• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 Title Page
 Water quality considerations in...
 Materials needed to use this...
 Important factors that affect pesticide...
 Indices used to select pestici...
 Criteria for matching soil ratings...
 Using the worksheet
 Table 1: Cotton-pesticide parameter...
 Pesticide selection worksheet
 Acknowledgement














Group Title: Circular - Soil Science Department, University of Florida - 976
Title: Cotton
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00067155/00001
 Material Information
Title: Cotton managing pesticides for crop production and water quality protection : a supplement to the IFAS pest control guides
Series Title: Water quality initiative series Soil Science Dept
Alternate Title: Managing pesticides for crop production and water quality protection
IFAS pest control guides
Physical Description: 11 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Hornsby, A. G
University of Florida -- Soil Science Dept
Publisher: Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1991
 Subjects
Subject: Cotton -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Environmental aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Pesticides -- Environmental aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Soil surveys -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: A.G. Hornsby ... et al..
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: "May 1991."
Funding: Circular (Florida Cooperative Extension Service) ;
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00067155
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 24855513

Table of Contents
    Copyright
        Copyright
    Title Page
        Page 1
    Water quality considerations in cotton production
        Page 2
    Materials needed to use this procedure
        Page 2
    Important factors that affect pesticide selection
        Page 2
    Indices used to select pesticides
        Page 3
    Criteria for matching soil ratings with pesticide indices
        Page 4
    Using the worksheet
        Page 5
    Table 1: Cotton-pesticide parameter matrix for selecting pesticides to minimize water quality problems
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Pesticide selection worksheet
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Acknowledgement
        Page 12
Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida








Soil Science Department
Water Quality Initiative Series


Circular 976
May 1991


COTrON


MANAGING PESTICIDES FOR CROP PRODUCTION

AND WATER QUALITY PROTECTION

A Supplement to the IFAS Pest Control Guides


A. G. HORNSBY
and
T. M. BUTLER
Soil Science Department

D. L. COLVIN
Agronomy Department

R. E. SPRENKEL
NFREC, Quincy, FL

R. A. DUNN
Entomology and Nematology Department

T. A. KUCHAREK
Plant Pathology Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611




Florida Cooperative Extension Service
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville
John T. Woeste, Dean for Extension









WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS IN
COTTON PRODUCTION

Concern about the harmful effects of pesticides on
surface water and groundwater quality should
motivate cotton producers to select pesticides with
the least potential to cause water quality problems.
Many cotton producers live in rural areas near
where they and other producers grow cotton,
therefore, their personal water supply is susceptible
to contamination. Unfortunately, information that
allows producers to select pesticides less likely to
affect water quality has not previously been readily
available.

Our purpose is to provide information that can help
producers select pesticides that will have a
minimum adverse impact on water quality. The
procedure considers the soil properties of the
application site, the mobility of pesticides in these
soils, and the toxicity of the pesticides in water to
humans and aquatic species. A proper selection will
decrease chances of adversely affecting surface
water and groundwater quality. Certain
combinations of soil and pesticide properties (along
with weather conditions) can pose a significant
potential hazard to water quality. Our goal is to
identify and avoid these circumstances. Information
contained in this report can help cotton producers
make better decisions about the pesticides that they
use. This document in no way endorses any
particular pest control product. All products must
be used in accordance with the label.


MATERIALS NEEDED TO USE THIS
PROCEDURE

To effectively use this procedure you will need the
following source materials:

1. A copy of the current IFAS Pest Control Guides
or other appropriate information sources that
identify pesticides that control specific pests.

2. A copy of your county soil survey report to
identify the soil types found in your fields.

3. A copy of the Soil Science Fact Sheet entitled
"[Name of your county]:Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides" for your county, available from your
county Cooperative Extension Office. The basis of
these ratings are given in the IFAS Extension


Circular 959 entitled "Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides for Water Quality Goals," which is also
available from your county Cooperative Extension
Office.

Note: If your county has not yet been mapped by
the Soil Conservation Service, you will need to
contact the local SCS office for a site evaluation and
determination of soil types and ratings for leaching
and runoff of pesticides.


