Advertisement

Impact of hexazinone on invertebrates after application to forested watersheds

  • David T. Mayack
  • Parshall B. Bush
  • Daniel G. Neary
  • James E. Douglass
Article

Abstract

The impact of the herbicide, hexazinone, was assessed on aquatic macrophytes, aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate communities within forested watersheds in the Piedmont region of Georgia. Four replicate watersheds received hexazinone on April 23, 1979, and were subsequently monitored for eight months. Residue levels in terrestrial invertebrates were a maximum of two orders of magnitude greater than comparable levels (0.01 to 0.18 ppm) found in forest floor material. Aquatic organisms in a second order perennial stream were exposed to intermittent concentrations of hexazinone (6 to 44 ppb). Hexazinone and its metabolites were generally not detected (<0.1 ppm) in aquatic invertebrates and macrophytes. No major alterations in species composition or diversity were detected in the aquatic macroinvertebrate community. Terrestrial microarthropod samples collected near the end of the study period revealed no major community changes.

Keywords

Macrophyte Forest Floor Aquatic Macrophyte Invertebrate Community Macroinvertebrate Community 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beckett, D. C.: Ordination of macroinvertebrate communities in a multistressed river system, In J. H. Thorp and J. W. Gibbons (eds.): Energy and environmental stress in aquatic systems. p. 748. Technical Information Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Springfield, VA. (1978).Google Scholar
  2. Bormann, F. H., and G. E. Likens: Pattern and process in a forested ecosystem, New York: Springer-Verlag (1979).Google Scholar
  3. Bradt, P. T.: Longitudinal variation in the macroinvertebrate fauna and water chemistry of an eastern Pennsylvania trout stream, In J. H. Thorp and J. W. Gibbons (eds.): Energy and environmental stress in aquatic systems, p. 771. Technical Information Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Springfield, VA. (1978).Google Scholar
  4. Brender, E. V.: Silviculture of loblolly pine in the Georgia Piedmont. Ga. For. Res. Counc. Rep.33, 74 (1973).Google Scholar
  5. Burlington, R. F.: Quantitative biological assessment of pollution, J. Water Pollut. Control Fed.,34, 414 (1962).Google Scholar
  6. Edwards, C. A., and K. E. Fletcher: A comparison of extraction methods for terrestrial arthropods. In J. Phillipson (ed.): IBP Handbook No. 18 Methods of study in quantitative soil ecology: Population, production and energy flow, p. 150. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications (1971).Google Scholar
  7. Fitzgerald, C. H.: Chemical vegetation control in forest stands in the past half century. DuPont Forest Herbicides Seminar, Athens, GA. January 8–10 (1980).Google Scholar
  8. Fowler, M. C.: Laboratory trials of a new triazine herbicide (DPX 3674) on various aquatic species of macrophytes and algae. Weed Res.17, 191 (1977).Google Scholar
  9. Hanson, H. C.: Characteristics of theStipa comata-Boutelova gracilis-Touteloua curtipendual, association of Northern Colorado. Ecology36, 269 (1955).Google Scholar
  10. Holt, R. H.: Personal Communication (1979).Google Scholar
  11. Holt, R. H.: Determination of hexazinone and metabolite residues using nitrogen-selective gas chromatography. J. Agri. Food Chem.29, 165 (1981).Google Scholar
  12. Hurd, R. M.: Grassland vegetation in the Big Horn Mountains, Wyoming. Ecology42, 459 (1961).Google Scholar
  13. McIntosh, R. P.: The continuum concept of vegetation. Bot. Rev.33, 130 (1967).Google Scholar
  14. Neary, D. G., J. E. Douglass, P. B. Bush, and D. T. Mayack: Hexazinone losses in storm runoff from small forest watersheds in the Upper Piedmont of Georgia. Abstracts of The Twentieth Meeting of Weed Science Society of America, Toronto, Canada, February 25–27. p. 53. (1980).Google Scholar
  15. Nutter, W. L., and J. E. Douglass: Consequences of harvesting and site preparation in the Piedmont, In Proceedings of a symposium on principles of maintaining productivity on prepared sites, Mississippi State University. March 21–22 (1978).Google Scholar
  16. Pielou, E. C.: Species—diversity and pattern-diversity in the study of ecological succession. J. Theor. Biol.10, 370 (1966a).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. —: The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J. Theor. Biol.13, 131 (1966b).Google Scholar
  18. Shannon, C. E., and W. Weaver: The mathematical theory of communication, University of Illinois Press, Urbana (1963).Google Scholar
  19. Sokal, R., and J. F. Rohlf: Biometry. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman (1969).Google Scholar
  20. Summers, J.: Personal Communication (1980).Google Scholar
  21. Whittaker, R. H.: Communities and ecosystems, New York: MacMillan (1975).Google Scholar
  22. Wilhm, J. L.: Range of diversity index in benthic macroinvertebrate populations. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed.42, R221 (1970a).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. —: Effect of sample size on Shannon's formula. Southwest Nat.14, 441 (1970b).Google Scholar
  24. Wilhm, J. L., and T. C. Dorris: Biological parameters of water quality. BioScience18, 447 (1968).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • David T. Mayack
    • 1
    • 2
  • Parshall B. Bush
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daniel G. Neary
    • 1
    • 2
  • James E. Douglass
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Ecology, Extension Poultry Science DepartmentUniversity of GeorgiaAthens
  2. 2.Coweeta Hydrologic LaboratoryFranklin

Personalised recommendations