Astm stp 1595 2016

STP 1595

Editors:

Craig Pofenberger

Justin Heuser

Downloaded/printed by

Coventry University (Tongji University) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.

Selected technical PaPerS

StP1595

Editors: Craig Pofenberger and Justin Heuser

Pesticide Formulation and

Del ivery Systems: 36th Volume,

Emerging Trends Building

on a Sol id Foundation

ASTM STOCK #STP1595

DOI: 10.1520/STP1595-EB

ASTM International , 100 Barr H arbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959

Printed in the U.S.A.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

ISBN: 978-0-8031-7635-5

ISSN: 1545-9004

Copyright © 2016 ASTM INTERNATIONAL , West Conshohocken, PA. Al l rights reserved. This material

may not be reproduced or copied, in whole or in part, in any printed, mechanical, electronic, flm, or other

distribution and storage media, without the written consent of the publisher.

Photocopy Rights

Authorization to photocopy items for internal , personal , or educational classroom use, or the internal ,

personal , or educational classroom use of specifc clients, is granted by ASTM International provided that

the appropriate fee is paid to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923,

Tel : (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/

The Society is not responsible, as a body, for the statements and opinions expressed in this publ ication.

ASTM International does not endorse any products represented in this publication.

Peer Review Policy

Each paper published in this volume was evaluated by two peer reviewers and at least one editor.

The authors addressed al l of the reviewers’ comments to the satisfaction of both the technical editor(s)

and the ASTM International Committee on Publications.

The quality of the papers in this publ ication refects not only the obvious eforts of the authors and the

technical editor(s), but also the work of the peer reviewers. In keeping with long-standing publication

practices, ASTM International maintains the anonymity of the peer reviewers. The ASTM International

Committee on Publications acknowledges with appreciation their dedication and contribution of time

and efort on behalf of ASTM International.

Citation of Papers

When citing papers from this publication, the appropriate citation includes the paper authors, “paper

title,” STP title, STP number, book editor(s), ASTM International , West Conshohocken, PA, year, page

range, paper doi, listed in the footnote of the paper. A citation is provided on page one of each paper.

Printed in Bay Shore, NY

November, 2016

THIS COMPILATION OF Selected Technical Papers, STP1595, Pesticide Formula￾tion and Delivery Systems: 36th Volume, Emerging Trends Building on a Solid Founda￾tion, contains peer-reviewed papers that were presented at a symposium held October

27–29, 2015, in Tampa, Florida, USA. Te symposium was sponsored by ASTM In￾ternational Committee E35 on Pesticides, Antimicrobials, and Alternative Control

Agents and Subcommittee E35.22 on Pesticide Formulations and Delivery Systems.

Symposium Chairpersons and STP Editors:

Craig Pofenberger

Evonik Corporation

Richmond, VA, USA

Justin Heuser

Evonik Corporation

Richmond, VA, USA

Foreword

v

Overview vii

Standards

OMRI Listing for Pesticides: What You Need to Know 1

Doug Currier

ASTM Standard Terminology Related to Biorationals Update 15

Lizbeth Rea and M ichael C. White

Adjuvant Technology

Polyglycerol Esters as Adjuvants for Enhanced Pesticidal Activity 18

Justin Heuser, Craig Pofenberger, Rene Haensel , and Ewald Sieverding

Lignin-Based Chemicals as Green Dispersants for Liquid Formulation:

