Persistence of deltamethrin in baled alfalfa hay

Deltamethrin was applied to alfalfa at 12.5 g/ha, and residues were determined after 0, 7, and 14 days. The crop was cut and baled after 19 days. Residues in the bales were monitored using a 63Ni-ECD GC method to analyze core samples from replicate stacks. Residue decline in the standing crop was fi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of agricultural and food chemistry 1992-12, Vol.40 (12), p.2493-2496
Main Authors: Hill, Bernard D, Inaba, Dan J, Schaalje, G. Bruce
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
baling
Biological and medical sciences
echantillonnage
Feed and pet food industries
foin
Food industries
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
hay
heno
insecticidas
insecticide
insecticides
medicago sativa
mise en balle
muestreo
piretrinas sinteticas
prensado en balas
pyrethrine de synthese
residu
residues
residuos
sampling
synthetic pyrethrins
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Deltamethrin was applied to alfalfa at 12.5 g/ha, and residues were determined after 0, 7, and 14 days. The crop was cut and baled after 19 days. Residues in the bales were monitored using a 63Ni-ECD GC method to analyze core samples from replicate stacks. Residue decline in the standing crop was first order with a half-life of 9.0 days. Deltamethrin residues were carried over into the bales. Two days after baling, 0.64 ppmd (d = dry weight basis) residues were detected. Residue decline during the 0-16-week period after baling was also first-order but extremely slow with a projected half-life of 77 weeks. Residue levels 16 weeks after baling were 0.55 ppmd. There was no residue decline during the 16--52-week winter/spring-period. The sampling errors from taking core samples were investigated. There was negligible sampling error between bale ends (0%) or among sites on the bale ends (0.5%) compared with 2.5% error among replicate stacks and 7.4% error for laboratory analyses.
ISSN:0021-8561
1520-5118
DOI:10.1021/jf00024a030