DD279166A1 - SELECTIVE HERBICIDE COMBINATIONS - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention relates to selective herbicide combinations for the control of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous weeds in cereal crops. The active compounds are N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -N, N-dimethylurea and N- (4-bromophenyl) -N, N-dimethylurea and optionally 2- (2,4-dichlorophenylphenoxy) -propionic acid or 2- (2 -Methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) propionic acid or 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile used.

Description

and optionally 2- (2,4-dichlorophenoxy) propionic acid of the general formula III,

, CL- <Oy-Q ~ CH-COOR CL CH ₃

in which R denotes H, Na, K or alkyl,

or 2- (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) propionic acid of the general formula IV

-CH- COOK

with R-H, Na, K or alkyl

or 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxy-benzonitrile of the formula V

CH

contain.

Field of application of the invention

The invention relates to novel herbicide combinations for controlling monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous weeds in cultivated plant stands, preferably in cereals.

Characteristic of the known state of the art

It is known that N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea is very well suited for controlling weeds, such as Alopecurus myosuroides, Apera spica-venti, Avena fatua and Poa annua, and has high selectivity Grain has (GB-PS 407587). "Villous gaps exist in comparison to broad-leaved weeds, such as Lamium spp., Polygonum spp. and Galium aparine.

To close such gaps, the preparations "Arelori P" (N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea + 2- (4-chloro-2-methylpheriGyxypropionic acid) and "Twin-Tak" (N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea - 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile + 4-hydroxy-3,5-diiodo-benzonitrile.) These mixed preparations have a broad spectrum of activity, but require a relatively high An essential disadvantage is the known low residual effect of the leaf-active phenoxyalkanoic acid and the nitrile preparations.

It is also known that N- (4-bromophenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea has a good action against dicotyledonous weeds

(DD-PS 111542, DD-PS 102275). To close the loopholes in grass weeds mixtures with acetanilides have been developed, which have not yet been used and are not suitable for weed control in cereal stocks (DD-PS 13438)

 The same applies to the mixtures mentioned in patent DD-PS 242163 with 3-chloropyridazinyl-G-phenyl ether and triazines.

Object of the invention

The aim of the invention is to develop new selective herbicide combinations which simultaneously combat annoying mono- and dicotyledonous weeds with increased residual action and low active ingredient per unit area, preferably in cereal stocks.

Explanation of the essence of the invention

This object is achieved in that the selected herbicide combinations in addition to conventional excipients and carriers as active ingredients N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea of the formula I.

C _n H ₃

CH- (O) -NH-CO-N '

and N- (4-bromophenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea of the formula II

/ CH ₃ 3r- <0> -NW-- ~ "

and optionally 2- (2,4-dichlorophen> xy) -propionic acid of the general formula III,

O - CH-

III

in which R = H, Na, bait alkyl,

or 2- (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) propionic acid of the general formula IV

O -CN-COOI? _{| V}

with R = H, Na, K or alkyl

or 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxy-lenzenzonitrile of the formula V

CN

contain.

These combinations not only cause an extension of the spectrum of activity and a simple addition of the different effects, but there are real synergistic effects, especially with regard to the action against typical weeds in cereal stocks, on.

In the active compound combinations according to the invention, the well-known good action of N- (4-bromophenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylurea against dicotyledonous weeds was demonstrated by the addition of the monocotyledonous N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -Ν', Ν'- Dimothylharnstoffs supplemented and achieved a substantial reduction in the application rate per unit area, while improving the herbicidal activity and increasing the duration of action and grain tolerance.

In addition, the inclusion of 2- (2,4-dichlorophenoxy) propionic acid, 2- (4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy) propionic acid, or 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile is found to be effective under certain conditions.

The application of the herbicide combinations is expediently carried out in the preparation and application forms customary for weed control, such as, for example, solutions, emulsions, suspensions or spray concentrates, which, with the addition of liquid and / or solid carriers or diluents, are generally surface-active

and other formulation aids and can be diluted with water for use. The application forms vary with the intended use. It is essential in any case, to ensure a fine distribution of the active substances.

The preparation of the various preparations is carried out in the known manner by mixing and milling or by dissolution. In addition, a common application of the combinations according to the invention with other agrochemicals is possible.

The following example is intended to illustrate the invention without limiting it.

In greenhouse experiments, using a soil of medium sorption capacity (sandy loam) with a water capacity of 60%, the herbicidal activity and the cereal compatibility of mixtures of active substances were tested in comparison with the individual components.

The following active ingredients were considered:

A = N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -N ', N'-dimethylharnsioff B = N- {4-bromophenyl) -N', N'-dimethylurea C = 2- (2,4-dichlorophenoxy) -propionic acid D = 2 - (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) -propionic acid E = 3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile

To assess the herbicidal activity and crop plant compatibility, the key given in Table 1 was used. Table 1: Rating key

Boniturnote Schad strength weed growth 1 destroyed 0 2 5 3 15 4 30 5 50 6 70 7 85 8th 95 9 unharmed 100

The testing was done on the weed species

Stellaria media L

 Senecio VulgarisL

 Anthemis ervensis L.

^T hlaspi arvense L

 Agrostemma githago L

 Lamium purpureum L.

 Cheuopodiuin album L

 Polygonum lapathifolium L.

 Spfirgula arvensis L.

 Galium aparine L.

 Apera spica-venti (L.) P.B

 Poaannua L

 Setariaglauca (L.) P.B

 Bromus secalir.us L

 Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P.B.

Winter barley, winter rye and winter wheat were included to determine cereal compatibility.

With the Wirkstoffkombinatiorteii occurred in comparison to the individual active ingredients an improvement in effectiveness, ciis based on synergistic effects.

The combination effect v. It is then termed synergistic, where it is better than the independent additive effect calculated from both individual effects of the mixing partner (COLBY Weeds 15 [1967] 1, 20-22).

The calculation is carried out according to LANG et al. (Conference Report "Weed Control in Industrial Plant Production",

The comparison of the expected with the actually required by the combination application rate refers to a Restverwunki citation of 10 or 5% (ED ₀₀ - or ED ₉₅ -WeM). In this comparison, therefore, not the strongest synergism, but a practice-relevant effect of 90 ... 100% control success prevail, whereby the respective average values of the test plants are indicated.

For the calculation, the rating values from the 30th day after the application were used ».

Table 2 shows the substance savings achieved with the herbicide mixtures.

Table 3 illustrates the effect improvement achieved with the combinations.

Table 2: Substance savings

2.1. Substance savings in the effectiveness range ED ₉₀ through the combination A + B

mix test plants A Dose experiment A + B total A B C A + B + C Dose model A + B + C Dcsiseinsparung relationship 0.229 (KGAs / ha) 0.260 total 0.168 0,022 0,081 0,271 (KGAs / ha) 0,325 (%) 0,180 B 0.204 total 0,025 0,193 0.093 0.311 A + B 0.625 88:12 total 0.184 0.031 0.245 total 0,117 0,018 0.231 0.366 0,324 0.609 20 total 0,160 0.024 0.213 total 0,021 0,137 0.270 0.428 0,248 1,086 18 75:25 total 0,155 0,061 0.259 total 0.109 0,055 0.442 0.606 0,366 0.915 33 total 0,125 0.053 0.209 0,089 0,089 0.177 0.355 0,250 0.584 15 60:40 total 0.197 0.104 0.299 0.345 25 total 0.146 0.084 0.221 0,255 18 66:34 total 0.126 0,102 0.281 0.385 32 total 0.113 0,075 0.252 0,258 15 45:55 total 0,155 2.2. Substance savings in the range EDg ₀ by the combination A + B + C 0.334 15 total 0,139 0.308 13 62: 8: 30 8:62:30 32: 5: 63 17 5:32:63 50 18: 9: 73 40 25:25:50 61 45 39

2.3. Substance savings in the effectiveness range ED ₉₀ through the combination A + B + D

mix test plants A Dose experiment B (KGAs / ha) A + B + D total 0,137 0,017 0,021 0,175 Dose model dose reduction relationship 0.026 0,203 D 0.328 total 0.112 0,018 0.067 0.197 ! KGAs / ha) (%) 0.166 0.026 0,099 0.519 total 0,110 0.053 0.023 0,186 A + B + D 8:62:30 total 0,160 0,080 0.327 0.348 total 0,065 0,133 0.027 0.225 0.729 55 32: 5: 63 total 0,100 0,200 0.108 0.436 total 0.027 0.173 0.103 0.303 0.761 32 46:23:31 total 0.043 0.118 0,136 1,079 total 0.027 0.081 0.191 0.299 0,476 27 23:46:31 total 0.114 0,041 0.918 1,033 total 0.098 0.033 0.233 0.364 0.601 28 4:11:85 total 0,060 0,120 0,878 0.666 total 0,099 0,051 0,117 0,267 2,320 53 11: 4: 85 total 0.486 2.4. Substanzeneinsparung in the range ED ₉₀ through the combination A ι B + E total 0,089 0,089 0.057 0,235 1,767 42 9:18:73 total 78:10:12 1,353 51 57: 9: 34 59:29:12 0.274 36 29:59:12 0,372 47 9:57:34 0.317 41 9:27:64 0.415 46 27: 9: 64 0.669 55 37. i9: 44 1,080 72 38:38:24 0.726 50 0,500 47 0.412 43

Table 3: Effect improvement

3.1. Improvement of herbicidal activity by combination A + B and grain selectivity

mix test plants dose weed growth model effect Wi.-Ge. selectivity 9 Wi.-Wei. relationship experiment (%) improvement Wi.-Ro. 9 (KGAs / ha) (%) 14 (%) 9 (Grade) 9 9 88:12 total 0.260 10 21 4 9 9 9 total 0.204 17 17 4 9 9 9 75:25 total 0.245 12 19 5 9 9 total 0.213 15 14 4 9 9 60:40 total 0.259 9 5

test plants dose weed growth model total 0,271 10 13 total 0.328 10 21 total 0,175 10 24 effect Wi.-Ge. 8th 9 9 -5- 9 279 166 experiment (%) total 0.311 10 22 total 0.519 10 17 total 0.197 10 29 improvement 9 8th 9 9 Table 3 (continued) (KGAs / ha) (%) 21 total 0,366 10 21 total 0.348 10 15 total 0,186 10 24 (%) 9 8th 8th 9 selectivity 9 mix total 0.209 16 10 total 0.428 10 27 total 0.436 10 14 total 0.225 10 23 5 8th 9 9 8th Wi.-Ro. 9 Wi.-Wei. relationship total 0.299 6 15 total 0.606 10 18 total 1,079 10 20 total 0.303 10 24 4 9 9 9 8th (Grade) 9 total 0.221 15 6 total 0.354 10 20 total 1,033 10 18 total 0.299 10 33 3 8th 9 9 8th 9 total 0.281 5 14 3.3. Improvement of the herbicidal action by the combination A + total 0.666 10 20 total 0.364 10 26 1 8th B + D and cereal selectivity 9 9 9 9 66:34 total 0.252 9 3.2. Improvement of the herbicidal action by the combination A + 8:62:30 3 4. Improvement of the herbicidal action by the combination A + total 0,267 10 25 5 B + C and cereal selectivity 11 B + E and cereal selectivity 9 9 9 62: 8: 31 32: 5: 63 78:10:12 total 0,235 10 23 3 7 14 8th 9 9 45:55 8:62:31 46:23:31 57: 9: 34 12 5 19 9 9 32: 5: 63 23:46:31 59:29:12 11 4 14 9 5:32:63 4:11:85 29:59:12 17 10 13 9 9 18: 9: 73 11: 4: 85 9:57:34 S 8th 14 9 25:25:50 9:18:73 9:27:64 10 10 23 9 8th 27: 9: 64 16 9 9 37: 19:44 15 8th 9 38:38:23 13 9 9 9 9 9 9 8th 8th 9 9 9 9 9 9 8th 9 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 8th 8th 8th 9 9 9 7

Claims (1)

Selective herbicide combinations for the control of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous weeds, characterized in that they contain N- (4-isopropylphenyl) -Ν ', Ν'-dimethylurea of the formula I in addition to customary auxiliaries and excipients and N- (4-bromophenyl) -N ', N'-dirrethylhamstoif of the formula II / CH ₃
JR (OV-NH-CO-N