Introduction
Alachlor was the first herbicide in this chemical group to be commercialized. It was
discovered by the Monsanto Corp. in 1966 and introduced to the marketplace in 1969.
Alachlor had a big impact on farming and weed control. Alachlor was a herbicide that could
be used in both corn and soybeans for broad spectrum (grasses and broadleaved weeds)
without soil incorporation (unlike trifluralin in soybeans, one of its competitors in
those early days).
Soon thereafter metolachlor was discovered by Ciba-Geigy, a herbicide with very similar
herbicidal properties as alachlor. One of those irrepressible Swiss wits in the company
came up with the chemical name as some kind of sardonic marketing joke for their alachlor
clone: "me-to-lachlor" (me-also-lachlor?).
These herbicides provide selective control of seedling grasses and some dicot weeds:
pigweeds; black nightshade; fair control of purslane; suppression or lowered
competitiveness of yellow nutsedge. They are used in corn, soybeans, potatoes, white beans
(phaseolus spp.), peanuts, cotton, sunflower, cabbage, tobacco, sugarcane.
They are applied typically pre-emergence or pre-plant incorporated. Although some
marketing effort was expended on promoting postemergence alachlor, this type of
application failed consistently in all my many years of field evaluations.
The "Yield Advantages" and crop safety under stressfull environmental
conditions.
In the late 1980's alachlor was implicated as having toxicological problems (causing
turbinate carcinomas in mice in feeding trials). Because no one wants cancer producing
chemicals in crop production, the EPA went through an extensive Cost-Benefit Analysis of
alachlor: was it worth continued farmer exposure to a known cancer causing chemical
compared to its benefits to society? The Monsanto lobbyists geared up and won the battle,
mainly by proving that alachlor had a "yield advantage" over metolachlor, making
it beneficial and worthy. This controversy over relative differences between alachlor and
metolachlor was disturbing to me in that small and inconsistent weed control & crop
safety differences between these chemicals became the basis of important public policy
decisions. Alachlor may have marginally better control of pigweeds, common lambsquarters
and wild mustard. Metolachlor may have marginally longer residual in soils.
Chemistry
Other herbicides in this group include propachlor (1965), butachlor (1970), CDAA (1956), CDEA, diphenamide, napropamide, pronamide, propanil.
Acetochlor has been commercialized and has largely replaced alachlor in terms of
Monsanto's contributions to this group of chemistry. It has amazed me over the years that
acetochlor was introduced to the marketplace. I tested this herbicide for several years
and it consistently injured crops. Hopefully the marketed version has greater crop safety.
Physiology and Metabolism of the Chloracetamides in Plants
Mode of Chloracetamide Action
Uptake and Movement of Chloracetamides in Plants
Basis of Selectivity between Plant Species
Fate of Chloracetamides in the Environment
Soil.
Water.
Air.
Animal Toxicology.
Plant Injury Symptomology of the Chloracetamides
The primary symptoms are inhibition of early seedling growth and emergence after
germination.
Leaf Injury.
-Inhibition of grass leaf emergence from coleoptile and stem (below).
-Malformed, inhibited leaf midvein development. Leaf tip inhibition of soybeans
("heart-shaped"; "drawstring" effect) often observed. Increasing
injury from left to right on beans:
-Twisted, malformed, dark-green leaves; improper unrolling of monocot leaves from sheath,
often stuck together due to cuticle development inhibition; decreased air spaces between
leaves in sheath; "onion-leaf" or "buggy-whip" effect.
Meristem inhibition: stunted shoot tips and roots, reduced plant vigor.
Greater plant injury under severe weather (cold, wet) prior to emergence. Greater injury with high rainfall, greater alachlor uptake.
Abnormal release of apical dominance due to chloracetamides can cause growth of corn leaf buds, underground.