Tap
Well-Known Member
The Raptor label calls for non ionic surfactant AND AMS. I assume Imox is to be mixed the same way...or is it different?
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Imox vs Clethodim for clover?
- Thread starter split toe
- Start date
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
There is no one right answer. Yesterday I mixed one oz of 12.1% concentrate IMOX in about 150 oz of water and covered about 0.15 acres.
That amount of water covered the area nicely for me and my backpack sprayer (Solo). I was using a cone nozzle because I can't find my flat fan. Also in the mix was about 2 oz of crop oil. The one ounce of IMOX is a little heavy for the area sprayed. I might just end up dinging the clover also. My reason for the dose was the size of the target weed(s) and the threat of rain. It didn't rain. So, we'll see how it goes with the clover and the smartweed problem.
If you have a herbicide then you have a label. You should ready and study the label. Not too be too edgy, if you can't read and understand the label, well.....try again. If after you read the label and have a semi-understanding ask for clarification. That's my mode.
Tap
Well-Known Member
A lot of herbicide labels also have a breakdown for a mix for treating 1,000 sq ft. For spot spraying, sometimes I think it's easier to look at that chart and divide by 10 to get the 100 sq ft mix rate (10'x10'). I can wrap my brain around how much area that is better than I can trying to pare-down a "per acre" rate.
I’m no expert when it comes to spraying labels, how it’s to be mixed etc. We ordered the Imox from Keystone Pest Soultions and after talking to the reps they said that the NitoSurf is the recommended surfactant, but then later asked if I could use AMS instead just to finish up and they said that was fine as well. The label says 4-6 ounces per acre, with our sprayer we have it worked out that it takes about 10-12 gallons of water to cover an acre. We mix 5 ounces of the Imox in with our water and surfactant and that has worked well for us. Like farmer dan said though, each sprayer and each persons experience is going to be a little bit different
Tap
Well-Known Member
AMS and surfactant is apples and oranges. They don't serve the same purpose.
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
I have poor impulse control! Now that it's out of the bag....
That's too easy TAP!
Apples and oranges they are! But both are fruits and, while there may be subtle differences in their dietary impacts, the hopeful outcome is the same! AMS and surfactants are spray adjuvants. The reason for using AMS and surfactants would be - to accomplish a better weed control / kill. There's a whole complex set of factors that influence herbicide effectiveness and we presume adding all this stuff is worthwhile and effective. Well maybe, but we've gotten lazy and just assume we should add the stuff without knowing why. I've never used AMS in my life and I seem to be doing OK. Your experience may be different.
I would quibble with the statement, "They don't serve the same purpose." In the end, in fact, they do if only thru different modes.
However, I would agree AMS is not a substitute for a surfactant but adding AMS might be enough to overcome the lack of one.
Tap
Well-Known Member
Well, yeah, they are the same in that they each contribute to weed kill, but, unless I'm mistaken (and this certainly won't be the 1st time for that!) surfactant is strictly to help the herbicide stick to the leaves and AMS has a dual purpose. AMS treats the mix water and helps "neutralize" (if that's the right term") mineral content in the water that might otherwise bind with the herbicide molecules and render it less effective and AMS is also a fertilizer which the plant absorbs and spurs growth which aids in absorption. We always say that herbicides need an actively growing plant, right? I'm strictly an amateur on this stuff so if I'm inaccurate, please straighten me out.
Now, I've never used Imox, exactly, but I have used Raptor many times...same active chemical, right? The Raptor label calls for both surfactant and AMS, so I add both. There are a lot of variables when it comes to applying herbicides and I'm far from an expert. Weed species and it's stage, herbicide chemical, adjuvants, weather, application method, and probably a few other things. By the time I spend the money on the chemicals, seed, tractor fuel, and sweat equity, I'm not going to take short cuts with this stuff. Prep and planting are so time-frame sensitive. And when we are dealing with certain, hard to kill weeds, I want everything that I can control going in my favor.
dogghr
Well-Known Member
And yet we laugh at the old farmers using dish soap? Maybe we don't know so much? Or have too much expendable income for a deer food plot.
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
Look, its all just for fun while we wait for something better to come along (FarmerDan has too much time on his hands).
I usually try to stay inside the 'written word' and gospel according to Monsanto and all those other companies who make us poor. Tonight I feel especially free! I just signed up for Medicare. May the wonders of the world never cease!
This is an, "As I see it....."
Where to start. There's something of a disconnect between the science of herbicide formulation and the what actually makes it into a pesticide label. Now, don't come up out of your chair. I'm not alleging fraud or misrepresentation. But, the people manufacturing and selling the herbicides do a lot to protect themselves from a lot of claims by guys like us who never do anything wrong and, therefore, the product must be bad. That was a little snarky, but, hey, I'm signed up for Medicare!
So, if there's something the manufacture can have you add that will save you from yourself....and by linear circumstance....save them from you, they are going to "recommend" that you use it. I agree, there are a lot of variables in the whole process. That's what makes farming and growing so much fun! There are so many variable even the most respected scientists throw up their hands in frustration. They use actions and words different than that but its the same.
Here are just a couple sentences from some Penn State literature I happened to stumble across (of course I get to pick and choose!!):
Within the last 15 years, nitrogen fertilizers have been more frequently added to the spray solution as an adjuvant to increase herbicide activity. Ammonium salts (NH4+) appear to be the active component of these fertilizer solutions and have improved the performance consistency on some weeds. It is still unclear how ammonium salts improve herbicide performance.
Nitrogen fertilizers may replace surfactant or crop oil concentrate with some of the contact-type herbicides, but are usually added in addition to surfactant or crop oil concentrate with systemic products.
Ammonium-based fertilizers and, in particular, ammonium sulfate (AMS) are also being promoted to reduce potential antagonism with hard water or antagonism with other pesticides (NOTE the words "promoted" and "potential".)
It's a complicated subject. You can read more about it here;
https://extension.psu.edu/adjuvants-for-enhancing-herbicide-performance
Now get back inside the lines and do what the label suggests. but if you don't have.....
And thanks for the ride. I think I will get off here and have a beer.
I usually try to stay inside the 'written word' and gospel according to Monsanto and all those other companies who make us poor. Tonight I feel especially free! I just signed up for Medicare. May the wonders of the world never cease!
This is an, "As I see it....."
Where to start. There's something of a disconnect between the science of herbicide formulation and the what actually makes it into a pesticide label. Now, don't come up out of your chair. I'm not alleging fraud or misrepresentation. But, the people manufacturing and selling the herbicides do a lot to protect themselves from a lot of claims by guys like us who never do anything wrong and, therefore, the product must be bad. That was a little snarky, but, hey, I'm signed up for Medicare!
So, if there's something the manufacture can have you add that will save you from yourself....and by linear circumstance....save them from you, they are going to "recommend" that you use it. I agree, there are a lot of variables in the whole process. That's what makes farming and growing so much fun! There are so many variable even the most respected scientists throw up their hands in frustration. They use actions and words different than that but its the same.
Here are just a couple sentences from some Penn State literature I happened to stumble across (of course I get to pick and choose!!):
Within the last 15 years, nitrogen fertilizers have been more frequently added to the spray solution as an adjuvant to increase herbicide activity. Ammonium salts (NH4+) appear to be the active component of these fertilizer solutions and have improved the performance consistency on some weeds. It is still unclear how ammonium salts improve herbicide performance.
Nitrogen fertilizers may replace surfactant or crop oil concentrate with some of the contact-type herbicides, but are usually added in addition to surfactant or crop oil concentrate with systemic products.
Ammonium-based fertilizers and, in particular, ammonium sulfate (AMS) are also being promoted to reduce potential antagonism with hard water or antagonism with other pesticides (NOTE the words "promoted" and "potential".)
It's a complicated subject. You can read more about it here;
https://extension.psu.edu/adjuvants-for-enhancing-herbicide-performance
Now get back inside the lines and do what the label suggests. but if you don't have.....
And thanks for the ride. I think I will get off here and have a beer.
Tap
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info Dan.
Hope you didn't think that I was arguing or bing pissy with you. It's just a discussion.
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
Apologies to you, Tap, if you thought I was picking on you. Your thoughts are clear and correct! I just like to stretch the edges a little bit and maybe generate some enthusiastic and informed conversation based on new and/or renewed thinking.
Best wishes!
Best wishes!
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
And to the two comments about how expensive IMOX is....I just bought a quart for $99 and got hosed. I found it for $89 elsewhere. At four ounces to the acres that's around $12 an acre -- for marvelous weed control in clover.
And residual is a good thing! it keeps new weeds from germinating! You can plant into IMOX sprayed ground if the crop is listed on the IMOX label. It takes a little reading and some forward thinking.
And residual is a good thing! it keeps new weeds from germinating! You can plant into IMOX sprayed ground if the crop is listed on the IMOX label. It takes a little reading and some forward thinking.
Tap
Well-Known Member
No apologies necessary. I didn't think you were picking on me...I thought maybe I was beginning to get under your skin. No worries though...there's plenty of time to annoy you
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Tap
Well-Known Member
Just like a jug of Raptor. When I bought it, you could only get it in full gallons for "only" ~$550.
But I agree, the per-acre price is pretty cheap.
I have to re-read the label...seemed like a lot of follow up crops couldn't be planted for many months.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
Its funny. I just went back and read the label on my $99/qt IMOX and it has no "crops" listed, just weeds controlled and the basics. There is no recommendation for AMS.
Let's look here for the EPA label registration for Raptor
https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/registration/fs_PC-129171_22-May-97.pdf
The information provided includes the half-life of the herbicide in the soil. The half-life is where we begin understanding how long we must wait to plant crops sensitive to the herbicide. It's the beginning, but not the end.
"Environmental characteristics: Imazamox is only moderately persistent, and it degrades aerobically in the soil to a non-herbicidal metabolite which is immobile or moderately mobile. Imazamox also degrades by aqueous photolysis. Adsorption and leaching: Imazamox is mobile however the terminal soil metabolite is moderately mobile to immobile. Leaching of imazamox in the field studies was very limited. Microbial breakdown: Imazamox is metabolized under aerobic soil conditions. The degradation products are not herbicidal.
Loss from hydrolysis, photo decomposition, and/or volatilization: Imazamox is hydrolytically stable at pH 5, 7, and 9. Photodegradation is rapid in water (half-life of 6.8 hours) but slow on soil. Volatilization is not significant. Resultant average persistence: The range of dissipation half-lives is 15 to 130 days with the more representative half-lives appearing to be 35 and 50 days. The limited persistence will restrict much of imazamox from reaching ground water"
I'm going to take a guess here and say if it's hot and dry and the organic matter in you soil is decent and you've used the higher rate of herbicide you're looking at the upper end of the range. And the opposite for times when moisture is plentiful and/or your soils are lower in OM and the rates are on the lower end. It's a ballet trying to figure all this out, but herbicides are not an easy subject and much success or failure depends on understanding the subtleties.
The product label is always going to offer the most conservative guidance possible.
Now, the decision is yours.
Let's look here for the EPA label registration for Raptor
https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/registration/fs_PC-129171_22-May-97.pdf
The information provided includes the half-life of the herbicide in the soil. The half-life is where we begin understanding how long we must wait to plant crops sensitive to the herbicide. It's the beginning, but not the end.
"Environmental characteristics: Imazamox is only moderately persistent, and it degrades aerobically in the soil to a non-herbicidal metabolite which is immobile or moderately mobile. Imazamox also degrades by aqueous photolysis. Adsorption and leaching: Imazamox is mobile however the terminal soil metabolite is moderately mobile to immobile. Leaching of imazamox in the field studies was very limited. Microbial breakdown: Imazamox is metabolized under aerobic soil conditions. The degradation products are not herbicidal.
Loss from hydrolysis, photo decomposition, and/or volatilization: Imazamox is hydrolytically stable at pH 5, 7, and 9. Photodegradation is rapid in water (half-life of 6.8 hours) but slow on soil. Volatilization is not significant. Resultant average persistence: The range of dissipation half-lives is 15 to 130 days with the more representative half-lives appearing to be 35 and 50 days. The limited persistence will restrict much of imazamox from reaching ground water"
I'm going to take a guess here and say if it's hot and dry and the organic matter in you soil is decent and you've used the higher rate of herbicide you're looking at the upper end of the range. And the opposite for times when moisture is plentiful and/or your soils are lower in OM and the rates are on the lower end. It's a ballet trying to figure all this out, but herbicides are not an easy subject and much success or failure depends on understanding the subtleties.
The product label is always going to offer the most conservative guidance possible.
Now, the decision is yours.
Tap
Well-Known Member
I read both IMOX and Raptor labels. Talk about confusing and sometimes contradictory...geeze.
>The one thing that jumped out at me was the difference between the 2 in the per-acre rate. Take Pa Smartweed for example. The Raptor label calls for a maximum (regardless of weed species) of 6 oz per acre. IMOX gave a range of 68 to128 oz per acre. If I understood those labels correctly, IMOX is not as inexpensive (to use) as Raptor.
>IMOX says no more than two applications per year, Raptor says one per year.
IMOX says to include a surfactant for water applications (pond weeds, etc) but it doesn't say anything about any adjuvants for terrestrial applications. Raptor calls for both surfactant, and AMS "for tough to control weeds".
>On the Raptor label, the rotational interval (how long before a specific crop can be planted)varies from anytime (for beans) all the way up to 18 months for beets and "All other crops not listed on the rotational chart"...clover is not on the chart, but alfalfa is...3 months before you can plant that...not sure if clover is the same or not. Turnip interval is 9 months. Some of us like to over seed brassicas into the thin areas of of clover. I guess, if you want to seed brassica by late July, then you better not spray Raptor after early May??
The exact wording of labels on so many of these herbicides shouldn't be glossed-over. They call for different rates for different weeds on different crops and different application methods. It's easy to read one part of a label and make false assumptions about how to use the stuff.
And as the link that Dan supplied said...soil, OM, and rainfall makes for even more variables.
OP, Sorry we (I) seem to have jacked the thread.
You asked about cleth vs IMOX and it seems to have morphed into Raptor vs IMOX.
I still think it's an important part of the discussion and decision making process and should be mentioned.
X-farmerdan
Well-Known Member
Superb analysis Tap! You motivate me!
My $99 quart of IMOX, pictured below is manufactured FOR Alligare, LLC somewhere in Alabama. So, the label attached to this product is what I re-read and the one I believe you refer to. I'll leave Raptor alone for now except for a few observations.
I guess we all know pesticides are regulated by EPA and state agencies. Point being there are laws and regulations that must be followed and this is reflected in the herbicide label. And then there are patents.
Raptor and IMOX have slightly different chemical formations. They are twins, but not identical. I can't see a difference in effectiveness, but the chemical differences open a door for a new registration - hence the generic in different jug sizes.
Take a closer look at the Alligare IMOX label as Tap has and you see nothing familiar. I'm thinking that's because this product is registered for this use, (taken from the label)
"A herbicide for the selective management of undesirable vegetation in
and around aquatic sites and terrestrial non-crop areas, industrial sites
and rights-of-ways. The herbicide may be used on listed sites that are
cut for hay or grazed."
Further, again from the label-
"Alligare IMOX Herbicide may also be applied for terrestrial and riparian vegetation control
in industrial noncropland sites, and railroad, utility, and highway rights-of-way. Industrial
noncropland sites include utility plant sites, tank farms, pumping installations, storage
areas, fence rows and ditch banks. Alligare IMOX Herbicide may also be used for the
establishment and maintenance of wildlife openings. The sites listed above and treated
with Alligare IMOX Herbicide may be grazed or cut for hay. "
This is how you get past tramping on the regulations, registrations, and patents held by other manufacturers.
None of what's on the Alligare IMOX label makes any economic sense. And I doubt anybody would use it on non-cropland for the TOTAL suppression and/or control of the specified weeds (I guess). But, the listed rates are for just such an application - not for crops!!
We're smarter than that and it's exactly what the manufactures know and intended. The regulators go wink - wink and we use the stuff by referring to the directions on the Raptor label which IS specific to crops and crop rotations.
Make sense?
My $99 quart of IMOX, pictured below is manufactured FOR Alligare, LLC somewhere in Alabama. So, the label attached to this product is what I re-read and the one I believe you refer to. I'll leave Raptor alone for now except for a few observations.
I guess we all know pesticides are regulated by EPA and state agencies. Point being there are laws and regulations that must be followed and this is reflected in the herbicide label. And then there are patents.
Raptor and IMOX have slightly different chemical formations. They are twins, but not identical. I can't see a difference in effectiveness, but the chemical differences open a door for a new registration - hence the generic in different jug sizes.
Take a closer look at the Alligare IMOX label as Tap has and you see nothing familiar. I'm thinking that's because this product is registered for this use, (taken from the label)
"A herbicide for the selective management of undesirable vegetation in
and around aquatic sites and terrestrial non-crop areas, industrial sites
and rights-of-ways. The herbicide may be used on listed sites that are
cut for hay or grazed."
Further, again from the label-
"Alligare IMOX Herbicide may also be applied for terrestrial and riparian vegetation control
in industrial noncropland sites, and railroad, utility, and highway rights-of-way. Industrial
noncropland sites include utility plant sites, tank farms, pumping installations, storage
areas, fence rows and ditch banks. Alligare IMOX Herbicide may also be used for the
establishment and maintenance of wildlife openings. The sites listed above and treated
with Alligare IMOX Herbicide may be grazed or cut for hay. "
This is how you get past tramping on the regulations, registrations, and patents held by other manufacturers.
None of what's on the Alligare IMOX label makes any economic sense. And I doubt anybody would use it on non-cropland for the TOTAL suppression and/or control of the specified weeds (I guess). But, the listed rates are for just such an application - not for crops!!
We're smarter than that and it's exactly what the manufactures know and intended. The regulators go wink - wink and we use the stuff by referring to the directions on the Raptor label which IS specific to crops and crop rotations.
Make sense?
KSbowhunter
New Member
I've been spraying ag crops for about 3 years and most of the time I include ams in the mix. I've left it out alot of times also and never could see that I got less of a kill. Always heard glyphosate benefits from AMS. Some water probably greatly benefits from having it in the tank but I would imagine you will still get a good kill on the grass/weeds without it.