IMPORTANT FACTORS
PESTICIDE SELECTION


THAT AFFECT


How pesticides behave in the soil is determined by
many factors including properties of the pesticides
and of the soil at the application site. Some of the
factors that should be considered when selecting
pesticides with minimal potential for water quality
impacts are:

Pesticide properties 1) The organic carbon
adsorption coefficient, Kc describes the relative
affinity or attraction of the pesticide to soil
materials and therefore its mobility in the soil. 2)
The biological degradation half-life, T,, is a
measure of persistence of the pesticide in soil. 3)
The lifetime health advisory level or equivalent,
HALEQ, is a measure of health risk to humans of
pesticide contaminated drinking water. 4) Aquatic
toxicity, LC0 is a measure of the ability of the
pesticide to cause 50% mortality in aquatic test
species.

Soil properties 1) Hydraulic permeability is a
measure of the soils ability to allow water to
percolate through it. 2) Organic matter is
important for providing binding sites for pesticides,
thus reducing their mobility and increasing their
opportunity to be degraded by soil microorganisms.
3) Slope affects the potential for water to run off
the land surface.

Management practices 1) Pesticide application
frequencies and rates determine the total amount
applied. Lower frequencies and rates reduce the
potential for contamination. 2) Application
methods affect the amount of pesticide subject to
transport by water. For example, if applied directly
to the soil, there is a greater probability that more
of the product will be available for leaching or
runoff than if applied to the foliage. If the product









WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS IN
COTTON PRODUCTION

Concern about the harmful effects of pesticides on
surface water and groundwater quality should
motivate cotton producers to select pesticides with
the least potential to cause water quality problems.
Many cotton producers live in rural areas near
where they and other producers grow cotton,
therefore, their personal water supply is susceptible
to contamination. Unfortunately, information that
allows producers to select pesticides less likely to
affect water quality has not previously been readily
available.

Our purpose is to provide information that can help
producers select pesticides that will have a
minimum adverse impact on water quality. The
procedure considers the soil properties of the
application site, the mobility of pesticides in these
soils, and the toxicity of the pesticides in water to
humans and aquatic species. A proper selection will
decrease chances of adversely affecting surface
water and groundwater quality. Certain
combinations of soil and pesticide properties (along
with weather conditions) can pose a significant
potential hazard to water quality. Our goal is to
identify and avoid these circumstances. Information
contained in this report can help cotton producers
make better decisions about the pesticides that they
use. This document in no way endorses any
particular pest control product. All products must
be used in accordance with the label.


MATERIALS NEEDED TO USE THIS
PROCEDURE

To effectively use this procedure you will need the
following source materials:

1. A copy of the current IFAS Pest Control Guides
or other appropriate information sources that
identify pesticides that control specific pests.

2. A copy of your county soil survey report to
identify the soil types found in your fields.

3. A copy of the Soil Science Fact Sheet entitled
"[Name of your county]:Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides" for your county, available from your
county Cooperative Extension Office. The basis of
these ratings are given in the IFAS Extension


Circular 959 entitled "Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides for Water Quality Goals," which is also
available from your county Cooperative Extension
Office.

Note: If your county has not yet been mapped by
the Soil Conservation Service, you will need to
contact the local SCS office for a site evaluation and
determination of soil types and ratings for leaching
and runoff of pesticides.


IMPORTANT FACTORS
PESTICIDE SELECTION


THAT AFFECT


How pesticides behave in the soil is determined by
many factors including properties of the pesticides
and of the soil at the application site. Some of the
factors that should be considered when selecting
pesticides with minimal potential for water quality
impacts are:

Pesticide properties 1) The organic carbon
adsorption coefficient, Kc describes the relative
affinity or attraction of the pesticide to soil
materials and therefore its mobility in the soil. 2)
The biological degradation half-life, T,, is a
measure of persistence of the pesticide in soil. 3)
The lifetime health advisory level or equivalent,
HALEQ, is a measure of health risk to humans of
pesticide contaminated drinking water. 4) Aquatic
toxicity, LC0 is a measure of the ability of the
pesticide to cause 50% mortality in aquatic test
species.

Soil properties 1) Hydraulic permeability is a
measure of the soils ability to allow water to
percolate through it. 2) Organic matter is
important for providing binding sites for pesticides,
thus reducing their mobility and increasing their
opportunity to be degraded by soil microorganisms.
3) Slope affects the potential for water to run off
the land surface.

Management practices 1) Pesticide application
frequencies and rates determine the total amount
applied. Lower frequencies and rates reduce the
potential for contamination. 2) Application
methods affect the amount of pesticide subject to
transport by water. For example, if applied directly
to the soil, there is a greater probability that more
of the product will be available for leaching or
runoff than if applied to the foliage. If the product









WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS IN
COTTON PRODUCTION

Concern about the harmful effects of pesticides on
surface water and groundwater quality should
motivate cotton producers to select pesticides with
the least potential to cause water quality problems.
Many cotton producers live in rural areas near
where they and other producers grow cotton,
therefore, their personal water supply is susceptible
to contamination. Unfortunately, information that
allows producers to select pesticides less likely to
affect water quality has not previously been readily
available.

Our purpose is to provide information that can help
producers select pesticides that will have a
minimum adverse impact on water quality. The
procedure considers the soil properties of the
application site, the mobility of pesticides in these
soils, and the toxicity of the pesticides in water to
humans and aquatic species. A proper selection will
decrease chances of adversely affecting surface
water and groundwater quality. Certain
combinations of soil and pesticide properties (along
with weather conditions) can pose a significant
potential hazard to water quality. Our goal is to
identify and avoid these circumstances. Information
contained in this report can help cotton producers
make better decisions about the pesticides that they
use. This document in no way endorses any
particular pest control product. All products must
be used in accordance with the label.


MATERIALS NEEDED TO USE THIS
PROCEDURE

To effectively use this procedure you will need the
following source materials:

1. A copy of the current IFAS Pest Control Guides
or other appropriate information sources that
identify pesticides that control specific pests.

2. A copy of your county soil survey report to
identify the soil types found in your fields.

3. A copy of the Soil Science Fact Sheet entitled
"[Name of your county]:Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides" for your county, available from your
county Cooperative Extension Office. The basis of
these ratings are given in the IFAS Extension


Circular 959 entitled "Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides for Water Quality Goals," which is also
available from your county Cooperative Extension
Office.

Note: If your county has not yet been mapped by
the Soil Conservation Service, you will need to
contact the local SCS office for a site evaluation and
determination of soil types and ratings for leaching
and runoff of pesticides.


IMPORTANT FACTORS
PESTICIDE SELECTION


THAT AFFECT


How pesticides behave in the soil is determined by
many factors including properties of the pesticides
and of the soil at the application site. Some of the
factors that should be considered when selecting
pesticides with minimal potential for water quality
impacts are:

Pesticide properties 1) The organic carbon
adsorption coefficient, Kc describes the relative
affinity or attraction of the pesticide to soil
materials and therefore its mobility in the soil. 2)
The biological degradation half-life, T,, is a
measure of persistence of the pesticide in soil. 3)
The lifetime health advisory level or equivalent,
HALEQ, is a measure of health risk to humans of
pesticide contaminated drinking water. 4) Aquatic
toxicity, LC0 is a measure of the ability of the
pesticide to cause 50% mortality in aquatic test
species.

Soil properties 1) Hydraulic permeability is a
measure of the soils ability to allow water to
percolate through it. 2) Organic matter is
important for providing binding sites for pesticides,
thus reducing their mobility and increasing their
opportunity to be degraded by soil microorganisms.
3) Slope affects the potential for water to run off
the land surface.

Management practices 1) Pesticide application
frequencies and rates determine the total amount
applied. Lower frequencies and rates reduce the
potential for contamination. 2) Application
methods affect the amount of pesticide subject to
transport by water. For example, if applied directly
to the soil, there is a greater probability that more
of the product will be available for leaching or
runoff than if applied to the foliage. If the product









is incorporated into the soil, leaching may be the
most important loss pathway. Pesticides applied to
the foliage may be lost to the atmosphere,
decomposed by sunlight, or absorbed by the foliage,
thereby reducing the amount available for wash-off
and transport to water bodies. Irrigation practices
can also determine the loss pathways of pesticides.
Pesticides often move with water, so the less excess
water that is applied the less potential there is for
a pesticide to move past the crop root zone or to
run off in surface water. Rainfall or overhead
irrigation can wash off significant quantities of
pesticides from foliage immediately after
application.


INDICES USED TO SELECT PESTICIDES

Table 1 contains two important indices, the
pesticide leaching potential (RLPI) and the
pesticide runoff potential (RRPI). Both indices are
relative. For a given soil, these indices rank the
pesticides by their potential to move from the
application site by the indicated pathway (leaching
or runoff). The indices are based on the organic
carbon sorption coefficient and degradation half-life
values of each pesticide. Values for these
parameters have been taken from scientific
literature, technical manuals, and company product
literature.

