CS207493B2 - Herbicide means - Google Patents

Abstract

HOE 76/F 315 HERBICIDAL COMPOSITIONS of the disclosure: Composition containing as active ingredients 2-¢4-(4'-chlorophenoxy)-phenoxy!-propionic acid lower alkyl ester, or 2-¢4-(2',4'-dichlorophenoxy)-phenoxy!-pro-pionic acid lower alkyl ester, or 2-¢4-(2'-chloro-4'-bromo-phenoxy)-phenoxy!-propionic acid lower alkyl ester, or 2-¢4- (4'-trifluoromethylphenoxy)-phenoxy!-propionic acid lower alkyl ester, in combination with 3-ethoxy-carbonylaminophenyl-N-phenyl carbamate or 3-meth-oxycarbonylaminophenyl-N-(3'-methylphenyl)-carbamate, or N-3-chloro-4-ethoxyphenyl-N',N'-dimethyl urea, or N-(2-benzthiazolyl-N ,N'-dimethyl urea, or 3-methyl-4-amino-6-phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one have a synergistic effect against weed grasses.

Description

It is known that a number of chloro and trifluoromethylsubstituted 4-phenoxyphenoxy-α-propionic acid esters have a specific effect against economically important weeds, in particular against common fox-grass and deaf oat, but also against corn rootworm, cudweed, perennial ryegrass and pore (cf. DOS 2,223,894 and DOS 2,433,067). Esters of 2-chloro-4-bromo-substituted 4-phenoxyphenoxy-α-propionic acid have also been proposed for the same purpose (cf. DOS 2,601,548). Compounds of this type (hereinafter referred to as type (1)) can be used not only in sugar beet, pulses, various vegetables and other dicotyledonous crops, but also in part in barley, wheat and rye, the plants being sprayed preferably after emerging.

Furthermore, it is known that many herbicidal active compounds have a good effect on dicotyledonous weed species, but they are not effective against grass weeds or are only insufficiently effective against grass weeds

R * (i) them. Compounds of this type (hereinafter referred to as tpy (2) 1) include, but are not limited to: Desmedipham and Phenmedipham cf. 3. Symposium Uber Neue Herbizide, Paris, 1969), N- (3-chloro-4-ethoxyphenyl) -N'-N'-dimethylurea (cf. DOS 2,221,795) Methabenzthiazuron (Ltd., Biol. Landund Forttwirttchaft, Pflanzenschutzmit telverzeichnis 1975/76, p. 105) and non-metamitron (cf. Zeitschr. F. Pfl. Krankh. And Pflanzenschutz, SH VII, 1975, 367-374 J.).

Surprisingly, it has now been found that the combined use of compounds of types (1) and (2) does not result in an additive (in itself expected) effect, but a synergistic effect in the control of grass weeds.

Accordingly, the present invention provides herbicidal compositions which are characterized in that they comprise (1) phenoxyphenoxypropionic acid esters of formula (I).

CH-O- (111251 alkyl).

in which

R is chloro, bromo or trifluoromethyl;

R ¹ is hydrogen or chlorine, in combination with (2) a) 3-ethoxycarbonylaminophenyl N-phenylcarbamate or bJ 3-methoxycarbonylaminophenyl N- (3'-methylphenyl) carbamate, when in formula IR = Br and R ¹ = Cl, or R = -CF 3 and R ¹ = H, or

c) N-3-chloro-4-ethoxyphenyl-N ', N'-dimethylurea when in formula IR = Cl and R ¹ = H, or R = Cl and R 1 = Cl, or R = Br and R ¹ = Cl, or

d) N- (2-benzthiazolyl] -N ', N'-dimethylurea, when in the formula IR = Cl and R = H or Cl and R = R ¹ = Cl or Br and R = R ¹ = Cl or

e) 3-methyl-4-amino-6-phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5 (4H) -one; when in the formula IR - Br and R ¹ - Cl or R = -CF 3 and R 1 = H.

Preference is given to compositions in which the weight ratio of component (1) to (2) is 1: 0.5 to 1: 17.

In the description below, the designations of compounds I, II, III and IV refer to the following compounds:

(I) 2- (4- (4'-chlorophenoxy) phenoxy) propionic acid lower alkyl ester, (П) 2- [4- (2 ', 4'-dichlorophenoxy) phenoxy] propionic acid lower alkyl ester, (ΙΠ) 2- [4- (2'-chloro-4'-bromophenoxyphenoxy] propionic acid, or (IV) 2- [4- (4'-trifluoromethylphenoxy) phenoxy] propionic acid lower alkyl ester.

Preferred are the isobutyl esters of the compounds of formula I as well as the methyl esters of compounds II, III and IV. The mixing ratio (I to IV): (a - e) may vary within wide limits between about 1: 0.5 and 1: 17. The mixing ratio chosen depends on the components of the mixture concerned, the weed spectrum occurring and the weed development stage . For example, a combination of compounds I, II or III with a) or III with b) is preferably used in a ratio of 1: 1 to 1: 4, whereas for a combination of IV + a) or IV-Jb) a ratio of 1: 0.5 to 1 is preferred. 2. The combinations of compounds I, II and III sc) or d) preferably have a ratio of 1: 2 to 1: 6. Combinations III or IV are, on the other hand, preferably a ratio of 1: 6 to 1: 14.

The weed control compositions of the present invention can be used in the form of wettable powders, emulsifiable concentrates or dusts and contain conventional adjuvants such as wetting agents, adhesives, dispersing agents, solid or liquid inert substances, and grinding aids or solvents.

Mineral substances such as aluminum silicates, clays, kaolin, chalks, siliceous chalks, talc, diatomaceous earth or hydrated silicas or preparations of these minerals with special additives such as chalk or sodium stearate can be used as carriers. All useful and suitable organic solvents such as toluene, xylene, diacetone alcohol, isophorone, gasolines, paraffinic oils, dioxane, dimethylformamide, dimethylsulfoxide, ethyl acetate, butyl acetate, tetrahydrofuran, chlorobenzene and others can be used as carriers for liquid formulations.

Glucose cellulose-based products or polyvinyl alcohols may be used as transponders.

Suitable wetting agents are all suitable emulsifiers or oxethylated alkylphenols, aryl- or alkylarylsulfonic acid salts, ethoxylated benzenesulfonic acid salts or soaps.

Suitable dispersants are the resins obtained in the production of cellulose (sulphite waste liquor salts), naphthalenesulphonic acid salts and, if appropriate, hydrated silicic acid or diatomaceous earth.

Inorganic or organic salts such as sodium sulfate, ammonium sulfate, sodium carbamic acid, sodium bicarbonate, sodium thiosulfate, sodium stearic acid, sodium acetate can be used as grinding aids.

The active compound content of these compositions is generally between 2 and 75%. However, the active compounds may also be present in the compositions in admixture with other known active compounds.

The application rate required under practical conditions can vary within wide limits. Thus, for example, combinations of I, II or III sa) and III sb) can be used in a total amount of from 0.5 to 5, preferably 1 to 3 kg / ha, combinations IV aa) and IV and b) are used in an amount of 0.1 to 5, preferably 1 to 3 kg / ha, a combination of I, II or III sc) or d) in an amount of 0.1 to 10, preferably 0.5 to 5 kg / ha and the combination III or IV se) in an amount of 1 to 15, preferably 5 to 10 kg / ha.

Simple compositions which are suitable for use can be obtained, for example, according to the following regulations:

Examples illustrating the composition of resources:

Example 1

25.0 parts by weight of the compound II in the form of the methyl ester is converted to a liquid state at 60 ° C and adsorbed to 18.7 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid (mixture 1); separately 26.2 parts by weight of compound a) are mixed

8.0 parts by weight of the sodium salt of dinaphthylmethanedisulfonic acid,

2.1 parts by weight of partially saponified polyvinyl acetate,

3.0 parts by weight of alkylnaphthalenesulfonic acid sodium salt,

5.0 parts by weight of sodium bicarbonate; and

9.0 parts by weight of silicic acid and the mixture was finely ground in a pin mill (mixture 2).

Then mixtures 1 and 2 are mixed and ground together in a slow-running hammer mill to form a wettable powder.

The ratio of α): II in the mixture is 1.05: 1.

Example 2

26.2 parts by weight of compound a),

19.0 parts by weight of diatomite,

8,0 parts by weight of sodium dinaphthylmethanedisulfonic acid,

2.0 parts by weight of alkylnaphthalenesulphonic acid sodium salt,

0.5 part by weight of sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid and

6.6 parts by weight of sodium bicarbonate were mixed and finely ground at high speed on a pin mill (mixture 1). It also liquefies at 60 ° C

20.0 parts by weight of the compound III in the form of the methyl ester and this is adsorbed in a high-speed mixer to 15.1 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid (mixture 2).

Both mixtures are ground in a low speed hammer mill to a wettable powder.

Ratio α): III = 1.31.

Example 3

26.2 parts by weight of compound b),

19.0 parts by weight of diatomaceous earth,

12.0 pbw of lignin sulphonic acid sodium salt,

4.0 parts by weight of sodium alkylnaphthalenesulfonic acid sodium;

1.1 parts by weight of partially saponified polyvinyl acetate are treated as a mixture 1 as described in Example 2.

As in Example 2, a mixture of 2 is prepared from 20.0 parts by weight of compound III in the form of methyl ester and 15.1 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid; The two mixtures are ground in a hammer cross mill.

The ratio of components b): III = 1.31: 1.

Example 4

30.0 parts by weight of compound b),

8,0 parts by weight of sodium dinaphthylmethanedisulfonic acid,

1.0 part by weight of di-octyl sulphosuccinate in the form of the sodium salt,

2.0 parts by weight of sodium oleyl-N-methyltauride,

0,5 part by weight of sodium salt of palmitic acid,

5.0 parts by weight of sodium bicarbonate,

15.0 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid; and

3.5 parts by weight of diatomite are mixed and this mixture is finely ground at high speed using a pin mill (mixture 1). Further, liquefied at 60 ° C, 18 parts by weight of methyl ester of compound IV is adsorbed in a high-speed mixer to 14 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid. The mixtures 1 and 2 are finally mixed and the resulting mixture is ground in a slow running hammer cross mill to form a wettable powder.

Ratio b): IV = 1.67: 1.

Example 5

12.0 pbw of Compound I as isobutyl ester are liquefied at 60 ° C and adsorbed to 8.5 pbw of synthetic silicic acid (mixture 1).

Separately prepared by mixing:

39.0 parts by weight of compound c),

13.0 pbw of lignin sulphonic acid sodium salt,

3.0 parts by weight of dibutylnaphthalenesulfonic acid sodium salt,

2.0 parts by weight of partially saponified polyvinyl acetate,

1.0 parts by weight of polypropylene glycol; and

16.6 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid, and this mixture is finely ground in a pin mill (mixture 2). Thereafter, mixtures 1 and 2 are mixed and ground in a low speed hammer cross mill to form a wettable powder.

Ratio 1: 3.25: 1.

Example 6

As in Example 5, two mixtures were prepared separately and then ground to a wettable powder:

Mix 1:

18.0 pbw of Compound II as the methyl ester

15.0 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid

Mix 2:

35.0 parts by weight of compound c)

14.0 pbw of lignin sulphonic acid sodium salt,

3.2 parts by weight of the sodium salt of oleyl-N-methyltauride,

1.0 parts by weight of sodium palmitic acid,

II, 0 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid.

Ratio (II): II = 1.94: 1.

Example 7

As in Example 5, two mixtures were prepared separately and then ground together to form a wettable powder:

Mix 1:

15.7 parts by weight of compound III as the methyl ester,

12.3 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid.

Mix 2:

36.4 parts by weight of compound (c),

14.6 parts by weight of sodium lignin sulphonic acid,

2.0 parts by weight of di-octyl sulphosuccinate in the form of the sodium salt,

2.0 parts by weight of sodium oleyl-N-methyltauride,

5.0 parts by weight of sodium bicarbonate; and

10.0 parts by weight of silicic acid (synthetic).

The ratio of the components с): III = 2.4: 1.

Example 8

8.0 parts by weight of the compound I in the form of the isobutyl ester are liquefied at 60 DEG C. and adsorbed onto

5.7 parts by weight of synthetic silicic acid (mixture 1).

Separately from this mixture:

41.5 parts by weight of compound d).

14.0 pbw of lignin sulphonic acid sodium salt,

4.0 parts by weight of dibutylnaphthalenesulfonic acid sodium salt,

1.0 part by weight of sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid;

20.8 parts by weight of diatomite and the mixture is finely ground on a pin mill [mixture 2].

Thereafter, mixtures 1 and 2 are mixed and ground in a low speed hammer cross mill to form a wettable powder.

The ratio of components d): I = 5.19: 1.

Examples 9 to 12

In a similar manner, other compositions can be obtained in combinations according to the following table:

Examples 9 to 12 of component 9) I-isobutyl ester 10) II-methyl ester 11) III-methyl ester 12) III-methyl ester parts by weight

0_CO co in

ОЭ ίτΓ гЧ гЧ о ю см оо

> ф б

сл> ф

1Л гЧ 'φ

со 1 г ° - LO оо | 1 со 00

см

СЛ

СЛ 'ф> о

й > ф о > 0-1 о Й СЛ ’ТЧ Д о <44 g * -Ч Й Й сл СО Й гй 4— * Й Ф .5? WITH 4 * ^ Ч-Ч Й ф д д ф сл ХЗ > 4 СО Д ®Й WITH сл • г-Ч д сл> й ф ю 'ф ДЗ 'Ф Д Ф Д о Ό ω I.E о>? О ω сл сл

.2 ф сл > 4 Р 'ф> о Д 2 О чч 'С Й Й СО СЛ 4- » Я Г-4 Ф д Д 44 4-J Ф 2 t ОЧ СО Й of > » 44 Й ф 5 о хз WITH »Й сл сл 'со 'СО Д Й ХЗ О О сл сл

сэ гЧ LO сэ о LO 1 ^ю - LO ι-H о • оо II гЧ t— «

д гЧ ф сл >>

Λ

'ф > о >> й .2 о г — Ч 04 / ф 3 сл сл >> Й ^ ф То 'ф > 4J о <44 Рч СО Й сл >> о дз ф ф ХЗ О 43 ой , _________ 1 сл ОЙ 'СО СЛ 'СО Й Й Ό Ό О О СЛ СЛ

О О оэ гЧ гЧ 1П гЧ 11 > —1 »- < хз

4-> 'Ф 4Ф о со г-н Д • F-4 д > • гЧ > » ф о сл> 4 Рч 44 '>> 'Ф> О 44 й> ф Д ф д хз д '> 4 То Б а N WITH СЛ ) ф Й 'СО 'Ф д О ХЗ о Ф сл Λ

'СО 44 WITH «F — Ч tí ф> 54 ^ 3 со .2 Л СЛ> ^ 3 Ф 'СО > к о ДЗ г-Ч О сл 44 Рч ф > Ф Й 2 о сл CU

Examples illustrating biological activity:

Example 1

Plants of field fox and sugar beet are grown in pots in a greenhouse and treated with water-emulsifiable active substances I (in the form of isobutyl ester) and (a) by themselves as well as the corresponding combinations at the 3 to 4 leaf stage.

The result of the treatment found 4 weeks after treatment is shown in Table 1. The table shows that Compound I alone was well effective against foxtail, while Compound A was completely ineffective. Surprisingly, in combination, the effect against field fox was surprisingly much higher, especially at doses of a) + 1 of 1.0 0.12 a

1.0 + 0.06 kg / ha. Sugar beet plants were not damaged.

Table 1

Effect in post-emergence treatment (greenhouse experiment) treatment dose effect (° / o damage) (kg / ha) foxtail

and) 1.0 0 0 I (as isobutyl ester) 0.5 100 ALIGN! 0 0.25 97.5 0.12 85 0.06 65 a) +1 1.0 + 0.5 100 ALIGN! 0 1.0 + 0.25 100 ALIGN! 1.0 + 0.12 97.5 1.0 + 0.06 75

Example 2 In a similar experiment the active substances II and a) are tested alone and in combination with deaf oats and sugar beet. Here, the combination also shows a drastic and unexpected increase in the effect on deaf oats. The results are shown in Table 2. 1 к and 2 Ta b u Effect of herbicidal combination even in postemergence treatment (experiment in the greenhouse) treatment dose effect (% damage) against (kg / ha) oat deaf sugar beet and) 1.0 0 0 II (as ethyl ester) 1.0 98.7 0 0.5 97.5 0.25 80 0.12 65.6 0.06 4.1 а) + П 1.0 + 1.0 100 ALIGN! 0 1.0 + 0.5 99.5 1.0 + 0.25 95 1.0 + 0.12 92.5 1.0 + 0.06 76.2

Example 3

In a mixed weed field trial, after emergence of plants, the same active substances as in the previous example were applied by spraying alone and in combination, partially prepared immediately before use (tankmix), partly as ready-to-use wettable powders. The result found 5 weeks after treatment (cf. Table 3) shows that

(a) it is only effective against the broad-leaved team of weeds (black-tailed fox-nursery, deaf oats and fowls)

II alone is only effective against deaf oats.

In combination a) + II, the effect on deaf oats has always been clearly better than when using substance II alone. This is particularly pronounced at a dose of 0.72 kg / ha of substance II.

The sugar beet plants were not damaged by the treatment.

Table 3

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment: (field trial):

treatment rate (kg / ha) effect (° / o damage) against oat deaf psárce polní ptacinci žabinci sugar beet and) 0.94 0 95 100 ALIGN! 0 II (as 0.9 92.5 0 0 0 methyl ester) 0.72 75 0 0 0 a) + II ^х ' 0.94 + 0.9 97.5 97.5 100 ALIGN! 0 0.94 + 0.72 95.0 95 100 ALIGN! 0 a) + II ^XX) 0.94 + 0.9 98.75 97.5 100 ALIGN! 0 0.75 + 0.72 96.25 92.5 100 ALIGN! 0

^{x) a} preparation prepared immediately before use (tankmix) ^xx) as a wettable powder according to Example 1 (examples illustrating the composition of the compositions).

Example 4 Deaf oats and sugar beet. Again, a significantly better effect of the combination has been shown. As in Example 2, compounds III, (a) and (b) alone are applied alone by spraying ce to control deaf oats, with the action of the individual components.

as well as in combination a) III and b) + III on

Table 4

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment (greenhouse experiment) treatment dose effect (% damage) on (kg / ha) oat deaf sugar beet

and) 0.94 0 0 (b) 0.94 0 0 III 0.72 98.7 0 . 0.36 90 0.18 75 0.09 32.5 a) + III 0.94 + 0.72 100 ALIGN! 0 0.94 + 0.36 99.2 0.94 + 0.18 90 0.94 + 0.09 80 b) + III 0.94 + 0.72 100 ALIGN! 0 0.94 + 0.36 99.2 0.94 + 0.18 97.5 0.94 + 0.09 85

Example 5

In a plant pot under natural climatic conditions, the same compounds alone and in combination by spraying on deaf oats and field fox are applied in addition to the above experiments. The synergistic effect of mixing on deaf oats was confirmed. Field foxes also showed a marked increase in efficacy compared to the use of compound III itself, although both component a) and component b) were completely ineffective.

T a b u 1 k a 5

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment (vegetation hall)

treatment dose (kg / ha) effect (% damage) on oat deaf psárku polní and) 0.94 0 0 (b) 0.94 0 0 ΠΙ 0.72 92.5 85 0.54 67.5 65 a) + III ^х » 0.94 + 0.72 99.4 92.5 (b) + III ^XX > 0.70 + 0.54 87.5 85 0.94 + 0.72 97.5 93.7 0.70 -j-, 54 90.0 92.5

^x) as a composition prepared immediately before use (tankmix) ^xx * as a wettable powder according to Example 3 (see examples illustrating the composition of the compositions)

Example 6

In a greenhouse experiment, compounds (a), (b) and (IV) alone are applied, as well as in combination (a) + IV and (b) + IV after spraying on weeds and deaf foxes and sugar beet. The combinations were diluted in the same dilution series (1.74: 1). The numbers in Table 6 show that the combination has a significantly better weed effect than Compound IV alone, although both Compound a) and Compound b) were completely ineffective on grasses alone.

Table 6

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment in a greenhouse

treatment dose (kg / ha) effect (% damage) on oat deaf psárku polní sugar beet (b) 0.470 0 0 0 and) 0.470 0 0 0 IV (as methyl) - 0.270 100 ALIGN! 100 ALIGN! 0 ester) 0.135 88.3 98.8 0 0,067 48.5 92.5 0 0,034 16.1 70 0 b) 1- IV 0.470 + 0.270 100 ALIGN! 100 ALIGN! 0 0.235 + 0.135 100 ALIGN! 100 ALIGN! 0 0.117 + 0.067 80 100 ALIGN! 0 0.059 4- 0.034 77.5 97.8 0 IV 0.470 + 0.270 100 ALIGN! 100 ALIGN! 0 0.235 + 0.135 100 ALIGN! 100 ALIGN! 0 0.117 + 0.067 89.5 98.3 0 0.059 -j- 0.034 48.8 91.3 0

Example 7

In a field contaminated with wheat, after emergence of sugar beet, parts of the plots are treated with compounds b) and IV alone and in combination according to the invention. The results shown in Table 7 show that 4 weeks later, the combination treatment showed a better anti-prick effect than treatment with IV alone, although b) was itself completely ineffective. 10 weeks after treatment, the differences were even more noticeable. On parcels treated with substance IV, the effect could hardly be demonstrated, while parcels treated with combination b) + IV were rather somewhat higher.

Table 7

Effect of herbicidal combinations in post-emergence treatment (field trial) treatment dose effect (% damage) on (kg / ha) sugar beet

4 ^X 10 ^x 4 ^X 10 ’ (b) 0.94 0 0 0 0 IV 1.80 90 85 0 0 1.44 87.5 77.5 0 0 b) + IV 0.94 4- 1.80 97.5 99 0 0 0.94 4- 1.44 95 97.5 0 0

^x weeks after treatment

Example 8

Seeds of barley, wheat and some weeds are planted in pots and planters are placed in a greenhouse. After about 3 leaves have been formed, the plants are sprayed with compounds (c) or (I) as well as mixtures of both.

The result, found 4 weeks after treatment, is shown in Table 8. The numbers shown show that compound c) at a dose of 0.62 kg / ha is not fully effective against 2 of the 3 species used. In combination with 0.31 kg / ha of Compound I, on the other hand, the effect was almost everywhere complete, although Compound I alone was only effective against field fox. Against the chundelce and prickles, the effect of the combination was surprisingly stronger than expected.

Also when using a mixture of 1.25 kg / ha

c) + 0.31 kg / ha and an increase in effect was observed. Here was the effect of the component itself

(c) already so good that the synergistic effect could no longer be clearly established.

The ratio of the amount of components (s): I in the mixture was 4: 1 or 2: 1.

Table 8

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment (greenhouse experiment)

type of plant C) 0.62 % damage at doses in kg / ha AND 0.31 c) 4-1 0.62 4- 0.31 (a) weed species: chundelka 90 0 100 ALIGN! he had a friend 75 0 95 Psař polní 32.5 85 95 (b) cultural plants: wheat 0 0 0 barley 0 0 0

men and wheat. The ratio of the components in this combination is 1.91: 1 and 2.44: 1.

Example 9

In a greenhouse experiment, the compounds с), II and III alone, as well as in combination с) + II and с) + III were applied to four different weed species as well as to barley207493

The effect of the herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment (greenhouse experiment) was expressed in% damage

Table 9

compound rate (kg / ha) oat deaf Psař polní chundelka annual meadowgrass barley, wheat C) 0.44 38 48.5 92.5 90 0 0.22 0 8 32 51 0 II 0.23 91 70 0 0 0 0.11 90 16 0 0 0 III 0.18 92.5 90 16 0 0 0.08 82.5 82.5 0 0 0 c) + 11 0.44 + 0.23 99.5 100 ALIGN! 99.5 97.5 0 0.22 + 0.11 97.5 75 80 75 0 с) + III 0.44 + 0.18 100 ALIGN! 99.5 97.5 98.7 0 0.22 + 0.09 95 90 90 90 0

Example 10

Seeds of common foxtail (Alopecurus myosuroides) are sown in a flower pot and, after emerging to the 2 to 3 leaf stage in the greenhouse, are treated with compounds d) and I alone as well as combinations thereof using ratios of components d): I = 5.19: 1 3.25: 1.

The result of the treatment, which is expressed as. % damage 4 weeks after treatment is shown in Table 10. These results indicate that the combination, especially in the lower dose range, has an unexpectedly higher effect on the foxtail compared to treatment with the individual components.

The wheat was in no way damaged (not shown in the table).

Table 10

Effect of herbicidal combination on post-emergence treatment (in a greenhouse) on field fox

ratio d): active substance I = 5.19: 1 ratio d): I = 3.25: 1 dose (kg / ha) effect active substance rate (kg / ha) effect AND 0.270 95 AND 0.270 95 0.135 75 0.135 75 0,067 32 0,067 32 0,034 16 0,034 16 (d) 1.4 80 (d) 0.875 70 0.7 65 0.437 48.5 0.35 32 0.219 0 0.175 0 0.109 0 1 + d) 0.270 + 1.4 100 ALIGN! I + d) 0.270 + 0.875 99 0.135 + 0.7 90 0.135 + 0.437 95 0.067 + 0.35 85 0.067 + 0.219 70 0.034 4- 0.175 65 0.024 &lt; 0.109 60

Example 11

In a further experiment in the greenhouse, the active substances dj, II and III are applied alone as well as in the combination d) + II and d) + III after the emergence of the plants. The mixtures were applied in the following doses corresponding to field trials:

d) + II = 1.75 + 0.9 kg / ha = 1.94: 1 dj + III = 1.75 + 0.72 kg / ha = 2.43: 1.

At the time of treatment, the weed and chundella weeds had developed about 3 leaves, the spring wheat crops and winter barley had 3 to 4 leaves.

The result (cf. Table 11) shows a weak effect of compound (d) on the common fox as well as a good effect on chundella; compounds II and III, both in the form of methyl esters, have a relatively good effect on field fox, but not on chundella.

With the combination, an effect is obtained on field fox that exceeds the expected rate (in 1/2 and 1/4 of the initial dose) and on chundella (in 1/2 of the initial dose). Wheat and barley are only damaged at the highest doses of the combination, which is similar to that of compound (d) alone.

Table 11

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment (greenhouse experiment)

active substance dose (kg / ha) Psař polní Effect (% damage) on Whisker Wheat barley (d) 0.88 62 96 7.5 10 0.44 8 48.5 0 1,2 0.22 0 8 0 0 II 0.45 87.5 0 0 0 0.23 70 0 0 0 0.11 16.2 0 0 0 III 0.36 92.5 32.5 0 0 0.18 87.5 16.2 0 0 0.09 75 0 0 0 d) + II 0.88 + 0.45 95 97.5 10 12.5 0.44 + 0.23 87.5 85 2.5 2.5 0.22 + 0.11 48.5 32.5 0 0 d) + III 0.88 + 0.36 100 ALIGN! 97.5 7.5 10 0.44 + 0.18 97.5 90 0 1,2 0.22 4- 0.09 90 32.5 0 0

Example 12

In a field trial, beet beets of active ingredients (e), (III) and (IV) alone and in combination (e) (III) are applied by spraying after emergence of the plants,

e) + IV.

The active substance (e) was ineffective against deaf oats, whereas it was very poor in controlling dicotyledonous weeds. Also, the effect of III and IV on deaf oats was relatively weak. Surprisingly, using the combination, an increase in effect on an unexpected scale has been achieved, both on deaf oats and on dicotyledonous weed species, lebed, field mustard and cotton.

Table 12

Effect of herbicidal combination in post-emergence treatment (field trial)

active substance dose (kg / ha) oat deaf θ) 4.9 0 III 0.72 62 IV 0.30 43 0.54 60 e) -1- III 4.9 - (- 0.72 97.5 e) + IV 4.9 + 0.30 - 82,5 4.9 - (- 0.54 92.5

Effect (% damage)

lebeda mustard rdesno sugar beet 30 57.5 32.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 60 75 50 0 57.5 70 45 0 60 72.5 55 0

Claims (2)

OBJECT OF THE INVENTION CLAIMS 1. Herbicidal compositions comprising (1) phenoxyphenoxypropionic acid esters of the general formula I in which: R represents chlorine, bromine or trifluoromethyl group C1-6; R1 is hydrogen or chlorine and the lower alkyl has 1 to 4 carbon atoms in combination with (2) a) 3-ethoxyoxyabonylaminophenyl-N-phenylcarbainate, or (b) 3-N-methoxycarbonylaminophenyl-N- (3'-methylphenyl) carbamate, when in formula I R-Br and R1-Cl, or R--CF3 and R1 = H, or (c) N-3-chloro-4-ethoxyphenyl-N ', N'-dimethylurea when in formula I R = Cl and R1 = H, or R = Cl; and R ¹ = Cl, or R = Br and R 1 = Cl, or (d) N- (2-benzthiazolyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea when in formula 1 R = Cl and R 1 = H, or R = Cl and R 1 = Cl, or R = Br and R 1 = Cl, or e) 3-methyl-4-amino-6-phenyl-2,4,4-triazin-5 (4H) -one when in formula I, R-Br and R-Cl or R--CFs and R1 = H. 2. A composition according to claim 1, wherein the weight ratio of component (1) to (2) is from 1: 0.5 to 1: 17.