1980
DOI: 10.1016/0038-0717(80)90025-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Apparent decomposition of paraquat in soil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1985
1985
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Rashidzadeh et al (2017) described better paraquat adsorption in montmorillonite as compared to clinoptilolite clay and adsorption in clay is stronger than sandy soil (Amondham et al, 2006). Microorganisms can only utilize and degrade less than 1% of paraquat in soil particles (Figure 1) (Roberts et al, 2002), and its half-life can be up to 3∼6.6 years (Hance et al, 1980; Pateiro-Moure et al, 2009). Alexander (1999) concluded that microorganisms could completely degrade soil paraquat in 6 years.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rashidzadeh et al (2017) described better paraquat adsorption in montmorillonite as compared to clinoptilolite clay and adsorption in clay is stronger than sandy soil (Amondham et al, 2006). Microorganisms can only utilize and degrade less than 1% of paraquat in soil particles (Figure 1) (Roberts et al, 2002), and its half-life can be up to 3∼6.6 years (Hance et al, 1980; Pateiro-Moure et al, 2009). Alexander (1999) concluded that microorganisms could completely degrade soil paraquat in 6 years.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also suggested that when the paraquat adsorption process to soil is slowed due to reasons such as the large bulk of plant residues, the dissipation of paraquat may occur even in the plant residue incorporated into soil. Thus, this study demonstrated for the first time that the plant residues in the soil environment are a possible site for the microbial degradation of paraquat and, at the same time, that degradation is a possible reason why paraquat did not accumulate as much as expected in spite of repeated application (Hance et al, 1980). However, Kanazawa (1990) reported a decrease in paraquat concentration in the field after stopping the application.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…To the contrary, Hance et al (1980) andConstenla et al (1990) reported that paraquat did not accumulate as much as expected in spite of repeated applications. Kanazawa (1990) reported that paraquat concentration in soil decreased after application was stopped.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…An early report11 from the Weed Research Organisation (UK) indicated that, after six annual applications of paraquat at 4.48 kg ha −1 beginning in 1967, essentially all of the applied paraquat could be recovered at the end of this period. However, when this trial was reassessed after 12 years of annual application,12 the amounts of paraquat found were beginning to reach a plateau. Although the data were somewhat variable, it appeared that about 10% of the paraquat was being lost each year, equivalent to a half‐life of about 6.6 years (Fig 2).…”
Section: Paraquat Behaviour In Plants and Soilmentioning
confidence: 90%