr. Sln. Clr. Sln. Clr.
Sln. 50.degree. C. Stable Stable Clr. Sln. Clr. Sln. 0.degree. C.
Clr. Sln. Clr. Sln. Clr. Sln. Layer -10.degree. C. Clr. Sln. Clr.
Sln. Clr. Sln. Layer -20.degree. C. Frozen Clr. Sln. Clr. Sln.
Layer -30.degree. C. Frozen Frozen Frozen Frozen
[0218] The results indicate that at high pH (8.9) layering occurs
while at slightly lower pH (8.2) the formulation is stable.
Example 8
[0219] Aqueous formulations comprising 480 and 600 g a.e./L MEA
dicamba were formulated with varying amounts of Lupasol SK polymer
(poly5). Viscosity was measured at 10.degree. C. using a Haake
VT550 viscometer @45 RPM. The viscosity results are reported in
Table 8a in centipoise.
TABLE-US-00044 TABLE 8a Lupasol SK (wt %) 480 g a.e./L dicamba 600
g a.e./L dicamba 0 -- 20 1.5 -- 105 2 55 -- 3 -- 280 4 160 460 5 --
700 6 335 -- 8 650 -- 8.5 770 --
[0220] The data show that the viscosity of a formulation increases
with increasing amount of polymer and dicamba salt.
Example 9
[0221] The compatibility of MEA dicamba and tank mixes containing
MEA dicamba with Roundup WeatherMAX.RTM. or Roundup PowerMAX.RTM.
with the drift control agents Gardian.RTM., Gardian Plus.RTM.,
Dri-Gard.RTM., Pro-One XL.TM., Array.TM., Compadre.TM.,
In-Place.RTM., Bronc.RTM. Max EDT, EDT Concentrate.TM.,
Coverage.RTM. and Bronc.RTM. Plus Dry EDT was evaluated. Aqueous
formulations were prepared as described in Table 9a below where
"Form" refers to the formulation, "Drift Cont." refers to the drift
control agent, "Amt" refers to the amount, "W.MAX" refers to
ROUNDUP WEATHERMAX, and "P.MAX" refers to ROUNDUP POWERMAX.
TABLE-US-00045 TABLE 9a Form. Drift Cont. Amt. Dicamba ROUNDUP pH
9A GARDIAN 0.75 mL 0.52 g -- 6.2 9B GARDIAN PLUS 5 mL 0.52 g --
6.72 9C DRI-GARD 1.44 g 0.52 g -- 7.16 9D PRO-ONE XL 1.56 g 0.52 g
-- 6.74 9E ARRAY 1.68 g 0.52 g -- 7.25 Form. Drift Cont. Amt.
Dicamba W.MAX pH 9F GARDIAN 0.75 mL 1 g 3 g 5.13 9G GARDIAN PLUS 5
mL 1 g 3 g 5.01 9H DRI-GARD 1.44 g 1 g 3 g 4.97 9I PRO-ONE XL 1.56
g 1 g 3 g 4.98 9J ARRAY 1.68 g 1 g 3 g 4.96 9K COMPADRE 0.125 mL 1
g 3 g 5.11 9L IN PLACE 1.5 g 1 g 3 g 5.15 9M BRONC MAX EDT 2 mL 1 g
3 g 5.14 9N EDT CONCEN- 2 mL 1 g 3 g 5.18 TRATE 9O COVERAGE 3.1 mL
1 g 3 g 5.14 9P BRONC PLUS DRY 2.4 g 1 g 3 g 5.12 EDT 9Q GARDIAN
0.75 mL 2 g 6 g 5.03 9R GARDIAN PLUS 5 mL 2 g 6 g 4.97 9S DRI-GARD
1.44 g 2 g 6 g 4.94 9T PRO-ONE XL 1.56 g 2 g 6 g 4.96 9U ARRAY 1.68
g 2 g 6 g 5 9V COMPADRE 0.125 mL 2 g 6 g 5.06 9W IN PLACE 1.5 g 2 g
6 g 5.13 9X BRONC MAX EDT 2 mL 2 g 6 g 5.1 9Y EDT CONCEN- 2 mL 2 g
6 g 5.08 TRATE 9Z COVERAGE 3.1 mL 2 g 6 g 5.11 9AA BRONC PLUS DRY
2.4 g 2 g 6 g 5.02 EDT Form. Drift Cont. Amt. Dicamba P.MAX pH 9BB
GARDIAN 0.75 mL 1 g 3 g 4.9 9CC GARDIAN PLUS 5 mL 1 g 3 g 4.84 9DD
DRI-GARD 1.44 g 1 g 3 g 4.82 9EE PRO-ONE XL 1.56 g 1 g 3 g 4.8 9FF
ARRAY 1.68 g 1 g 3 g 4.78 9GG COMPADRE 0.125 mL 1 g 3 g 4.86 9HH IN
PLACE 1.5 g 1 g 3 g 4.87 9II BRONC MAX EDT 2 mL 1 g 3 g 4.95 9JJ
EDT CONCEN- 2 mL 1 g 3 g 4.89 TRATE 9KK COVERAGE 3.1 mL 1 g 3 g
4.93 9LL BRONC PLUS DRY 2.4 g 1 g 3 g 4.9 EDT 9MM GARDIAN 0.75 mL 2
g 6 g 4.82 9NN GARDIAN PLUS 5 mL 2 g 6 g 4.76 9OO DRI-GARD 1.44 g 2
g 6 g 4.75 9PP PRO-ONE XL 1.56 g 2 g 6 g 4.75 9QQ ARRAY 1.68 g 2 g
6 g 4.76 9RR COMPADRE 0.125 mL 2 g 6 g 4.8 9SS IN PLACE 1.5 g 2 g 6
g 4.87 9TT BRONC MAX EDT 2 mL 2 g 6 g 4.92 9UU EDT CONCEN- 2 mL 2 g
6 g 4.9 TRATE 9VV COVERAGE 3.1 mL 2 g 6 g 4.88 9WW BRONC PLUS DRY
2.4 g 2 g 6 g 4.86 EDT
[0222] The Table 9a formulations were evaluated for compatibility
by observing the appearance after storage at room temperature after
one hour. After one hour, the solutions were poured through a 150
micron sieve and observed for the presence of solids. The results
are reported in Table 9b below.
TABLE-US-00046 TABLE 9b Form. Observations Separations 9A Clear
None 9B Clear None 9C Hazy White None 9D Hazy White None 9E
Suspension that separates out in a Undissolved few hours particles
9F Clear None 9G Clear None 9H Hazy None 9I Clear Undissolved
particles 9J Suspension that separates out in a -- few hours 9K
Transparent blue-green solution None 9L Hazy light blue 1 mm cream,
4 mm oil 9M Clear blue None 9N Clear blue None 9O Hazy light blue 5
mm cream, 7 mm oil 9P Very hazy, light blue Undissolved particles
9Q Clear None 9R Clear None 9S Hazy None 9T Dissolved better than
with 3 g W.MAX Undissolved particles 9U Suspension that separates
out in a -- few hours 9V Transparent blue-green solution None 9W
Hazy light blue 3 mm oil 9X Clear blue None 9Y Clear blue None 9Z
Hazy light blue 1 mm cream, 6 mm oil 9AA Very hazy, light blue
Undissolved particles 9BB Clear None 9CC Clear None 9DD Hazy None
9EE Clear None 9FF Suspension that separates out in a -- few hours
9GG Clear None 9HH Hazy White 4 mm oil 9II Clear None 9JJ Clear
None 9KK Very hazy white 7 mm oil 9LL Clear Undissolved particles
9MM Clear None 9NN Clear None 9OO Hazy None 9PP Clear None 9QQ
Suspension that separates out in a -- few hours 9RR Clear None 9SS
Hazy White 5 mm oil 9TT Clear None 9UU Clear None 9VV Very hazy
white 8 mm oil 9WW Clear Undissolved particles
[0223] GARDIAN, GARDIAN PLUS, COMPADRE, BRONC MAX EDT and EDT
CONCENTRATE were compatible with all of the mixtures and dicamba
alone. Each created clear solutions with no separation and left
little to no particles on a 150 um sieve. DRI-GARD dissolved well,
but the solutions were all hazy. PRO-ONE XL did create clear
solutions but some particles would not dissolve in the tests
containing ROUNDUP WEATHER MAX. In all cases ARRAY appeared to
suspend for a few hours, but precipitated with time leaving a large
amount of residue on the Nessler tubes. IN-PLACE and COVERAGE
created emulsions that separated quickly. BRONC PLUS DRY EDT did
not dissolve completely.
[0224] PRO-ONE XL and BRONC PLUS MAX EDT were the only formulations
to show clear differences in compatibility between ROUNDUP WEATHER
MAX and ROUNDUP POWER MAX. PRO-ONE XL dissolved better in ROUNDUP
POWER MAX and BRONC PLUS MAX EDT created a clear solution with
Power Max but created a hazy solution with ROUNDUP WEATHER MAX.
Example 10
[0225] The aqueous solubility of the various salts of dicamba
prepared from the bases sodium, potassium, DGA, MEA and
hexamethylene diamine (HMDA) salt of dicamba was measured. The
maximum solubility was measured by taking a solution of that salt
containing salt crystals and equilibrating the solution at
20.degree. C. and 0.degree. C. for 5 to 7 days. The solution was
then passed through a 0.45 micron filter and assayed by HPLC for
soluble dicamba. The results are reported in Table 10a below where
"salt" refers to the dicamba salt, the solubility in reported in wt
% acid equivalent (a.e.) and wt % active ingredient (a.i.).
TABLE-US-00047 TABLE 10a 20.degree. C. 20.degree. C. 0.degree. C.
0.degree. C. Salt a.e. a.i. a.e. a.i. Comments Na 36.3 40.3 33 36.3
Crystals form easily K 54.6 64 52.7 61.8 Crystals form on surfaces
easily DGA <50 -- -- -- Crystals formed slowly MEA >71.9
>91.8 -- -- No crystals, sticky oil HMDA 14.1 17.8 11.2 14.1
Pasty solid
[0226] The solutions of the MEA and DGA salts were found to be
particularly difficult to get to form crystals. The MEA salt
solution did not form crystals and it took several weeks for a DGA
salt solution at -57% a.e. to start to form crystals. It should be
noted that, when these salt solutions dry on a glass surface, in
some experiments a sticky residue is left that does not form
crystals. In other experiments crystals did form upon drying MEA
dicamba solutions. The data show that it can be difficult to
initiate crystal growth from MEA dicamba solutions.
[0227] The Na and K salts formed crystals very readily on a glass
surface. As the solution dried, a powdery residue of salt formed
quickly and readily.
[0228] In a second experiment, the aqueous solubility of the
sodium, potassium, DGA and MEA salts of dicamba and dicamba acid
were measured at 20.degree. C. was measured. The results are
reported in Table 10b below:
TABLE-US-00048 TABLE 10b Dicamba wt % a.e. @20.degree. C. wt % a.i.
@20.degree. C. acid 0.4 -- sodium salt 36.3 40.3 potassium salt
54.6 64 DGA salt 56.5 83.4 MEA salt 66.1 84.4
Example 11
[0229] The compatibility of 480 and 600 g a.e./L solutions of MEA
dicamba with various surfactants was evaluated as a function of
cloud point. The results are reported in Table 11a below where
"salt" refers to the dicamba salt, "wt % a.e." refers to the
dicamba concentration, "Surf Conc" refers to the surfactant
concentration and "Cld Pt" refers to cloud point. Formulations
having a dicamba loading of 38.5-40 wt % a.e. contained about 480 g
a.e./L dicamba and formulations having a dicamba loading of 48 wt %
a.e. contained about 600 g a.e./L dicamba.
TABLE-US-00049 TABLE 11a Form. Salt wt % a.e. Surfactant Surf Conc
Cld Pt 11A K 38.5 Surf3 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11B K 38.5 Surf29
10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11C MEA 38.5 Surf3 10 wt % >90.degree.
C. 11D MEA 38.5 Surf29 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11E MEA 38.5
Surf30 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11F MEA 38.5 Surf31 10 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11G MEA 38.5 Surf32 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11H
MEA 38.5 Surf33 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11I MEA 38.5 Surf34 10 wt
% >90.degree. C. 11J K 38.5 Surf30 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11K
K 38.5 Surf31 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11L K 38.5 Surf32 10 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11M K 38.5 Surf33 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11N K
38.5 Surf34 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11O K 38.5 Surf35 10 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11P K 38.5 Surf5 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11Q
MEA 38.5 Surf35 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11R MEA 38.5 Surf5 10 wt
% >90.degree. C. 11S MEA 38.5 Surf4 10 wt % >90.degree. C.
11T K 38.5 Surf4 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11U MEA 38.5 Surf36 0.8
wt % >90.degree. C. 11V MEA 38.5 Surf36 2.7 wt % >90.degree.
C. 11W MEA 38.5 Surf37 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11X K 38.5 Surf37
10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11Y K 38.5 Surf2 15 wt % >90.degree.
C. 11Z MEA 38.5 Surf2 15 wt % >90.degree. C. 11AA MEA 38.5
Surf40 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11BB MEA 48 Surf3 10 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11CC MEA 48 Surf38 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11DD
MEA 48 Surf1 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11EE MEA 48 Surf36 1.5 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11FF MEA 48 Surf34 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11GG
MEA 48 Surf39 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11HH MEA 48 Surf6 10 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11II MEA 48 Surf2 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11JJ
MEA 48 Surf4 10 wt % >90.degree. C. 11KK MEA 40 Surf5 8 wt %
>90.degree. C. 11LL MEA 48 Surf29 14 wt % >90.degree. C.
[0230] It is demonstrated by this data that a wide range of
different types of surfactants are surprisingly compatible with
highly concentrated K and MEA salt solutions of dicamba.
Example 12
[0231] Aqueous tank mix compatibility of the Na, MEA and DGA
dicamba salts with potassium glyphosate was measured. A 35.8% a.e.
aqueous solution of the dicamba salt solution was added to an
aqueous solution comprising 7.7% Roundup POWERMAX.RTM. herbicide
(containing 540 g a.e./L potassium glyphosate) until precipitation
was noted. The weight of the dicamba solution that caused
precipitation was noted. The results are reported in Table 12a
below where "salt" refers to the dicamba salt and "g to crystals"
refers to the total amount of grams of dicamba a.e. that were
required to induce crystallization or precipitation of
crystals.
TABLE-US-00050 TABLE 12a Salt g to crystals Comment Na 13.6 -- DGA
>17 CLARITY - clear solution with no precipitate MEA >34.2
Clear solution, no precipitate
[0232] Only the sodium salt induced crystallization in the presence
of potassium glyphosate.
[0233] Formulation 11BB was discovered to have low viscosity
demonstrating that a 600 g/L a.e. MEA dicamba formulation
containing 10% surfactant has a low viscosity and would be easily
pumpable. The viscosity as a function of temperature was measured
and the results are reported in Table 12b below.
TABLE-US-00051 TABLE 12b Temp (.degree. C.) Viscosity (cP) 2.5
201.4 6.5 161.5 10.5 127.1 14.6 99.7 18.3 79.4 22.1 63.7 26 52.2
29.8 42.7
Example 13
[0234] In certain formulations containing MEA dicamba and polyimine
polymer, the polymer may precipitate upon dilution, particularly at
low pH. Addition of APA surfactants to these formulations was
evaluated to determine if polyimine polymer dissolution could be
facilitated.
[0235] A MEA dicamba solution was prepared by mixing together 799.9
grams (64% w/w/) dicamba acid, 198.6 grams (15.9% w/w) MEA and
251.4 grams (20.1% w/w) water until dissolved.
[0236] A 16.6% Lupasol P (Poly1) solution was prepared by mixing
together 58.2 grams (33.1% w/w) Lupasol P (50%) and 117.5 grams
(66.9% w/w water) until dissolved.
[0237] Formulations of MEA dicamba containing Lupasol P, and Armeen
APA 8, 10 (Surf43) were prepared by combining, in order, the MEA
dicamba solution, water, the Armeen APA, and the Lupasol P solution
using the amounts reported in Table 13a.
TABLE-US-00052 TABLE 13a Form. MEA dicamba (g) Poly1 (g) Surf43 (g)
Water (g) pH 13A 33.33 12.52 0 4.17 9.26 13B 33.33 12.52 1 3.15
9.33 13C 33.33 12.52 1.5 2.65 9.35 13D 33.33 12.54 1.75 2.41 9.38
13E 33.33 12.55 2.01 2.17 9.4
[0238] In a series of evaluations, 1 mL of each of the Table 13a
formulations were combined with 2 mL ROUNDUP WEATHERMAX and 47 mL
water in a 50 mL Nessler tube. The results are reported in Table
13b.
TABLE-US-00053 TABLE 13b Form. Observation 13A Polymer settled to
the bottom of the tube as white lumps 13B White lumps formed, a few
settled to the bottom of the tube 13C White lumps formed then
dissolved before settling to bottom 13D Very few white lumps formed
then dissolved before settling to bottom 13E No lumps formed,
dissolved well
[0239] The formulations containing APA surfactant showed little or
no precipitation of the polymer compared to formulations containing
no APA surfactant.
[0240] Aqueous formulations comprising MEA dicamba, Lupasol SK, and
APA surfactants were formulated as indicated in Table 13c wherein
each formulation contained 480 g a.e./L MEA dicamba, 4.15% a.i.
Lupasol SK and 2% APA surfactant.
TABLE-US-00054 TABLE 13c Formulation APA 681K7H Surf41 682M3D
Surf42 683Q9L Surf43 684V5F Surf44 685Y4N Surf45 686X8I Surf46
687E1R Surf47
[0241] For all of the formulations studied, the addition of APA
surfactant facilitated dissolution of the polymer and no
precipitation upon dilution with water or in ROUNDUP tank mixtures
was observed.
[0242] Additional formulations with varied concentrations of APA
were evaluated. Data is provided in Table 13d wherein each
formulation was 480 g a.e./L MEA dicamba and 4.15% a.i. Lupasol
SK.
TABLE-US-00055 TABLE 13d Formulation wt % Surf43 521O5B 0.50%
522C2A 1.00% 523M9I 3.00% 524R0P 4.00% 525L2Z 5%
[0243] For all of the formulations studied, the addition of APA
facilitated dissolution of the polymer and no precipitation upon
dilution with water or in ROUNDUP tank mixtures was observed.
[0244] Cold temperature stability of aqueous MEA dicamba
formulations containing APA was evaluated. The formulation of the
MEA dicamba/APA formulations and test results are provided in Table
13e where all formulations contain 4.15% a.i. Lupasol SK and 2%
APA.
TABLE-US-00056 TABLE 13e % Dicamba Form. (a.e.) Polymer APA
-25.degree. C. -20.degree. C. -15.degree. C. 091U6J 36.00% None
none Frozen Frozen Liquid 033P3X 36.00% Poly5 None Liquid Liquid
Liquid 048L8N 36.50% Poly5 Surf43 Frozen Frozen Liquid 684M1S
36.30% Poly5 Surf45 Frozen Liquid Liquid 686T6G 36.3% Poly5 Surf47
Frozen Frozen Liquid
[0245] An experiment was performed to evaluate the efficacy of
application mixtures comprising MEA dicamba, polyimine polymer and
APA. The formulations of the experimental dicamba formulations are
indicated in table 13f where the dicamba concentration is reported
as wt % a.e. and the concentration of the other components in wt %
is indicated in parentheses.
TABLE-US-00057 TABLE 13f % MEA dicamba Form. a.e. by wt Poly. (%)
APA 810B4B 39.5 Poly1 (4.15) Surf43 (2) 810D3E 39.5 Poly1 (4.15)
Surf45 (2) 810F9K 39.5 Poly1 (4.15) Surf47 (2) 751W4I 36.3 Poly5
(4) Surf45 (2) 752A4J 36.3 Poly5 (4) Surf47 (2) 811U3Y 36.3 Poly3
(4) Surf43 (2) 812T5F 36.3 Poly3 (4) Surf45 (2)
[0246] The formulations from Table 13f, CLARITY and 925S3J were
sprayed over the top of 10-15 cm velvetleaf (ABUTH) plants to
evaluate herbicidal efficacy at application rates of 140, 280, and
561 g a.e./ha. Herbicidal efficacy was evaluated 21 days after
treatment. The data is presented in Table 13g in an ANOVA summary
of formulations mean comparisons by rate.
TABLE-US-00058 TABLE 13g Form. 140 g a.e./ha 280 g a.e/ha 560 g
a.e/ha CLARITY 44.2 70.8 85.0 925S3J 57.5 80.0 90.0 810B4B 50.0
74.2 84.2 810D3E 58.3 82.5 86.7 810F9K 64.4 74.2 86.7 751W4I 56.7
83.3 91.7 752A4J 65.8 81.7 88.3 811U3Y 50.0 80.0 87.5 812T5F 61.7
75.0 90.8
[0247] At the 140 g a.e./ha application rate 925S3J, 810D3E,
810F9K, 751W41,752A4J, and 812T5F were more efficacious than
CLARITY. At the 280 g a.e./ha application rate 925S3J, 810D3E,
751W41,752A4J, and 811U3Y were more efficacious than CLARITY. At
the 560 g a.e./ha application rate 925S3J, 751W41 and 811U3Y were
more efficacious than CLARITY.
[0248] The volatility of formulations comprising MEA dicamba,
polyimine polymer, and APA was measured and the results are shown
in Table 13h below.
TABLE-US-00059 TABLE 13h Form. Polymer % Dicamba APA pH Dicamba
ng/L 357C8D Poly1 (1.25) 10 Surf43 (4) 6.98 0.413 358X5Y Poly1
(1.25) 10 Surf43 (4) 8.00 0.321 359R8Y Poly1 (1.25) 10 Surf43 (4)
9.02 0.051 360L4F Poly1 (1.25) 10 Surf45 (2) 7.14 0.052 361M0G
Poly1 (1.25) 10 Surf45 (2) 8.04 0.056 362W7S Poly1 (1.25) 10 Surf45
(2) 9.21 0.049 475K3N Poly3 (1.25) 10 Surf45 (4) 7.07 0.459 476I8K
Poly3 (1.25) 10 Surf45 (4) 8.04 0.215 477E9B Poly3 (1.25) 10 Surf45
(4) 9.03 0.039
[0249] Addition of 2% ACAR 7051 to the formulation comprising MEA
dicamba and polyimine polymer greatly reduced dicamba volatility at
all 3 pH values of 7.14, 8.04 and 9.21 while addition of 4% Armeen
APA 810 showed significant reduction in volatility at pH 9.02.
Example 14
[0250] The volatility of MEA dicamba formulations containing
polyimine polymer with ROUNDUP herbicides was evaluated and
compared with CLARITY+ROUNDUP combination. The dicamba formulations
were mixed with ROUNDUP POWERMAX to give a 1:1 ratio of dicamba to
glyphosate. The results are shown in Table 14a.
TABLE-US-00060 TABLE 14a Form. Dicamba Form. pH Polymer Volatility
(ng/L) 114L6H CLARITY 4.57 none 3.172 112Q1E MEA DICAMBA 4.55 none
5.729 115D5B MEA DICAMBA 5.22 Poly2 1.758
[0251] The dicamba formulation containing the polyimine polymer had
reduced volatility compared to both MEA dicamba and CLARITY
formulations.
[0252] In a further set of experiments, the volatility of aqueous
tank mixtures containing dicamba salt and Roundup POWERMAX.RTM. was
measured. Aqueous formulations were prepared as described in table
14b. The tank mixtures were evaluated for dicamba concentration in
the gas phase (air) through air sampling while being exposed to
constant temperature and humidity in humidome in growth
chambers.
[0253] Humidomes were purchased from Hummert International (Part
Nos 14-3850-2 for humidomes and 11-3050-1 for 1020 flat tray) and
modified by cutting a 2.2 centimeter (cm) diameter hole on one end
approx 5 cm from the top to allow for insertion of glass air
sampling tube (22 mm OD) containing a polyurethane foam (PUF)
filter. The sampling tube was secured with a Viton o-ring on each
side of the humidome wall. The air sampling tube external to the
humidome was fitted with tubing that was connected to a vacuum
manifold immediately prior to sampling.
[0254] Formulations containing dicamba were introduced into the
humidome in one of two ways. Solutions containing dicamba
formulations (20 mL) were placed in a petri dish which was
positioned on the flat tray beneath the humidome. Alternatively,
the flat tray beneath the humidome was filled 1 liter of sifted dry
or wet 50/50 soil (50% Redi-Earth and 50% US 10 Field Soil) to a
depth of about 1 cm and dicamba formulations were sprayed over the
soil using a track sprayer at a rate of 10 gallons per acre (GPA).
To avoid contamination of the sides of the flat tray each tray was
nested in an empty tray prior to spraying. In some evaluations,
potted soybean or velvetleaf plants were placed on top of the
soil.
[0255] The flat tray bottom containing the dicamba formulation in a
petri dish or on soil was covered with a humidome lid and the lid
was secured with clamps. The assembled humidomes were placed in a
temperature and humidity controlled environment and connected to a
vacuum manifold through the air sampling line. Air was drawn
through the humidome and PUF at a rate of 2 liters per minutes
(LPM) for 24 hours at which point the air sampling was stopped. The
humidomes were then removed from the controlled environment and the
PUF filter was removed.
[0256] The PUF filter was extracted with 20 mL of methanol and the
solution was analyzed for dicamba concentration using liquid
chromatography-mass spectroscopy methods known in the art. The
reported results are an average of 3-6 samples.
[0257] Aqueous formulations were prepared as indicated in Table 14b
below and humidome results are indicated in Table 14c below. Each
formulation contained a combination of the indicated dicamba
formulation and POWERMAX and having concentrations of 0.5 wt % a.e.
dicamba and 1.5 wt % a.e. glyphosate. In Table 14b, "Form. No."
refers to formulation number and "Dicamba form." refers to dicamba
formulation. In Table 14c, "T" refers to temperature in degrees
centigrade, "RH" refers to relative humidity, "SD" refers to
standard deviation, "ng/L" refers to the air sample dicamba
concentration in nanograms per liter, "Petri" refers to petri dish,
"soil" refers to 50/50 soil (50% Redi-Earth and 50% US 10 Field
Soil), "soy" refers to soybean and "vel" refers to velvetleaf.
TABLE-US-00061 TABLE 14b Form No. Dicamba form. Dicamba salt pH
14(1) CLARITY DGA 4.46 14(2) BANVEL DMA 4.47 14(3) 968Q3W MEA 4.5
14(4) 933C3S MEA 4.81
TABLE-US-00062 TABLE 14c Form. Dicamba % plant No. Medium Plant T
RH ng/L SD injury 14(1) Petri None 35 40 0.179 0.03 14(2) Petri
None 35 40 0.151 0.021 14(3) Petri None 35 40 0.209 0.057 14(4)
Petri None 35 40 0.165 0.025 14(1) Petri Soy 35 40 0.115 0.045 18%
10DAT 14(2) Petri Soy 35 40 0.202 0.084 19% 10DAT 14(3) Petri Soy
35 40 0.071 0.02 20% 10DAT 14(4) Petri Soy 35 40 0.056 0.018 18%
10DAT 14(1) Soil Soy 35 40 1.254 0.145 32% 13DAT 14(2) Soil Soy 35
40 2.851 1.258 41% 13DAT 14(3) Soil Soy 35 40 1.308 0.044 37% 13DAT
14(4) Soil Soy 35 40 1.139 0.073 34% 13DAT 14(1) Soil Vel 27 40
0.384 0.162 37% 14DAT 14(2) Soil Vel 27 40 0.594 0.208 37% 14DAT
14(3) Soil Vel 27 40 0.462 0.154 37% 14DAT 14(4) Soil Vel 27 40
0.228 0.097 36% 14DAT 14(1) Soil Vel 27 40 0.487 0.198 16% 14DAT
14(2) Soil Vel 27 40 0.697 0.183 19% 14DAT 14(3) Soil Vel 27 40
0.649 0.283 18% 14DAT 14(4) Soil Vel 27 40 0.302 0.103 13%
14DAT
[0258] The data in Table 14c indicates that composition 968Q3W
(containing MEA dicamba) and BANVEL showed the highest volatility
in this humidome test. 933C3S (containing MEA dicamba and Lupasol
SK polymer) showed the lowest volatility. Plant injury data was
inconclusive in this test.
[0259] In a second set of humidome experiments, aqueous
formulations were prepared as indicated in Table 14d below. Each
formulation contained a combination of the indicated dicamba
formulation and POWERMAX and having concentrations of 1 wt % a.e.
dicamba and 3 wt % a.e. In Table 14d, "Form. No." refers to
formulation number and "Dicamba form." refers to dicamba
formulation. In Table 14e, "T" refers to temperature in degrees
centigrade, "RH" refers to relative humidity, "SD" refers to
standard deviation, "ng/L" refers to the air sample dicamba
concentration in nanograms per liter, "soil" refers to 50/50 soil
(50% Redi-Earth and 50% US 10 Field Soil) wherein the compositions
are applied to the soil, "RR soy" refers to ROUNDUP READY soybean
wherein the compositions are applied to the plant canopy, and "DT
soy" refers to dicamba tolerant soybean wherein the compositions
are applied to the plant canopy.
TABLE-US-00063 TABLE 14d Form No. Dicamba form. Dicamba salt pH
14(5) CLARITY DGA 4.41 14(6) 968Q3W MEA 4.43 14(7) 944L8M DGA 4.48
14(8) 933C3S MEA 4.81
TABLE-US-00064 TABLE 14e Form. No. Medium T RH Dicamba ng/L SD
14(5) Soil 27 40 0.409 0.142 14(6) Soil 27 40 0.632 0.186 14(5) RR
soy 27 40 0.77 0.194 14(6) RR soy 27 40 0.822 0.347 14(5) DT soy 27
40 0.619 0.112 14(6) DT soy 27 40 0.837 0.144 14(7) Soil 27 40
0.265 0.077 14(8) Soil 27 40 0.178 0.062 14(7) RR soy 27 40 0.468
0.081 14(8) RR soy 27 40 0.464 0.117
[0260] The data show that the addition of PEI polymer to MEA
dicamba formulations reduces the volatility of dicamba from a
canopy of ROUNDUP READY soybeans and from a canopy of dicamba
tolerant soybeans.
[0261] In a set of tube test experiments, aqueous formulations were
prepared as indicated in Table 14f below. In Table 14f, "Form. No."
refers to formulation number and "Dicamba form." refers to dicamba
formulation. Each Table 14f formulation contained 2 wt % a.e.
dicamba and 6 wt % a.e. glyphosate. Glyphosate "K salt" refers to
the potassium salt of glyphosate wherein the glyphosate source was
an aqueous solution containing 47.9 wt % a.e. potassium glyphosate;
POWERMAX refers to ROUNDUP POWERMAX.RTM.; and WEATERMAX refers to
ROUNDUP WEATHERMAX.RTM.. In Table 14g, "SD" refers to standard
deviation and "ng/L" refers to the air sample dicamba concentration
in nanograms per liter.
TABLE-US-00065 TABLE 14f Form. Dicmaba Dicamba Additional No. Form.
Salt components Glyphosate 14(9) BANVEL DMA -- K salt 14(10) 957Y2S
MEA -- K salt 14(11) CLARITY DGA -- K salt 14(12) 929P6H MEA -- K
salt 14(13) 931F5L MEA -- K salt 14(14) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.2%
LUPASOL P + K salt Surf48 14(15) CLARITY DGA 0.2% LUPASOL P K salt
14(16) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.2% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(17) MEA-Dicamba
MEA 0.2% LUPASOL P + K salt AGM 550 14(18) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.2%
LUPASOL FG + K salt Surf3 14(19) CLARITY DGA -- POWERMAX 14(20)
931F5L MEA -- POWERMAX 14(21) 926Y7O MEA Surf2 K salt 14(22) 925S3J
MEA Surf48 K salt 14(23) 956N5T MEA Surf3 K salt 14(24) CLARITY DGA
0.2% LUPASOL SK K salt 14(25) CLARITY DGA 0.2% LUPASOL HF K salt
14(26) CLARITY DGA 0.2% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(27) 933C3S MEA -- K
salt 14(28) DEA dicamba salt DEA -- K salt solution 14(29)
K-Dicamba K 0.2% LUPASOL SK K salt 14(30) K-Dicamba K 0.2% LUPASOL
P K salt 14(31) K-Dicamba K 0.2% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(32) K-Dicamba
K 0.2% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(33) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL SK +
K salt 0.15% LUPASOL P 14(34) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.15% LUPASOL SK + K
salt 0.05% LUPASOL P 14(35) Na-Dicamba Na -- K salt 14(36)
Na-Dicamba Na -- POWERMAX 14(37) BANVEL DMA 0.2% LUPASOL SK K salt
14(38) BANVEL DMA 0.2% LUPASOL P K salt 14(39) BANVEL DMA 0.2%
LUPASOL HF K salt 14(40) BANVEL DMA 0.2% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(41)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.15% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(42) MEA-Dicamba MEA
0.10% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(43) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL FG K
salt 14(44) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
HF 14(45) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
PN60 14(46) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
FG 14(47) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL SK + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
FG 14(48) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL SK + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
HF 14(49) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL SK + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
PN60 14(50) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL FG + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
HF 14(51) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL FG + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
PN60 14(52) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL HF + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL
PN60 14(53) K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL SK
14(54) K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL HF 14(55)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL PN60 14(56)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL P + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL FG 14(57)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL SK + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL FG 14(58)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL SK + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL HF 14(59)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL SK + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL PN60 14(60)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL FG + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL HF 14(61)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL FG + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL PN60 14(62)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL HF + K salt 0.05% LUPASOL PN60 14(63)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.10% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(64) MEA-Dicamba MEA
0.15% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(65) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.21% LUPASOL FG K
salt 14(66) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.25% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(67)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.30% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(68) MEA-Dicamba MEA
0.41% Surf30 K salt 14(69) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.05% LUPASOL HF K salt
14(70) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.10% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(71) MEA-Dicamba
MEA 0.15% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(72) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.20% LUPASOL HF
K salt 14(73) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.25% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(74)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.30% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(75) MEA-Dicamba MEA
0.05% LUPASOL P K salt 14(76) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.10% LUPASOL P K
salt 14(77) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.15% LUPASOL P K salt 14(78)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.20% LUPASOL P K salt 14(79) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.25%
LUPASOL P K salt 14(80) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.30% LUPASOL P K salt
14(81) K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(82) K-Dicamba K 0.10%
LUPASOL HF K salt 14(83) K-Dicamba K 0.15% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(84)
K-Dicamba K 0.20% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(85) K-Dicamba K 0.25%
LUPASOL HF K salt 14(86) K-Dicamba K 0.30% LUPASOL HF K salt 14(87)
K-Dicamba K 0.05% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(88) K-Dicamba K 0.10%
LUPASOL FG K salt 14(89) K-Dicamba K 0.15% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(90)
K-Dicamba K 0.20% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(91) K-Dicamba K 0.25%
LUPASOL FG K salt 14(92) K-Dicamba K 0.30% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(93)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.15% LUPASOL FG POWERMAX 14(94) MEA-Dicamba MEA
0.20% LUPASOL FG POWERMAX 14(95) 942T3R DGA -- K salt 14(96)
K-Dicamba K 0.20% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(97) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.25%
LUPASOL FG POWERMAX 14(98) 942T3R DGA -- POWERMAX 14(99) 942T3R DGA
-- WEATHERMAX 14(100) 957Y2S MEA -- WEATHERMAX 14(101) BANVEL DMA
-- POWERMAX 14(102) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.2% LUPASOL FG + K salt Surf3
14(103) 933C3S MEA -- POWERMAX 14(104) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.05%
LUPASOL FG K salt 14(105) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.10% LUPASOL FG K salt
14(106) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.15% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(107) DGA-Dicamba
DGA 0.20% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(108) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.25% LUPASOL
FG K salt 14(109) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.30% LUPASOL FG K salt 14(110)
DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.20% LUPASOL SK K salt 14(111) DGA-Dicamba DGA
0.20% LUPASOL P K salt 14(112) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.20% LUPASOL HF K
salt 14(113) MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.20% LUPASOL G20 K salt 14(114)
MEA-Dicamba MEA 0.20% LUPASOL G35 K salt 14(115) MEA-Dicamba MEA
0.20% LUPASOL G100 K salt 14(116) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.20% LUPASOL G20
K salt 14(117) DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.20% LUPASOL G35 K salt 14(118)
DGA-Dicamba DGA 0.20% LUPASOL G100 K salt
TABLE-US-00066 TABLE 14g Form. No. pH Dicamba ng/L SD 14(9) 4.08
5.04 0.963 14(10) 4.08 3.052 0.682 14(11) 4.07 2.778 0.476 14(12)
4.19 2.801 0.039 14(13) 4.46 3.483 0.336 14(14) 4.47 3.397 0.199
14(15) 4.56 1.706 0.233 14(16) 4.51 2.622 0.113 14(17) 4.52 3.53
0.181 14(18) 4.1 3.949 1.342 14(19) 4.36 1.811 0.13 14(20) 4.65
1.766 0.329 14(21) 4.21 5.761 1.294 14(22) 4.23 3.566 0.184 14(23)
4.28 3.644 0.283 14(24) 4.22 2.218 0.589 14(25) 4.69 1.7 0.015
14(26) 4.64 1.08 0.184 14(27) 4.58 0.781 0.092 14(28) 4.1 2.398
0.592 14(29) 4.26 2.484 0.427 14(30) 4.54 2.454 0.531 14(31) 4.53
1.527 0.085 14(32) 4.49 1.152 0.194 14(33) 4.46 3.244 1.016 14(34)
4.35 3.176 0.153 14(35) 4.75 0.98 0.245 14(36) 4.87 1.566 0.451
14(37) 4.15 2.685 0.45 14(38) 4.46 3.611 0.732 14(39) 4.47 3.54
0.681 14(40) 4.48 1.879 0.045 14(41) 4.32 2.934 0.671 14(42) 4.26
2.965 0.392 14(43) 4.23 3.416 0.591 14(44) 4.31 4.482 0.912 14(45)
4.22 5.322 1.191 14(46) 4.29 3.052 0.492 14(47) 4.26 2.96 0.523
14(48) 4.23 4.978 1.258 14(49) 4.15 5.453 0.981 14(50) 4.31 2.513
0.709 14(51) 4.19 2.261 0.363 14(52) 4.21 3.605 0.888 14(53) 4.28
3.59 1.143 14(54) 4.35 3.599 0.788 14(55) 4.21 3.459 1.033 14(56)
4.27 2.483 0.63 14(57) 4.24 2.359 0.268 14(58) 4.23 2.545 0.543
14(59) 4.13 4.832 0.31 14(60) 4.34 2.761 0.801 14(61) 4.23 2.962
0.709 14(62) 4.2 2.622 0.609 14(63) 4.26 2.266 0.459 14(64) 4.32
2.51 0.41 14(65) 4.56 0.933 0.351 14(66) 4.56 1.323 0.407 14(67)
4.66 0.898 0.188 14(68) 4.25 3.564 0.337 14(69) 4.15 3.797 0.883
14(70) 4.27 3.953 0.702 14(71) 4.33 3.551 0.236 14(72) 4.44 2.641
0.863 14(73) 4.51 3.228 0.54 14(74) 4.63 2.776 0.386 14(75) 4.26
2.963 0.422 14(76) 4.34 2.829 0.868 14(77) 4.43 2.471 0.611 14(78)
4.53 2.156 0.573 14(79) 4.59 3.311 0.104 14(80) 4.67 2.451 0.173
14(81) 4.19 4.159 0.411 14(82) 4.28 3.417 0.487 14(83) 4.37 3.244
0.565 14(84) 4.44 3.431 0.998 14(85) 4.49 2.972 0.676 14(86) 4.54
2.515 0.739 14(87) 4.24 2.28 0.233 14(88) 4.33 1.91 0.458 14(89)
4.41 1.708 0.346 14(90) 4.52 0.908 0.631 14(91) 4.58 1.146 0.207
14(92) 4.64 1.094 0.232 14(93) 4.68 1.799 0.754 14(94) 4.71 2.412
0.84 14(95) 4.12 1.806 0.313 14(96) 4.52 1.457 0.371 14(97) 4.77
1.251 0.38 14(98) 4.41 1.688 0.197 14(99) 4.52 1.558 0.413 14(100)
4.449 2.347 0.457 14(101) 4.34 3.898 0.991 14(102) 4.58 3.837 0.475
14(103) 4.61 1.391 0.087 14(104) 4.25 1.972 0.343 14(105) 4.35
1.334 0.135 14(106) 4.43 1.334 0.25 14(107) 4.53 1.431 0.373
14(108) 4.59 1.046 0.097 14(109) 4.63 1.149 0.394 14(110) 4.18
3.551 0.241 14(111) 4.46 1.947 0.268 14(112) 4.45 2.725 0.634
14(113) 4.57 1.275 0.262 14(114) 4.56 1.467 0.372 14(115) 4.53
2.797 0.936 14(116) 4.56 1.164 0.364 14(117) 4.55 1.036 0.169
14(118) 4.54 1.34 0.204
[0262] The Table 14g data show that the addition of PEI reduces the
volatility of CLARITY (DGA dicamba), BANVEL (DMA dicamba) and
potassium dicamba with LUPASOL FG providing the largest reduction.
The data further show that lower molecular weight LUPASOL PEIs
provide the greatest volatility reduction for MEA dicamba. The data
further show that a weight ratio of dicamba a.e. to PEI polymer of
about 10:1 provides the best volatility reduction. The data still
further show that PEI polymers having a molecular weight in excess
of about 5,000 Daltons are preferred.
Example 15
[0263] The spray droplet particle size of compositions of the
present invention and comparative compositions were measured using
an Aerometrics phase doppler particle analysis (PDPA) system. The
samples were each diluted in 15 L tap water at 20.0.degree. C. to a
final equivalent kilogram per hectare (kg/ha) value based on an
application rate of 93 liters per hectare (L/ha). The kg/ha values
are disclosed in Table 15a below. For each reported kg/ha value, a
corresponding concentration in grams acid equivalent per liter can
be calculated from the application rate of 93 L/ha. In particular,
values of 0.073, 0.09, 0.28 and 0.56 kg/ha reported in table 15a
below correspond to 0.78, 0.97, 3 and 6 g a.e./L, respectively.
Where the drift control agents GARDIAN and INTERLOCK are indicated,
the concentration is reported in % v/v based on the final diluted
formulation.
TABLE-US-00067 TABLE 15a Formulation Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Sample 4 CLARITY 0.073 0.28 0.56 -- CLARITY + 0.073 + 0.28 + -- --
GARDIAN 0.5% v/v 0.5% v/v CLARITY + 0.073 + 0.28 + -- -- INTERLOCK
0.3% v/v 0.3% v/v 962P0H 0.073 0.28 0.56 -- 962P0H + 0.070 + 0.28 +
-- -- GARDIAN 0.5% v/v 0.5% v/v 962P0H + 0.073 + 0.28 + -- --
INTERLOCK 0.3% v/v 0.3% v/v 908D1S 0.073 0.28 0.56 -- 908DIS +
0.073 + -- -- -- GARDIAN 0.5% v/v 908DIS + 0.073 + -- -- --
INTERLOCK 0.3% v/v 929P6H 0.073 0.28 0.56 -- 929P6H + 0.073 + -- --
-- GARDIAN 0.5% v/v 926Y7O 0.073 0.09 0.28 0.56 926Y7O + -- 0.09 +
0.28 + -- GARDIAN 0.5% v/v 0.5% v/v 926Y7O + 0.073 + -- 0.28 + --
INTERLOCK 0.3% v/v 0.3% v/v 931F5L -- 0.28 0.56 -- 931F5L + -- 0.28
+ -- -- GARDIAN 0.5% v/v 931F5L + -- 0.28 + -- -- INTERLOCK 0.3%
v/v GARDIAN 0.5% v/v -- -- -- INTERLOCK 0.3% v/v -- -- --
[0264] Each mixture was sprayed through a Teejet XR8003VS nozzle
tip at 276 kPa (40 psi) at a height of 30 cm above the probe volume
of the Aerometrics PDPA laser system. The size range scanned was
from 25.7 .mu.m-900.0 .mu.m. The voltage for the photo-multiplier
tube (PMT) was set to 325V.
[0265] Two types of measurement were made for each treatment: a
stationary center measurement under the x-y axes intersection point
(center); and a scan down the length of the long x-axis to yield an
overall global sample (x-scan). Each measurement was replicated 3
times. These replicates were merged to yield an overall sample.
This data was run through a macro program to generate data
including (i) average velocity (in meters per second for the entire
spray cloud); (ii) D10 (arithmetic mean diameter); (iii) D20 (area
mean); (iv) D30 (volume mean); (v) D32 (sauter mean); (vi) 10% and
90% points (The droplet particle size below which 10% (or 90%) of
the volume of the measured particles lie); (vii) Volume Median
Diameter (Dv0.5--The droplet particle size below which 50% of the
volume of particles are contained); (viii) Number Median Diameter
(NMD--The particle size below which 50% of the number of droplet
particles are contained); (ix) relative span [(90% point--10%
point)/VMD, wherein, the smaller the number, the more narrow
(monodispersed) the distribution]; (x) percent by volume and number
<100 and <150 .mu.m (the proportion of the volume of the
spray cloud/number of droplet particles contained within
(above/below) a given size range); and (xi) percent distributions
by volume and number for 100-200 .mu.m.
[0266] The PDPA particle size data for a first set of experiments
is reported in Table 15b below.
TABLE-US-00068 TABLE 15b % V < % V 100 .mu.m Formulation
Measurement 100 .mu.m % V < 150 .mu.m to 200 .mu.m Water Center
7.73 16.69 19.91 x-scan 4.32 12.02 18.75 CLARITY Center 8.11 17.49
20.54 Sample 1 x-scan 4.78 12.62 18.89 CLARITY Center 8.39 17.92
21.16 Sample 2 x-scan 4.44 12.19 18.87 CLARITY Center 9.32 19.21
21.7 Sample 3 x-scan 5.3 13.73 20.24 926Y7O Center 5.16 13.22 19.47
Sample 1 x-scan 2.99 9.79 17.03 926Y7O Center 4.66 12.19 18.42
Sample 3 x-scan 2.84 9.12 16.15 926Y7O Center 6.11 14.82 20.32
Sample 4 x-scan 3.44 10.47 17.66 926Y7O + Center 6.94 15.47 17.75
GARDIAN x-scan 3.29 8.5 12.13 Sample 3 926Y7O + Center 2.49 8.15
15.18 INTERLOCK x-scan 2.14 7.71 15.05 Sample 3 931F5L Center 5.33
13.41 19.19 Sample 2 x-scan 2.91 9.39 16.43 931F5L Center 3.69
10.54 17.23 Sample 3 x-scan 2.42 8.28 15.61 931F5L + Center 5.4
11.73 13.96 GARDIAN x-scan 2.47 6.43 9.45 Sample 2 931F5L + Center
1.42 5.63 12.12 INTERLOCK x-scan 1.39 5.74 12.5 Sample 2
[0267] The x-scan results for water, CLARITY Sample 3, 926Y7O
Sample 4, 931F5L Sample 3, 908D1S Sample 3 and 929P6H Sample 3 are
depicted in FIG. 1.
[0268] Analysis of the Table 15b results show that the CLARITY
prior art compositions had a greater volume percent at less than
100 .mu.m, less than 150 .mu.m and from 100 .mu.m to 200 .mu.m than
each composition of the present invention at comparative dicamba
concentrations thereby indicating that the inventive compositions
provide a larger average droplet particle size than the comparative
prior art compositions.
[0269] The PDPA particle size data for a second set of experiments
is reported in Table 15c below wherein the dicamba final kg/ha
values for formulation 926Y7O Samples 5, 6 and 7 were 0.072, 0.35
and 0.7 kg/ha, respectively.
TABLE-US-00069 TABLE 15c % V < % V 100 .mu.m Formulation
Measurement 100 .mu.m % V < 150 .mu.m to 200 .mu.m Water x-scan
4.7 12.78 19.5 Water + x-scan 2.76 7.38 10.91 GARDIAN CLARITY
x-scan 4.78 12.62 18.89 Sample 1 CLARITY x-scan 4.44 12.19 18.87
Sample 2 CLARITY x-scan 5.3 13.73 20.24 Sample 3 CLARITY + x-scan
2.28 6.08 9.07 GARDIAN Sample 1 CLARITY + x-scan 1.78 6.73 13.44
INTERLOCK Sample 1 962P0H x-scan 4.66 12.42 18.87 Sample 1 962P0H
x-scan 4.45 12.5 19.13 Sample 2 962P0H x-scan 4.4 12.44 19.38
Sample 3 962P0H + x-scan 2.46 6.36 9.2 GARDIAN Sample 1 962P0H +
x-scan 1.65 6.44 13.58 INTERLOCK Sample 1 908D1S x-scan 4.23 11.82
18.32 Sample 1 908D1S x-scan 5.19 13.59 19.81 Sample 2 908D1S
x-scan 6.26 15.68 22.05 Sample 3 908D1S + x-scan 2.86 7.41 10.59
GARDIAN Sample 1 908D1S + x-scan 1.5 5.89 12.69 INTERLOCK Sample 1
929P6H x-scan 4.67 12.46 18.72 Sample 1 929P6H x-scan 4.24 11.76
18.23 Sample 2 929P6H x-scan 4.31 11.72 18.04 Sample 3 929P6H +
x-scan 2.22 5.84 8.68 GARDIAN Sample 1 926Y7O x-scan 3.46 10.7
17.71 Sample 5 926Y7O x-scan 2.69 8.9 16.6 Sample 6 926Y7O x-scan
5.59 14.58 21.05 Sample 7 926Y7O + x-scan 2.63 7.09 10.44 GARDIAN
Sample 2
[0270] Analysis of the Table 15c results show that the CLARITY
prior art compositions had a greater volume percent: at less than
100 .mu.m, less than 150 .mu.m and from 100 .mu.m to 200 .mu.m than
each of compositions 962P0H Sample 1, 908D1S Sample 1,
908D1S+INTERLOCK Sample 1, 929P6H Samples 1-3, 929P6H+GUARDIAN
Sample 1 and 926Y7O Sample 5 of the present invention at
comparative dicamba concentrations; at less than 100 .mu.m and from
100 .mu.m to 200 .mu.m than 962P0H Sample 3 at a comparative
dicamba concentration; at less than 100 .mu.m and at less than 150
.mu.m than 962P0H+INTERLOCK Sample 1 at a comparative dicamba
concentration; and at less than 150 .mu.m and from 100 .mu.m to 200
.mu.m than composition 908D1S Sample 3 at a comparative dicamba
concentration thereby indicating that those inventive compositions
provide a larger average droplet particle size than the comparative
prior art compositions.
[0271] The Average velocity (m/sec), NMD (in .mu.m) and span for
the measurements reported in Table 15c are reported in Table 15d
below.
TABLE-US-00070 TABLE 15d Average velocity Formulation (m/sec) NMD
(.mu.m) Span Water 5.55 76.97 1.22 Water + 5.6 73.14 1.02 GARDIAN
CLARITY 5.58 73.14 1.14 Sample 1 CLARITY 5.78 79.33 1.18 Sample 2
CLARITY 5.58 71.77 1.18 Sample 3 CLARITY + 5.69 72.47 0.97 GARDIAN
Sample 1 CLARITY + 7.3 119.42 1.01 INTERLOCK Sample 1 962P0H 5.53
75.23 1.15 Sample 1 962P0H 5.83 79.27 1.17 Sample 2 962P0H 5.81
78.88 1.14 Sample 3 962P0H + 5.64 69.65 0.98 GARDIAN Sample 1
962P0H + 7.54 124.48 1.02 INTERLOCK Sample 1 908D1S 5.65 76.92 1.23
Sample 1 908D1S 5.69 73.44 1.27 Sample 2 908D1S 5.48 70.22 1.16
Sample 3 908D1S + 5.74 72.72 1.05 GARDIAN Sample 1 908D1S + 7.57
126.58 0.94 INTERLOCK Sample 1 929P6H 5.62 73.82 1.11 Sample 1
929P6H 5.88 80.83 1.15 Sample 2 929P6H 5.85 77.96 1.11 Sample 3
929P6H + 5.67 73.36 1.05 GARDIAN Sample 1 926Y7O 6.3 91.54 1.05
Sample 5 926Y7O 6.53 100.98 1.21 Sample 6 926Y7O 5.66 75.35 1.11
Sample 7 926Y7O + 5.58 74.76 1.11 GARDIAN Sample 2
[0272] Analysis of the Table 15d results show that the CLARITY
prior art compositions had a smaller median droplet particle size
than inventive compositions 962P0H Samples 1 and 3,
962P0H+INTERLOCK Sample 1, 908D1S Sample 1, 908D1S+GARDIAN Sample
1, 908D1S+INTERLOCK Sample 1, 929P6H Samples 1-3, 929P6H+GARDIAN
Sample 1, 926Y7O Sample 5 and 926Y7O+GARDIAN Sample 1 at
comparative dicamba concentrations thereby indicating that those
inventive compositions provide a larger droplet particle size than
the comparative prior art compositions.
Example 16
[0273] The eye irritation potential of an aqueous formulation of
the present invention was evaluated. A formulation consisting 61 wt
% a.e. aqueous MEA dicamba solution having a pH of 8.5 was
prepared. Eye irritation testing was done according to the methods
provided in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Health Effects Test
Guidelines: OPPTS 870.2400 Acute Eye Irritation. The eyes of 3
rabbit animals were treated with the formulation and were scored
for effects on the cornea, iris, and conjunctivae (redness,
swelling and discharge). A FIFRA category 3 rating, or moderately
irritating, was assigned to the formulation. The results are
presenting in Tables 16a-c below.
TABLE-US-00071 TABLE 16a Animal 1 Hours Days 2 24 48 72 4 7 10
Cornea Opacity 1 2 1 1 1 0 0 Area 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 Iris Values 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 Conjunctivae Redness 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 Chemosis 3 2 2 2 2 0 0
Discharge 3 3 2 1 1 1 0
TABLE-US-00072 TABLE 16b Animal 2 Hours Days 2 24 48 72 4 7 10
Cornea Opacity 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 Area 2 3 3 1 1 4 4 Iris Values 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 Conjunctivae Redness 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 Chemosis 3 2 2 2 2 0 0
Discharge 3 3 1 0 1 1 0
TABLE-US-00073 TABLE 16c Animal 3 Hours Days 2 24 48 72 4 7 10
Cornea Opacity 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Area 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 Iris Values 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 Conjunctivae Redness 3 3 3 2 2 1 3 Chemosis 3 2 2 2 2 0 3
Discharge 3 3 1 1 1 1 3
[0274] All treated eyes exhibited corneal opacity, iritis and
conjunctivitis within 24 hours after treatment. All eyes were free
of positive scores 7 days after treatment and all irritation by 10
days (conjunctival scores of 1 are not considered as positive
scores). Based on the results of the study, the MEA dicamba
formulation is considered to be moderately irritating to the eye
and would likely be classified in FIFRA Category III.
Example 17
[0275] The eye irritation potential of formulations 908D1S and
929P6H were evaluated. Eye irritation testing was conducted to
comply with Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) regulations as defined
in: 40 CFR 160 (U.S. EPA GLP Standards--Pesticide Programs (FIFRA)
1989; OECD Principles of GLP (as revised in 1977) published in
ENV/MC/CHEM (98)17, OECD, Paris (1978); and EC Directive
2004/10/EC, Official Journal of the European Union, L50/44 (2004).
Testing was done according to the protocol provided in: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Prevention, Pesticides
and Toxic Substances, Health Effects Test Guidelines (OPPTS
870.2400) Acute Eye Irritation; OECD Guideline for the Testing of
Chemicals, Test No. 405; and Official Journal of the European
Communities, Methods for the Determination of Toxicity, Part B.5
(Eye Irritation), Directive 2004/73/EC.
[0276] The eyes of 3 rabbit animals were treated with each
formulation to determine the potential for formulations 908D1S and
929P6H to produce irritation from a single instillation via the
ocular route. Prior to testing of the formulations, one drop of 2%
ophthalmic fluorescein sodium was instilled into both eyes of each
rabbit. After about 30 seconds, the eyes were rinsed with
physiological saline (0.9% NaCl) and then evaluated and scored for
corneal damage and abnormalities using an ultraviolet light source.
Three healthy rabbits, not previously tested and without
preexisting ocular irritation, were selected for testing. Prior to
testing of the formulations, 2-3 drops of ocular anesthetic
(Tetracaine Hydrochloride Ophthalmic Solution 0.5%) were placed in
each of both eyes of each rabbit. One tenth of a milliliter of the
evaluated formulation was instilled in the right eye of the rabbit.
The left eye remained untreated and served as a control. Ocular
irritation was evaluated at 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours by the method of
Draize et al. (Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of
substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes, J.
Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 82:377-390 (1944)). The fluorscein dye
evaluation method described above was performed at 24 and/or at 48
hours to evaluate the extent of corneal damage. The time interval
with the highest mean score (Maximum Mean Total Score--MMTS) for
all rabbits was used to classify the test substance by the system
of Kay and Calandra (Kay, J. H. and Calandra, J. C., Interpretation
of eye irritation tests, J. Soc. Cos. Chem., 13:281-289
(1962)).
[0277] The results for formulation 929P6H are presented in Tables
17a and b below and the results for formulation 908D1S are
presented in Tables 17c-e below.
TABLE-US-00074 TABLE 17a EEC Mean Scores for formulation 929P6H.
Corneal Iris Conjunctival Conjunctival Rabbit No. Opacity Lesion
Redness Chemosis 1 (Male) 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 2 (Female) 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 3 (Female) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
[0278] Formulation 929P6H is classified as mildly irritating to the
eye and meets the requirements for the EC classification of "No
classification for ocular irritation.
TABLE-US-00075 TABLE 17b Individual scores for ocular irritation
for formulation 929P6H Hour 1 Hour 24 Hour 48 Hour 72 Rabbit No. 1
(Male) I. Cornea A. Opacity 0 .sup. 1.sup.a .sup. 0.sup.a 0 B. Area
4 1 4 4 (A .times. B) .times. 5 0 5 0 0 II. Iris A. Values 0 0 0 0
A .times. 5 0 0 0 0 III. Conjunctivae A. Redness 2 2 1 0 B.
Chemosis 1 0 0 0 C. Discharge 2 2 1 0 (A + B + C) .times. 2 10 8 4
0 Total 10 13 4 0 Rabbit No. 2 (Female) I. Cornea A. Opacity 0
.sup. 0.sup.a 0 0 B. Area 4 4 4 4 (A .times. B) .times. 5 0 0 0 0
II. Iris A. Values 0 0 0 0 A .times. 5 0 0 0 0 III. Conjunctivae A.
Redness 1 0 0 0 B. Chemosis 0 0 0 0 C. Discharge 2 0 0 0 (A + B +
C) .times. 2 6 0 0 0 Total 6 0 0 0 Rabbit No. 3 (Female) I. Cornea
A. Opacity 0 .sup. 0.sup.a 0 0 B. Area 4 4 4 4 (A .times. B)
.times. 5 0 0 0 0 II. Iris A. Values 0 0 0 0 A .times. 5 0 0 0 0
III. Conjunctivae A. Redness 2 0 0 0 B. Chemosis 1 0 0 0 C.
Discharge 2 1 0 0 (A + B + C) .times. 2 10 2 0 0 Total 10 2 0 0
.sup.a2% ophthalmic fluorscein used to evaluate the extent or
verify the absence of corneal opacity
TABLE-US-00076 TABLE 17c EEC Mean Scores for formulation 908D1S
Corneal Iris Conjunctival Conjunctival Rabbit No. Opacity Lesion
Redness Chemosis 4 (Female) 1.0 0.0 2.0 1.3 5 (Female) 1.0 0.0 2.0
1.3 6 (Female) 1.0 0.0 2.0 1.3
[0279] Formulation 908D1S is classified as mildly irritating to the
eye and meets the requirements for the EC classification of "No
classification for ocular irritation."
TABLE-US-00077 TABLE 17d Average scores for ocular irritation for
formulation 908D1S Incidence of Positive Effects Time Post Corneal
Instillation Opacity Iritis Conjunctivitis 1 hour 2/3 2/3 3/3 24
hours 3/3 0/3 3/3 48 hours 3/3 0/3 3/3 72 hours 3/3 0/3 3/3 Day 4
3/3 0/3 1/3 Day 7 3/3 0/3 0/3 Day 10 3/3 0/3 0/3 Day 14 3/3 0/3 0/3
Day 17 3/3 0/3 0/3 Day 21 3/3 0/3 0/3
TABLE-US-00078 TABLE 17e Mean scores for severity of irritation for
formulation 908D1S Severity of Irritation (Mean Time Post
Instillation Score) 1 hour 25.0 24 hours 30.3 48 hours 23.3 72
hours 23.3 Day 4 20.3 Day 7 19.7 Day 10 17.3 Day 14 15.3 Day 17
16.0 Day 21 11.0
[0280] One hour after instillation of formulation 908D1S, two of
the three treated eyes exhibited corneal opacity and iritis, and
"positive" conjunctivitis was evident in all three eyes. By
24-hours iritis had cleared from both affected eyes, however,
corneal opacity and conjunctivitis were present in all three
treated eyes. The overall incidence and severity of irritation
decreased gradually thereafter. Pannus was observed in all three
eyes between Days 14 and 21. By study termination (Day 21), corneal
opacity persisted in all treated eyes with minimal conjunctivitis
noted in two eyes.
[0281] When introducing elements of the present invention or the
preferred embodiments(s) thereof, the articles "a", "an", "the" and
"said" are intended to mean that there are one or more of the
elements. The terms "comprising", "including" and "having" are
intended to be inclusive and mean that there may be additional
elements other than the listed elements.
[0282] In view of the above, it will be seen that the several
objects of the invention are achieved and other advantageous
results attained.
[0283] As various changes could be made in the above methods,
formulations and processes without departing from the scope of the
invention, it is intended that all matter contained in the above
description and shown in the accompanying drawing shall be
interpreted as illustrative and not in a limiting sense.
* * * * *