Better Protection Against Crystal Growth 30

Jerry Gargulak, Stig Are Gundersen, Frédérik Bierre, and Paul ine Rolland

The Afect of Dew on Herbicide and Adjuvant Efcacy 42

Donald Penner and Jan Michael

Crop Oil Concentrates Comparison: Connecting Chemical Features

to Performance 49

Fernanda de Ol iveira B. Costa, Cíntia Fávaro, Marcelo Catani F. Antunes, and

Richard K. Zollinger

Efcacy of Non-Ammonium Sulfate Water Conditioning Adjuvants 65

Richard K. Zollinger, Bryan G. Young, Mark L. Bernards, and Dallas E. Peterson

Formulation Development

Novel Nonionic Star Polymeric Stabilizer in Aqueous Dispersion Formulations 76

Ron Kayea, Matthew Secrest, and Greg Lindner

Polymeric-Based Compatibility Agents for High Electrolyte Systems 90

Hannah Bofnger, Sharon Ellis, Susan Sun, and Greg Lindner

Contents

vi

Improved Analytical Method Study of the Determination of Lambda-Cyhalothrin

as Premix in Water-Based, Environmentally Friendly Formulations 102

Shao’e Chen, Zhen Zhu, Dejian N i, Lidong Wang, and Zhongwen Gao

Spray Applications and Delivery Systems

Mode of Action of Silicone Drift Control Agents 113

M ichael Klostermann, Rene Hänsel , Ewald Sieverding, Joachim Venzmer,

Craig Pofenberger, Lars Opfer, I l ia Roisman, and Cameron Tropea

The Efect of Adjuvants at High Spray Pressures for Aerial Applications 133

Bradley K. Fritz, W. Cl int Hofmann, and Ryan S. Henry

The Infuence of Nozzle Type, Operating Pressure, and Tank-Mixture Components

on Droplet Characteristics and the EPA’s Drift Reduction Rating 149

Ryan S. Henry, Bradley K. Fritz, W. Cl int Hofmann, and Greg R. Kruger

Spray Characterization by Optical Image Analysis 162

Sounak Sarkar, Surya Kamin, and Greg R. Kruger

Seed Coatings

Correlation of the Mechanical Properties of Seed Coating Films and

Dust-Of, Flowability, and Plantability Tests 183

Alan Halecky, N ing Ren, Jie Lu, Jane Q. Wang, and Frances E. Lockwood

Flowable Seed Treatments: A New Polymeric Dispersing System to

Increase Active Ingredient Content and to Improve Flowable Seed

Formulation Performance and Flexibility 202

Rocco Di Modugno, Federico De Pellegrini , Brad Eidem, and Andrea Balestrini

vii

Te 36th Symposium on Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems was held in

Tampa, Florida, on October 27–29, 2015. It was sponsored by ASTM Committee E35

on Pesticides, Antimicrobials, and Alternative Control Agents and was organized

by Subcomittee E35.22 on Pesticide Formulations and Delivery Systems. Te sym￾posium was titled, “Emerging Trends Building on a Solid Foundation.” Tirty-three

contributed papers ranged in content from current topics such as UAVs, pollinator

health, and green chemistries to more traditional ones, such as regulatory issues,

spray applications, and formulation and adjuvant research.

Tis symposium varied from previous ones in that there were no traditional key￾note speakers. Following the conclusion of the 35th Symposium in New Orleans in

October 2014, a brainstorming session provided many insightful conference topics.

Consequently, invited speakers covered a broad range ofnoteworthy topics:

• Precision Agwith Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (presentation by an actualfarmer!)

• Irrigation and Water Minimization

• Pollinater Health and RNAi Technology

• Biopesticides

• A How-to on OMRI Listing of Pesticides and Adjuvants

In this publication, the 16 technical papers will be classifed as follows: Standards,

Adjuvant Technology, Formulation Development, Spray Applications and Delivery

Systems, and Seed Coatings.

STANDARDS

Doug Currier presented the basics on how to gain OMRI listings for pesticides and

adjuvants, including required documentation. Although not presented, Rea and

White submitted a paper on standard terminology for Biorationals, as this is under

review by the E35.22 subcomittee.

ADjuvANTS TeChNoLogy

Heuser et al. described the application ofpolyglycerol esters as benign tank-side adju￾vants, and Gargulak et al. detailed the application ofligninsulfonates as green disper￾sants in fungicidal SC formulations. Penner and Michael presented his results on how

dew efects various adjuvants upon the application of glyphosate on post-emergent

weeds. Costa et al. evaluated the performance of four crop oil concentrates for drif

Overview

viii

potential and in feld trials to: 1) determine the efcacy behavior ofa fungicide combi￾nation and 2) determine efcacy control of a three-component herbicide blend.

In a collaboration between four universities, Zollinger et al. conducted standard￾ized, uniform studies on several weed species known to show glyphosate antagonism

with hard water. Te intent is to ultimately develop an ASTM standard for water

conditioning agents.

FoRmuLATIoN DeveLoPmeNT

A new star polymer surfactant was introduced by Kayea et al. with benefts including

improved emulsion stability and resuspension ability as based on evaluations with

multiple formulation types and actives. Bofnger et al. described how a family of

novel amphoteric polymers compatibilizes high electrolyte formulations containing

glyphosate, AMS, and fertilizers.

Chen et al. introduced a high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) method for

determination ofLambda-cyhalothrin, which overcomes the limitiations ofthe CIPAC

method ofquantifcation by GC wherein the technical is prone to isomerization.

SPRAy APPLICATIoNS AND DeLIveRy SySTemS

Papers by Klostermann et al. and Fritz et al. reported on the mode ofaction ofsilicone

adjuvants as drif-control adjuvants and how adjuvants afect high-speed aerial appli￾cations, respectively. Henry et al. explained how parameters such as nozzle type, pres￾sure, and tank-mix components infuence spray droplet characteristics. Optical image

analysis was ofered as an alternative to characterize spray droplet size as compared to

the traditional laser method by Sarkar et al.

SeeD CoATINgS

To address the concerns ofdust ofofseed coatings, Halecky et al. adapted mechanical

methods used to predict paint durability in tribological studies with insecticide and

fungicide SC formulations. Di Modugno et al. described a new dispersant approach

with a polymeric surfactant which allows for an increased active content in the seed

coating and reduced dust of.

Te editors wish to acknowledge the sincere eforts undertaken by those who pre￾sented at the conference, those who followed with a contributed paper, and those who

reviewed the papers. Session chairs were selected to highlight the dynamic of a new

generation ofresearchers taking the reins ofSubcomittee E35.22 on Pesticide Formula￾tions and Delivery Systems. Evonik Corporation actively supported the endeavors and

time demands imposed on the symposium chairman and editors.

Dr. Craig Pofenberger Dr. Justin Heuser

Evonik Corporation Evonik Corporation

Richmond, Virginia Richmond, Virginia

Doug Currier

1

OMRI Listing for Pesticides:

What You Need to Know

Citation

Currier, D., “OMRI Listing for Pesticides: What You Need to Know,” Pesticide Formulation and

Delivery Systems: 36th Volume, Emerging Trends Building on a Solid Foundation, ASTM

STP1595, C. Poffenberger and J. Heuser, Eds., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,

2016, pp. 1–14, http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/STP1595201500902

ABSTRACT

The regulations that govern the production of certified organic produce in the

United States are complex and cover al l points of production from start (e.g.,

seed, input materials, origins of livestock) to finish (e.g., product handling,

label ing, del ivery). These regulations help ensure that organic produce is

meeting a standard that everyone must fol low. The Organic Materials Review

Institute (OMRI) helps clarify this complex regulatory environment by focusing

on one piece of certified organic production: input materials. Created by organic

certifiers in 1997 to conduct this type of work, OMRI has built a reputation over

the last 18 years as the leader in material review. This paper examines and

explains the specific reviewcriteria OMRI uses when evaluating the compliance

of pesticide products for use in organic production under the U.S. Department

of Agriculture’s National Organic Program.

Keywords

pesticides, National Organic Program, Canada Organic Regime, U.S. Department

of Agriculture (USDA), Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Organic

Materials Review Institute (OMRI), organic farming

Manuscript received October 26, 2015; accepted for publ ication May 10, 2016.

1

The Organic Materials ReviewInstitute, P. O. Box 11558, Eugene, OR 97440-3758

2ASTM 36th Symposium on Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems: Emerging Trends Building on a Solid

Foundation on October 27–29, 2015 in Tampa, Florida.

Copyright VC 2016 by ASTM International , 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

PESTICIDE FORMULATION AND DELIVERY SYSTEMS: 36TH VOLUME 1

STP 1595, 2016 / available onlin e a t www. astm. org / doi: 10.1520/STP159520150090

Introduction

The Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) is a 501

VC

(3) not-for-profit

organization located in Eugene, Oregon. OMRI is International Organization for

Standardization (ISO) 17065-accredited by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s

(USDA) Quality Assessment Division (QAD) for input material review and listing

under the National Organic Program (NOP) and Canada Organic Regime (COR)

standards. The term “input material” is wide-ranging but, in general, is defined

as any substance added to the soil, sprayed on a crop, fed to an animal, applied

directly to an animal, or added directly to a processed food. OMRI reviews input

materials in three ways: (1) through application- and fee-based technical reviews

of brand-name products, (2) through the completion of USDA NOP technical

reports for use in standards revision, and (3) in the form of public comments to the

USDA’s National Organic Standards Board (NOSB).

By far, OMRI’s main organizational goal is completing reviews of brand-name

products. Their decisions on the allowance of products are communicated to the

public through the OMRI Products List

VC

(OPL), which includes all the products

currently allowed or allowed with restrictions. OMRI also communicates decisions

on products through their subscriber updates, which include new products added

to the list and all ofthe recent products that were assigned a status of prohibited or

that were removed from the OPL for any other reason.