The Relative Leaching Potential Index (RLPI)
defines the relative attenuation (reduction in mass
as it moves through the soil) of each pesticide in
soil, and therefore its potential to leach to
groundwater. Pesticides that are very mobile, for
example, those that have Kc values less than 100 in
sandy soils, or 50 or less in fine-textured soils
should be used with caution. There is some
uncertainty in the data used to calculate this index.
However, since the values are relative they can still
be used. It is important to realize that the smaller
the RLPI value of a pesticide the greater is its
potential to leach.


The Relative Runoff Potential Index (RRPI)
defines the relative immobility and availability of
each pesticide in soil, and therefore its potential to
remain near the soil surface and be subject to loss
in the aqueous phase or sediment phase of runoff.
There is some uncertainty in the data used to
calculate this index. However, since the values are


relative they can still be used. The smaller the
RRPI value of a pesticide the greater is its potential
to be lost in runoff.

Table 1 also contains information on the toxicity of
pesticides to humans and aquatic species. This
information can be used as a secondary
consideration in the pesticide selection procedure.


The Lifetime Health Advisory Level or Equivalent
(HALEQ) provides a measure of pesticide toxicity
to humans. The lifetime health advisory level as
defined by the USEPA is the concentration of a
chemical in drinking water that is not expected to
cause any adverse health effects over a lifetime of
exposure (70 years), with a margin of safety. The
values in Table 1 are the USEPA lifetime health
advisory level, HAL, or an equivalent value,
HALEQ (denoted by a superscripted asterisk),
calculated using the same formula used by the
USEPA (HALEQ = RfD x 7000), where RfD is
the reference dose determined by the USEPA. For
non-carcinogenic pesticides the calculated HALEQ
should not differ by more than a factor of 10 from
the values forthcoming from the USEPA. The
HAL or HALEQ has units of micrograms per liter
(ptg/1, or ppb). The smaller the value the greater is
the toxicity to humans.

The Aquatic Toxicity provides a measure of
pesticide toxicity to aquatic species. The values
given in Table 1 are the lethal concentrations at
which 50% of the test species die (LC,, ). Unless
otherwise noted by a lower case letter following the
value, the test species was rainbow trout. The
smaller the value the greater is the toxicity to
aquatic species.

Data for KI, RLPI, RRPI, HALEQ, and aquatic
toxicity are given for the active ingredient (common
name) of a product. When using a product that is
a mixture of two or more active ingredients use the
RLPI, RRPI, HALEQ, and Aquatic Toxicity value
for the most restrictive active ingredient in the
mixture.

Important Note: The information presented in
Table 1 DOES NOT supersede or replace the
information on the pesticide container label or
product literature.









CRITERIA FOR MATCHING SOIL RATINGS WITH PESTICIDE INDICES


Pesticides with less potential to adversely affect water quality can be selected by matching the soil ratings and
pesticides using the following criteria:

PESTICIDE SELECTION CRITERIA


IF SOIL RATINGS
ARE:


RUNOFF


THEN
SELECT PESTICIDE WITH:


Larger RLPI value,

Larger RLPI value,

Larger RLPI and
RRPI values,

Larger RLPI and
RRPI values,

Larger RLPI and
RRPI values,

Larger RRPI value,


Larger RLPI and
RRPI values,

Larger RRPI and
RLPI values,

Larger RRPI value,


AND Larger HALEQ value.

AND Larger HALEQ value.

AND Larger HALEQ and
Aquatic Toxicity values.

AND Larger HALEQ and
Aquatic Toxicity values.

AND Larger HALEQ and
Aquatic Toxicity values.

AND Larger Aquatic Toxicity
value.

AND Larger HALEQ and
Aquatic Toxicity values.

AND Larger Aquatic Toxicity
and HALEQ values.

AND Larger Aquatic Toxicity
value.


PROCEDURE FOR SELECTING PESTICIDES
TO REDUCE ADVERSE WATER QUALITY
IMPACTS

A "Pesticide Selection Worksheet" is provided as a
convenient way to organize the information needed
to select pesticides to avoid water pollution by
pesticides in a particular production or management
unit. Instructions for using the worksheet are
outlined below. The function of the worksheet is to
match the soil leach and runoff ratings at the
application site with the pesticide RLPI (leaching)
and RRPI (runoff) indices and toxicity values given
in Table 1.


This will indicate the relative potential for pesticides
to leach or run off from a particular site and
consider the toxicity of the pesticides to humans or
aquatic life if the pesticides leach into groundwater
or if runoff enters surface impoundments or
streams. The last two columns are for recording the
cotton producer's choices and reasons for selecting
particular products.

Our intent is to provide a decision support tool for
the cotton producer. The producer is responsible
for making the final choice. The completed
worksheet can serve as a permanent record of the
selection process used and decision made by the
producer.


LEACH


HIGH


MEDIUM


LOW


HIGH


MEDIUM


LOW


HIGH


MEDIUM


LOW


LOW

LOW

LOW


MEDIUM


MEDIUM


MEDIUM


HIGH


HIGH


HIGH









USING THE WORKSHEET


1. TARGET PEST: Correct identification of the
pests that need to be controlled is essential! Check
with knowledgeable experts and utilize competent
diagnostic laboratories so that a proper diagnosis
can be made. Misdiagnosis results in the wasteful
use of unnecessary pesticides and needless increases
in production costs. List confirmed pests in column
1 of the Pesticide Selection Worksheet.


2. RECOMMENDED PESTICIDES: Use the
current IFAS Pest Control Guides, or other
appropriate information sources to identify the
pesticides that control the pests of concern. List
these pesticides in column 2 of the Pesticide
Selection Worksheet.


3. PESTICIDE PROPERTIES: For each pesticide
listed in column 2 on the Pesticide Selection
Worksheet, copy the numeric value for KIc, RLPI,
RRPI, HALEQ, and Aquatic Toxicity from Table 1
into columns 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the Pesticide
Selection Worksheet.


4. SOIL PROPERTIES: Consult the County Soil
Survey Report soil map sheets to locate your
production fields and to identify the soils that occur
in these fields. Use the Soil Science Fact Sheet
entitled "[Your County]:Soil Ratings for Selecting
Pesticides" (available from your county Cooperative
Extension Office) to determine the leaching and
surface runoff rating of the soils in your fields. As
you determine the soil leach rating and the soil
runoff rating for each soil in each field, list the soil
name, soil leach rating, and soil runoff rating in
columns 8, 9, and 10, respectively, of the Pesticide
Selection Worksheet.


5. SELECTION OF PESTICIDES: Using infor-
mation that you have compiled on the Pesticide
Selection Worksheet, select appropriate pesticides
using the selection criteria on page 4 to match soil
and pesticide properties. The selection made can
be recorded in column 11 and notes relating to the
selection can be recorded in column 12.


Notes:
1. If the pesticide product selected is a formulated
mixture or a tank mix, each active ingredient must
be considered. The most restrictive pesticide in the
mixture will determine the choice. Trade names in
Table 1 followed by (M) are formulated mixtures.

2. Sometimes there may not be a clear choice from
among the alternative chemicals available to control
a particular pest. In these cases, first order
screening using the RLPI or RRPI only can suffice.

3. Depth to groundwater and local geohydrology
may influence your final selection. Shallow
groundwater is more vulnerable to contamination.
Deep water tables with intervening impermeable
geologic layers are much less vulnerable.

4. Distance to surface water bodies may also
influence your final selection. Surface waters
adjacent to or near the pesticide application site are
more vulnerable to contamination than those further
away. If surface runoff from the application site
usually infiltrates into the soil off site before
reaching a surface water body, then the HALEQ
should be considered as the secondary screening
index.













Sorption Relative Losses Toxicity
Application Type2 Coefficient Leaching Runoff HAL or HALEQ6 Aquatic LC,7
Trade-Name1 Common Name Soil Foliar Ko (ml/g) RLPI4 RRPI5 (ppb) (ppm)

Herbicide

Ansar 529 MSMA x 10,000 E 1,000 1 nd 12b
Bladex cyanazine x 190 136 136 10 9
Caparol prometryn INC x 400 67 42 30 2.5
Cotoran fluometuron x x 100 12 12 90 3
Dacthal DCPA x 5,000 500 2 4,000 100a
Dual metolachlor x 200 22 22 100 2
Enide diphenamid x 210 70 70 200 53d
Eptam EPTC INC 200 333 333 200 17
Fusilade fluazifop-butyl x 5,700 >2,000 12 70 1.6
Goal oxyfluorfen x 100,000 E >2,000 1 20 0.2b
Gramoxone paraquat x 1,000,000 E >2,000 1 30 15
Karmex diuron x x 480 53 23 10 4.9
Lanex fluometuron x x 100 12 12 90 3
Lasso alachlor x 170 113 113 0.4 1.4
Lorox linuron x x 400 67 42 10 16
MSMA MSMA x 10,000 E 1,000 1 nd 12b
Poast sethoxydim x 100 E (pH7) 200 200 600 170
Probe methazole x 3,000 E >2,000 24 nd nd
Prowl pendimethatin x 5,000 556 2 300 0.199b
Round-Up glyphosate x 24,000 E >2,000 1 700 8.3
Sancap dipropetryn x 900 90 11 nd nd
Surflan oryzalin x 600 300 83 400 3.26
Treftan trifluralin INC 8,000 1,330 2 5 0.041
Whip fenoxaprop-ethyl x 9,490 >2,000 21 20 0.48
Zorial norflurazon INC x 700 233 48 300 6

HAL or HALEQ0: Lifetime Health Advisory Level or Lifetime Health Advisory Level Equivalent.

Cotton Continued---


r~lc ~ r~~m-l~c~irirb D~r~a~+n~ Y~+rir ~nr ~l~,im DeP~irirlp~ .n Yinia~ire LI1+Pr Ol~litV PPnhlC*II~


19{10(50











TABLE 1. Cotton Pesticide Parameter Hatrix---Continued:


Sorption Relative Losses Toxicity
Application Type2 Coefficient3 Leaching Runoff HAL or HALEQ6 Aquatic LCo7L
Trade-Name1 Common Name Soil Foliar K (ml/g) RLPI4 RRPI5 (ppb) (ppm)


Insecticide/Miticide


permethrin
cypermethrin
esfenvalerate
cyfluthrin
dicrotophos
sulprofos
bifenthrin
propargite
profenofos
dimethoate
cypermethrin
malathion
dimethoate
diflubenzuron
disulfoton
Bacillus thuringiensis
trichlorfon
diazinon
azinphos-methyl
Bacillus thuringiensis
lambda-cyhalothrin
dicofol
methomyl
thiodicarb
chlorpyrifos
methyl-parathion
oxydemeton-methyl
methamidophos
methomyl
acephate
flucythrinate


100,000
100,000
5,300
100,000
75
12,000
240,000
4,000
2,000
20
100,000
1,800
20
10,000
600
nd
10
1,000
1,000
nd
180,000
18,000
72
350
6,070
5,100
10
5
72
2
100,000


>2,000
E >2,000
1,510
E >2,000
38
E 857
>2,000
E 714
>2,000
29
E >2,000
>2,000
29
>2,000
E 200
nd
10
E 250
1,000
nd
>2,000
>2,000
24
500
>2,000
E >2,000
10
8
24
7
E >2,000


HAL or HALEQ6: Lifetime Health Advisory Level or Lifetime Health Advisory Level Equivalent.

Continued---


Ambush
Anmo
Asana
Baythroid
Bidrin
Bolstar
Capture
Comite
Curacron
Cygon
Cymbush
Cythion
Defend
Dimilin
Di-Syston
Dipel
Dylox
DZN AG500
Guthion
Javelin
Karate
Kelthane
Lannate
Larvin
Lorsban
Metacide
Metasystox-R
Monitor
Nudrin
Orthene
Pay-Off


0.0041
0.00092
0.00069j
nd
6.3
29.7
0.00015
0.12
0.3b
6.2
0.00092
0.2
6.2
100
1.85
95b
0.4
0.09
0.0043
95b
nd
0.52b
3.4
2.55
0.0071
3.7
6.4
51
3.4
730
0.0003











TABLE 1. Cotton Pesticide Parameter Matrix---Continued:


Sorption Relative Losses Toxicity
Application Type2 Coefficient3 Leaching Runoff HAL or HALEQ6 Aquatic LC,7
Trade-Name1 Common Name Soil Foliar Ko (ml/g) RLPI4 RRPI5 (ppb) (ppm)


Insecticide/Miticide


5,100
100,000
10
5,300
nd
100,000
300
400
7
30
1,000
5,000


methyl-parathion
permethrin
trichlorfon
fenvalerate
insecticidal soap
tralomethrin
carbaryl
methidathion
phosphamidon
aldicarb
phorate
parathion




fenamiphos
aldicarb





metalaxyl
chloroneb
imazalil
etridiazole
thiram
copper sulfate
carboxin


Penncap-M
Pounce
Proxol
Pydrin
Safer Soap
Scout
Sevin
Supracide
Swat
Temik
Thimet
Thiophos


Nematicide

Nemacur
Temik


Fungicide

Apron
Chloroneb
Flo-Pro
Terrazole
Thiram
Tri-Basic
Vitavax


E >2,000
>2,000
10
1,510
nd
E >2,000
300
E 571
4
10
E 167
E >2,000




20
10





7
127
nd
E 97
447
nd
867


3.7
0.0041
0.4
0.0006
nd
0.12
114
0.01
7.8
0.56
0.013
1.43


0.11
0.56


400 *
90 *
on *


>100
>4,200b
4
4
0.13
0.14
2


HAL or HALEQ6: Lifetime Health Advisory Level or Lifetime Health Advisory Level Equivalent.

Cotton Continued---


50
1,650
nd
1,000
670
nd
260










TABLE 1. Cotton Pesticide Parameter Natrix---Continued:


Sorption Relative Losses Toxicity
Application Type2 Coefficient Leaching Runoff HAL or HALEQ6 Aquatic LCo7
Trade Name1 Common Name Soil Foliar Ko (ml/g) RLPI4 RRPI5 (ppb) (ppm)

Fumigants for Control of Soil Fungi and Nematodes


Telone II 1,3-dichloropropene INJ 32 32 32 0.2 5.5


1Trade Name:
2Application Type:
3Sorption Coefficient:
4Relative Leaching Potential Index (RLPI):
5Relative Runoff Potential Index (RRPI):
6HAL or HALEQ:

7Aquatic Toxicity LC5:


nd: no data available.


(M) indicates that the product is a mixture of two or more active ingredients.
INC: incorporated INJ: injected x: applied to soil surface or foliage
E: estimated G: educated guess
Smaller number indicates greater leaching hazard.
Smaller number indicates greater runoff hazard.
Lifetime Health Advisory Level or Lifetime Health Advisory Level Equivalent.
*: Lifetime Health Advisory Equivalent
value is for rainbow trout 48 or 96 hr exposure time, unless otherwise specified
a=channel catfish b=bluegill d=gold fish
j=fat head minnow







PESTICIDE SELECTION WORKSHEET


County


Landowner/Operator Name:


Farm ID:


Field ID Sheet of


IFAS Relative Losses Toxicity Soil Soil
Target Pest Recommended K' Leaching Runoff Lifetime Aquatic Soil Leaching Runoff Selected Comments
Pesticides Value RLPI RRPI HALEQ* Toxicity Type Rating Rating Pesticide
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)












































If the Ko value is 100 or Less or if the RLPI value is 10 or less and the soil leach rating is high, then the pesticide has a high potential for leaching and should
be used with extreme caution. Alternative pesticides and reduced rates should be considered if possible. Apply pesticide during periods with low potential for rainfall
if possible.


Crop:


Date:


:


Dae






PESTICIDE SELECTION WORKSHEET


County


Landowner/Operator Name:


Farm ID:


Field ID Sheet of


IFAS Relative Losses Toxicity Soil Soil
Target Pest Recommended Ko Leaching Runoff Lifetime Aquatic Soil Leaching Runoff Selected Comments
Pesticides Value RLPI RRPI HALEQ* Toxicity Type Rating Rating Pesticide
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)















































If the K value is 100 or less or if the RLPI value is 10 or less and the soil leach rating is high, then the pesticide has a high potential for Leaching and should
be used with extreme caution. Alternative pesticides and reduced rates should be considered if possible. Apply pesticide during periods with low potential for rainfall
if possible.


Cron-


Date:


_


-r-


:


Dae










Acknowledgements:


The development of this document was supported by the USDA/ES Water Quality Initiative Project
#89EWQI-1-9134 and the IFAS Center for Natural Resources, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Printing supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Extension Service under special project
#90EWQI-1-9214.





















































COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, INSTITUTE OF FOODANDAGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, John T. Woeste,
Director, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture, publishes this information to further the purpose of the May 8 and June
30, 1914 Acts of Congress; and is authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that
function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap or national origin. Single copies of extension publications (excluding 4-H and youth
publications) are available free to Florida residents from county extension offices. Information on bulk rates or copies for out-of-state purchasers
is available from C.M. Hinton, Publications Distribution Center, IFAS Building 664, Universityof Florida, Gainesville, Florida32611. Before publicizing
this publication, editors should contact this address to determine availability. Printed 10/91.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs