Submit a PCR

Prnum Pesticide(MFG) Commodity (Crop Group) Category (Code) EPA Status 11128 + TERBACIL TKI CANEBERRY (13-07A = CANEBERRY SUBGROUP) E/CS DATA ON-GOING (03G) Reasons for need: ANNUAL AND PERENNIAL WEEDS; PER AR ME-TOO REQUEST: THERE IS A GREAT NEED FOR HERBICIDES THAT ARE SAFE ON NEWLY TRANSPLANTED CANEBERRIES Efficacy/Crop Safety (E/CS) Data Required: E/CS Research Comments: PER THE 2024 PERFORMANCE PROTOCOL: TESTING 4 RATES OF SINBAR 80WDG + ADJUVANT, (0.2, 0.4, 0.6 AND 1.2 LB AI/A), APPLIED AS DIRECTED SPRAYS TO EITHER SIDE AND ACROSS ROWS, IN AT LEAST 20 GPA; THE SAME TREATMENTS ARE TO BE APPLIED TO THE SAME PLOTS IN EACH OF 2 YEARS; ALL TRIALS ARE TO BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY AFTER ESTABLISHMENT OF CANES; A SANDY LOAM SOIL IS DESIRED FOR AT LEAST ONE TRIAL; MAKE 2 APPLIC OF EACH TREATMENT EACH YEAR, 60 DAYS APART, WITH THE 1ST APPLIC AFTER AND WITHIN 7 DAYS OF CANE PLANTING; IN THE 2ND YEAR MAKE 1ST APPLIC AS A DORMANT APPLIC, ABOUT 2 WEEKS BEFORE EXPECTED PRIMOCANE EMERGENCE (SEE PROTOCOL FOR MORE APPLIC REQUIREMENTS); EVALUATE CROP INJURY AFTER EACH APPLIC EACH YEAR; CROP YIELD DATA ARE ONLY REQUIRED IN YEAR 2; NO WEED CONTROL DATA ARE REQUIRED Comments: REQUEST IS TO REDUCE THE CURRENT LABELED USE RATE OF TERBACIL - RATES ARE TOO HIGH FOR NEW PLANTINGS; SINBAR 80WDG IS LABELED ON 1-YR-OLD OR OLDER CANEBERRIES AT 1-2 LB PRODUCT (0.8-1.6 LB AI)/A:08/13; MFG TO EXPLORE MAKING LABEL CHANGE AS NEEDED TO MEET THIS USE PATTERN, WHICH IS COVERED BY THE EXISTING TOLERANCE:07/14; IS NOT A MFG OBJECTIVE, AND MFG CHANGED STATUS TO POTENTIAL:07/20; PERFORMANCE PROTOCOL WAS SIGNED 1/3/24, SO THE CATEGORY HAS NOW BEEN CHANGED FROM POTENTIAL, E/CS DATA BEFORE APPROVAL FOR RESIDUE STUDY TO E/CS DATA ONGOING:02/24/sb Field Res.Dir (FRD) Field ID# Field Data Track# Raw Data Data to MFG Performance Results & Comments Moretti, Marcelo 24-ORP02 Moretti, Marcelo 25-ORP02 Yadav, Ram 25-OHP02 Yadav, Ram 25-OHP03 Doohan, D. 11-OH-DMP RECD 3438.pdf THREE TRIALS ON 3 BRAMBLE VARIETIES FROM 2009-2011. 1.2 LB AI/A PRE; GOOD CROP TOLERANCE; NO SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN PLANT BIOMASS OR YIELD Mitchem, Wayne 24-NCP01 RECD 5866.pdf 12/24 Year 1 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Impermeable 12” tall ‘milk carton’ trunk wraps were used to protect canes in year 1. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the trunk wraps on canes of newly established ‘Von’ blackberries growing in a sandy clay soil. Each treatment applied 7 and 60 days after planting canes. Treatments also included Chateau SW at 6 or 8 oz/a (0.19 or 0.255 lb ai/a) applied the same way on the same dates. No crop injury observed in Year 1 from any treatment through 60 days after the second application. Yield data not required in Year 1. Robinson, Allison 24-OHP01 RECD 5872.pdf 01/25 Year 1 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Impermeable 24” tall trunk wraps were used to protect canes in year 1. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the trunk wraps on canes of newly established ‘Heritage’ raspberries growing in a silt loam soil. Each treatment applied 6 and 66 days after planting canes. A weed-free check was also included. No crop injury observed in Year 1 from any treatment through 30 days after the second application. Terbacil provided excellent broadleaf weed control and good to excellent grass control at all evaluations, regardless of rate. Yield data not required in Year 1. Robinson, Allison 24-OHP02 RECD 5872.pdf 01/25 Year 1 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Impermeable 24” tall trunk wraps were used to protect canes in year 1. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the trunk wraps on canes of newly established ‘Chester’ blackberries growing in a silt loam soil. Each treatment applied 6 and 66 days after planting canes. A weed-free check was also included. No crop injury observed in Year 1 from any treatment through 30 days after the second application. Terbacil provided excellent broadleaf weed control and good to excellent grass control at all evaluations, regardless of rate. Yield data not required in Year 1. Mitchem, Wayne 25-NCP02 RECD 5976.pdf 09/25 Year 2 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Report includes data from both years. Impermeable 12” tall ‘milk carton’ trunk wraps that were used to protect canes in year 1 were mostly gone before year 2 sprays, but some did remain. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the lower canes of one-year old ‘Von’ blackberries growing in a sandy clay soil. The first application made to dormant canes prior to primocane emergence and the second application made ~ 60 days later. Treatments also included Chateau SW at 6 or 8 oz/a (0.19 or 0.255 lb ai/a) applied the same way on the same dates. No crop injury observed from any treatment in Year 2 through 61 days after second spray. Berry number and weight from terbacil treatments ranged from 79 to 134% of the untreated, with no evident rate response. Burgos, N. 24-AR-DMP RECD 6007.pdf 11/25 Trial conducted near Fayetteville. Year 1 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Report includes data from both years. Impermeable 12” tall ‘milk carton’ trunk wraps that were used to protect canes in year 1 but were not present in year 2. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the lower canes of newly planted, untrellised, Ouachita’ blackberries growing in a silt loam soil. The first application was made seven days after transplanting and the second application made ~ 60 days later. Treatments also included a hand-weeded check and one rate of five other herbicides applied in the same manner. All terbacil rates caused significant injury 2 weeks after the first application (WAFA), though injury was ≤ 20%. Injury from the two lower rates was ≤6 for the remainder of year 1. At 4 WAFA, injury from the two higher rates (32 and 73%) was still significant, with an evident rate response. Both of these rates caused significant injury through 8 weeks after the second application (WASA), again with an evident rate response. At 9 WASA, cane height was significantly reduced only by the two higher rates. All rates provided good to excellent overall weed control through 4 WAFA and the three higher rates still provided excellent control 2 WASA. Burgos, N. 24-ARP01 RECD 6007.pdf 11/25 Trial conducted near Clarksville. Year 1 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Report includes data from both years. Impermeable 12” tall ‘milk carton’ trunk wraps that were used to protect canes in year 1 but were not present in year 2. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the lower canes of newly planted, trellised, Ouachita’ blackberries growing in a loam soil. The first application was made nine days after transplanting and the second application made ~ 60 days later. Treatments also included a hand-weeded check and one rate of five other herbicides applied in the same manner. Slight, non-significant crop injury (0 to 9%) was seen from the two lower rates of terbacil in year 1. Significant injury (19%) was seen from the highest rate 2 weeks after first application (WAFA) and increased to 68% 4WAFA. The two highest rates caused significant injury through 4 weeks after second application (WASA). Injury was 41 and 92%, with an evident rate response. Injury from the highest rate remined severe (88%) at 9 WASA, while injury from other rates was ≤ 5%. At 9 WASA, cane height was significantly reduced only by the highest rate. All terbacil rates provided good to excellent overall weed control through 2 WASA. Burgos, N. 25-AR-DMP RECD 6007.pdf 11/25 Trial conducted near Fayetteville. Year 2 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Report includes data from both years. Impermeable 12” tall ‘milk carton’ trunk wraps that were used to protect canes in year 1 but were not present in year 2. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the lower canes of one-year old, untrellised, ‘Ouachita’ blackberries growing in a silt loam soil. The first application made to dormant canes prior to primocane emergence and the second application made ~ 60 days later. Treatments also included a hand-weeded check and one rate of five other herbicides applied in the same manner. Noticeable, but non-significant, crop injury was seen from all rates 4 weeks after the first applications (WAFA). Injury from the three lower rates for the remainder of year 2 was ≤ 8%, while the high rate caused approximately 80% injury through 4 weeks after the second application (WASA) . Yield parameters were not significantly reduced by the two lower rates, but some were reduced by one or both of the higher rates. All rates provided good to excellent overall weed control through 4 WASA. Burgos, N. 25-ARP01 RECD 6007.pdf 11/25 Trial conducted near Clarksville. Year 2 of 2 with treatments applied to the same plots each year. Report includes data from both years. Impermeable 12” tall ‘milk carton’ trunk wraps that were used to protect canes in year 1 but were not present in year 2. Sinbar 80 WDG applied twice at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.5 lb/a (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, or 1.2 lb ai/a) along and across the lower canes of one-year old, trellised, ‘Ouachita’ blackberries growing in a loam soil. The first application made to dormant canes prior to primocane emergence and the second application made ~ 90 days later. Treatments also included a hand-weeded check and one rate of five other herbicides applied in the same manner. Slight, non-significant crop injury (0 to 8%) was seen from the three lower rates of terbacil in year 2, while injury from the high rate 4 weeks after the first application (WAFA) was 93% and had only dissipated to 77% at 8 WASA. Injury from the hig rate was still nearly 80% at 4 weeks after the second application (WASA). Compared to the weed-free, yield parameters were numerically increased from all three lower rates, but were drastically reduced by the high rate. All terbacil rates provided good to excellent overall weed control through 4 WASA.