OMRI Appl ication Materials

For companies applying for OMRI listing, navigating the review process is a crucial

component to the work OMRI does. Successfully working within OMRI’s policies

and standards ensures that reviews are fairly and thoroughly conducted. This paper

focuses on OMRI’s application processes specific to products applying in the pesticide

classes crop pest, weed, and disease control (CP), livestock external parasiticides

and pesticides (LP), and processing pest controls (PP). This paper also addresses

application processes specific to inert ingredients applying in OMRI’s crop manage￾ment tools and production aids (CT) class. The specific compliance criteria that apply

to the review ofinput materials in these two classes are the list of allowed synthetics

in §205.601 and §205.603 ofthe NOP Rules (USDA) and on the Permitted Substan￾ces List (PSL), Table 4.3, in the COR regulations (CFIA). There also is a component

to OMRI review that examines the broader, interagency regulatory compliance of a

product. Specifically, products that must be registered with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) or the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) are

required to submit proof ofregistration. For products that are required to carry regis￾tration and are also organic compliant, OMRI lists these products with a caution.

This caution communicates to the public that the product is compliant for use in

organic production but cannot be used in the United States or Canada.

The majority of the work OMRI conducts involves the review of brand-name

products with respect to the NOP and COR standards. This process begins when a

2 STP 1595 On Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems

company applies for a technical review of their product through the submission of

a product application. This product application includes forms that are designed to

ask questions of an applicant that will help OMRI staff develop a picture of a prod￾uct in order to make a recommendation on its allowance in organic production. For

example, one of the main questions for a company to answer when preparing an

application is which class and category they would like the product reviewed under.

This information is important because it gives an indication of which set of

standards OMRI staffwill use in the course ofthe review. It also is important in the

listing process because OMRI lists products in the OPL in a specific class and

category.

An OMRI application kit includes all of the materials a company needs to

complete the initial (administrative) portion ofthe OMRI review. One component of

the application kit is the Product Information form (see Fig. 1). This form is for

reporting the company name, brand name, and product name as well as under which

organic standard and OMRI class and category the product should be reviewed. The

product information form is a generic document completed by all companies regard￾less ofthe class and category under which they are applying.

The OMRI Pesticide Report (Fig. 2) specifically is used when companies are

applying for the review of a product in the crop pest, weed, and disease control

(CP), livestock external parasiticides and pesticides (LP), or processing pest controls

(PP) class. The form includes many questions that will assist with technical review.

FIG. 1 OMRI Product Information Form (OMRI 2014).

CURRIER, DOI 10.1520/STP159520150090 3

Technical Review

In this section, how OMRI conducts the technical reviews of pesticides will be

outlined. Two points of technical review, with reference to the organic regulations,

will be highlighted: (1) preventative management practices and (2) the list of

allowed synthetic materials (NOP) and the list of permitted substances (COR).

Confidential ity

OMRI takes confidentiality seriously because the credibility ofits decisions relies on

companies submitting a great deal of information for review. OMRI is ISO 17065

accredited, meaning that it is audited annually to ensure that the policies and

standards required to complete independent and transparent reviews are in place

and are being followed.

Organic Regulations

Specific parts of the organic regulations allow for, or prohibit, the use of pesticide

products in organic farming. Those specific compliance standards are found in multi￾ple places in the NOP and COR organic regulations. (See Table 1 and Table 2 for more

details on the applicable regulations.) What OMRI does during a technical review

involves the consideration of all parts of the regulations when recommending the

allowance of a material and ultimately a final product.

OMRI’s policies and standards are based on NOP and COR standards; there￾fore, changes to those standards may affect how OMRI conducts reviews. With

changes to U.S. and Canadian organic standards pending, OMRI is attentive to

how standards updates affect its work. Once updates to national organic standards

are finalized, the OPL is examined and any products affected are re-reviewed.

FIG. 2 OMRI NOP Product Report—Pesticide (OMRI 2014).

4 STP 1595 On Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems

TABLE 1 Al lowed materials for use in pesticide products under NOP.

Material Rule Reference

As algicide, disinfectants, and sanitizer, including irrigation system

cleaning systems:

§205.601(a)

Alcohols including (i) ethanol and (ii) isopropanol . §205.601(a)(1), §205.603(a)(1)

Chlorine materials: For preharvest use, residual chlorine levels in the

water in direct crop contact or as water from cleaning irrigation

systems applied to soil must not exceed the maximum residual

disinfectant l imit under the Safe Drinking Water Act, except that chlo￾rine products may be used in edible sprout production according to

EPA label directions. (i) Calcium hypochlorite, (ii) chlorine dioxide,

(iii) sodium hypochlorite.

§205.601(a)(2), §205.603(7)

Copper sulfate: For use as an algicide in aquatic rice systems; l imited

to one appl ication per field during any 24-month period. Appl ication

rates are limited to those that do not increase basel ine soil test values

for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accred￾ited certifying agent.

§205.601(3)

Hydrogen peroxide. §205.601(4), §205.603(13)

Ozone gas: For use in irrigation system cleaners only. §205.601(5)

Peracetic acid: For use in disinfecting equipment, seed, and asexually

propagated planting material . Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide

formulations as allowed in §205.601(a) at a concentration of no more

than 6 % as indicated on the pesticide product label .

§205.601(6), §205.603(18)

Soap-based algicide/demossers. §205.601(7)

Sodium carbonate peroxyhydrate (CAS#-15630-89-4): Federal law

restricts the use of this substance in food crop production to approved

food uses identified on the product label.

§205.601(8)

Phosphoric acid: Al lowed as an equipment cleaner, provided that no

direct contact with organical ly managed l ivestock or land occurs.

§205.603(20)

As herbicides, weed barriers, as applicable: §205.601(b)

Herbicides, soap-based: For use in farmstead maintenance (roadways,

ditches, right of ways, building perimeters) and ornamental crops.

§205.601(b)(1)

Mulches including (i) newspaper or other recycled paper, without

glossy or colored inks, (ii) plastic mulch and covers (petroleum-based

other than polyvinyl chloride [PVC]), (iii) biodegradable biobased

mulch film as defined in §205.2. Must be produced without organisms

or feedstock derived from excluded methods.

§205.601(b)(2)

As animal repellents—soaps, ammonium—for use as a large animal

repellant only, no contact with soil or edible portion of crop.

§205.601(d)

As insecticides (including acaricides or mite control). §205.601(e)

Ammonium carbonate: For use as bait in insect traps only; no direct

contact with crop or soil.

§205.601(e)(1)

Aqueous potassium sil icate (CAS #-1312-76-1)—The silica, used in the

manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally

occurring sand.

§205.601(e)(2)

Boric acid—Structural pest control ; no direct contact with organic

food or crops.

§205.601(e)(3)

CURRIER, DOI 10.1520/STP159520150090 5

TABLE 1 (Continued)

Material Rule Reference

Copper sulfate: For use as tadpole shrimp control in aquatic rice

production; l imited to one appl ication per field during any 24-month

period. Application rates are limited to levels that do not increase

basel ine soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by

the producer and accredited certifying agent.

§205.601(e)(4),

Elemental sulfur. §205.601(e)(5)

Lime sul fur, including calcium polysulfide. §205.601(e)(6)

Oils, horticultural—Narrow range oils as dormant, suffocating, and

summer oils.

§205.601(e)(7)

Soaps, insecticidal . §205.601(e)(8)

Sticky traps/barriers. §205.601(e)(9)

Sucrose octanoate esters (CAS #s—42922-74-7; 58064-47-4)—In

accordance with approved label ing.

§205.601(e)(10), §205.603(b)(8)

Formic acid (CAS# 64-18-6): For use as a pesticide solely within

honeybee hives.

§205.603(b)(2)

As insect management. Pheromones. §205.601(f)

As rodenticides. Vitamin D3

. §205.601(g)

As slug or snail bait. Ferric phosphate (CAS # 10045-86-0). §205.601(h)

As plant disease control. §205.601(i)

Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1)—The sil ica, used in the

manufacture of potassium sil icate, must be sourced from naturally

occurring sand.

205.601(i)(1)

Coppers, fixed—Copper hydroxide, copper oxide, copper oxychloride,

includes products exempted from EPA tolerance, provided that

copper-based materials must be used in a manner that minimizes

accumulation in the soil and shall not be used as herbicides.

§205.601(i)(2)

Copper sulfate—Substance must be used in a manner that minimizes

accumulation of copper in the soil.

§205.601(i)(3)

Hydrated l ime. §205.601(i)(4), §205.603(b)(5)

Hydrogen peroxide. §205.601(i)(5)

Lime sulfur §205.601(i)(6)

Oils, horticultural , narrow range oils as dormant, suffocating, and

summer oils.

§205.601(i)(7)

Peracetic acid: For use to control fire blight bacteria. Also permitted in

hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(i) at concentra￾tion of no more than 6 % as indicated on the pesticide product label.

§205.601(i)(8)

Potassium bicarbonate. §205.601(i)(9)

Elemental sulfur. §205.601(i)(10)

As plant growth regulators. Ethylene gas—For regulation of

pineapple flowering.

§205.601(k)

As synthetic inert ingredients as classified by the EPA, for use with

nonsynthetic substances or synthetic substances listed in this section

and used as an active pesticide ingredient in accordance with any

limitations on the use of such substances.

§205.601(m)

6 STP 1595 On Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems