MAF 1 Drift fraction / Vegetation factor 2
8.1 Efficacy evaluation
Table 8.1a Glossary of pests mentioned in the dossier.
EPPO code Scientific name Common name
AETCY Aethusa cynapium Fool's parsley
AMACH Amaranthus hybridus Green amaranth
AMARE Amaranthus retroflexus Redroot pigweed
ATXPA Atriplex patula Common orache
BEAVA Beta vulgaris vulg. Altissima Sugarbeet
BIDTR Bidens tripartita Bur beggarticks
CHEAL Chenopodium album Lambsquarter
ECHCG Echinochloa crus-galli Common barnyardgrass
FUMOF Fumaria officinalis Common fumitory
GALAP Galium aparine Cleavers
GERDI Geranium dissectum Cut-leaved cranesbill
LAMPU Lamium purpureum Red Deadnettle
MATCH Matricaria chamomilla Scented mayweed
MATIN Matricaria inodora False Chamomille
MERAN Mercurialis annua Annual mercury
POAAN Poa annua Annual bluegrass
POLAV Polygonum aviculare Prostrate knotweed
POLCO Fallopia convolvulus Wild buckwheat
POLLA Polygonum lapathifolium Pale smart weed
SENVU Senecio vulgaris Common groundsel
SINAR Sinapis arvensis Wild mustard
SOLNI Solanum nigrum Black nightshade
SONAR Sonchus arvensis Perennial sowthistle
STEME Stellaria media Common chickweed
VERPE Veronica persica Common field speedwell
VIOAR Viola arvensis Field violet
The total area of potatoes in the Netherlands is about 160.000 hectares. This is divided into
approximately, 70,000 hectares ware potato, 50,000 hectares industrial potato and 40,000 hectares seed potato.
The data/information presented in these sections relating to efficacy is summarised from the core Biological Assessment Dossier of Proman, made by Eurofins Agroscience Services in February 2013.
Data for the Netherlands, member of the Central registration zone, have been presented from the Maritime climatic zone (see EPPO PP 1/241 for more information about the climatic zones).
Efficacy data from the Maritime climatic zone is available from France (Northern part), Germany, Belgium, United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic. Data from other climatic zones are also available in the Biological Assessment Dossier of Proman, but this information is not acceptable to support the proposed use of Proman in the Netherlands.
A total of fourteen trials are used to evaluate the effectiveness of Proman for the control of weeds in potatoes in the Netherlands. All trials were carried out in the Maritime climatic zone. An overview of the distribution of the trials by country and year is given in table 8.1b. The evaluated trials in this dRR were conducted in accordance with the principles of Good Experimental Practice (GEP).
Table 8.1b. Overview of the minimum effective dose and effectiveness trials.
Number of trials
Potato Annual weeds
Czech Republic
2012 MED + E 1 GEP
TOTAL - - - 14 -
MED = minimum effective dose, E = effectiveness trial.
An overview of methodology of the trials is given in table 8.1c.
Table 8.1c. Details on trial methodology
General guidelines
EPPO PP 1/152 (3):’Design and analysis of efficacy evaluation trials’
EPPO PP 1/181 (3):’Conduct and reporting of efficacy evaluation trials’
EPPO PP 1/135 (3):‘Phytotoxicity assessments’
Guidelines
Specific guidelines EPPO PP 1/51 (3) ‘weeds in potato’
CEB guideline No 36 ‘pomme de terre’ (French trials) Plot design Randomised block design
Plot size 15-45 m²
Experiment al design
Number of replications 4
Trials 14 effectiveness and 14 phytotoxicity
Varieties e.g. Adora, Agatha, Belinda, Bintje, Gala, Impala, Innovator, Kardal, Maris Piper, Miranda, Producent, Russet Burbank
Crop (potato)
Planting period April - May Crop stage (BBCH) at
application BBCH 00 - 09 Timing
Pest stage at application (1)
After planting, but before emergence of the potato crop (mostly in spring in april or may).
Number of applications 1 Application
Spray volumes 200 - 400 L/ha
Assessment types
Effectiveness trials: % of weed coverage, % weed control, number of weeds/m², vigour of weeds, all visible phytotoxic symptoms. Phytotoxicity:
crop vigour, bleaching symptoms on the foliage, necrotic symptoms, speed of emergence, yield, germination, other visible phytotoxic symptoms.
Assessment
Assessment dates Not the same periods in each trial, in most trials 3 or 4 assessments
Equipment Plot sprayer, T-Boom Other
relevant
information Nozzles Flat fan, Teejet
Assessments on efficacy (effectiveness and phytotoxicity) were carried out several times during the trial period (e.g. some days after application, one week after application, six weeks after application, and some months after application). The number of assessments and the interval between the assessments varied per trial.
Effectiveness against weeds was assessed by different methods, but the results of these methods were calculated on a scale from 0% (no effect) to 100% (total control).
Phytotoxicity was also assessed by different methods. The results were calculated on a scale from 0%
to 100%, were 0% is similar to no phytotoxicity.
The data were statistically analysed (e.g. ANOVA, Newman-Keuls, and Dunnet tests).
8.1.1 Preliminary range finding tests
Preliminary range finding tests are not reported. The active substance is well known (products with this active substance have been authorised in the past), dose rates and activity of the active substance are therefore quite well understood.
8.1.2 Dose justification
Fourteen effectiveness trials were established in order to determine the minimum effective dose for the control of annual weeds in potato. Proman was tested in a range of 1 L/ha to 4 L/ha, in accordance with the EPPO standard PP 1/225 ‘Minimum effective dose’. The proposed dose rate of Proman is a range of 3 L/ha to 4 L/ha, depending on the weed spectrum.
A summary of the dose response results is provided in Table 8.1.2a.
Table 8.1.2a. Effectiveness of Proman at different dose rates on weeds in potatoes at the final relevant assessment (28 to 102 days after application) in the Maritime climatic zone.
% control with Proman
1 L/ha 2 L/ha 3 L/ha 4 L/ha
% control with Proman
In the effectiveness trials, Proman showed in general a higher level of effectiveness against the whole weed population, when it is applied in a higher dose rate.
For the tested weeds, it can be concluded that dose rates of 1 L/ha and 2 L/ha Proman were in general not sufficient for a good and consistent weed control in potato. The dose rates of 3-4 L/ha provided in general the highest effectiveness against the whole weed population, and the dose rate of 4 L/ha is specially recommended when for example weeds as FUMOF, MERAN and SINAR are present in the field.
A dose rate lower than 3 L/ha Proman is also not advisable, because the active substance metobromuron has a risk for resistance development.
8.1.3 Efficacy
A total of fourteen trials were carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of 3-4 L/ha Proman, compared to some reference products, for the control of annual weeds in potatoes.
The weed pressure in these trials was on an acceptable level, and in all trials Proman was applied conform the proposed use. The reference products in the trials were based on clomazone or metribuzine.
An overview of the level of control against the tested weed species of Proman is given in Table 8.1.3a Table 8.1.3a. Effectiveness of Proman and the reference products on weeds in potato at the final relevant assessment (28 to 102 days after application) in the Maritime climatic zone.
% control of weeds
% control of weeds
3 L/ha Proman 4 L/ha Proman
0.25 L/ha reference product based on
clomazone
0.75 - 1 L/ha reference products based on
metribuzine Weed
species No.
of trials
Mean Min &
Max
No.
of trials
Mean Min &
Max
No.
of trials
Mean Min &
Max
No.
of trials
Mean Min &
Max
BIDTR 1 100 100 1 96 96 1 51 51 1 97 93-100
CHEAL 3 99 97-100 3 100 99-100 3 80 50-98 3 100 100
FUMOF 3 54 35-86 3 86 75-94 2 33 0-66 3 87 66-100
GALAP 3 50 28-95 3 53 35-90 1 97 97 3 76 64-92
GERDI 1 17 17 1 27 27 - - - 1 99 99
LAMPU 1 100 100 1 100 100 1 95 95 1 96 96
MATCH 1 80 80 1 100 100 1 60 60 1 100 100
MATIN 3 100 99-100 3 100 100 2 84 68-100 3 100 100
MERAN 5 66 18-100 5 80 50-99 4 61 38-92 5 92 81-100
POLAV 2 97 97 2 99 97-100 2 71 50-92 2 99 97-100
POLCO 1 100 100 1 100 100 1 100 100 1 100 100
POLLA 1 100 100 1 100 100 1 93 93 1 100 100
SENVU 2 99 98-99 2 100 100 2 85 78-92 2 100 100
SINAR 2 86 75-97 2 98 96-100 1 50 50 2 99 97-100
SOLNI 5 85 47-100 5 87 53-100 5 82 51-98 5 80 47-100
SONAR 1 94 94 1 79 79 1 51 51 1 91 91
STEME 3 92 83-99 3 95 85-100 3 90 75-99 3 88 68-100
VERPE 1 35 35 1 50 50 - - - 1 100 100
VIOAR 2 71 58-84 2 81 68-94 1 35 35 2 85 70-100
The effectiveness of Proman against a broad spectrum of individual annual weed species was of a high level.
In general the effectiveness of Proman at the proposed dose rates against the tested annual weeds was inferior to the effectiveness of the reference products based on metribuzine, and superior to the effectiveness of the reference product based on clomazone. Explanation of the differences in
effectiveness of Proman and the reference products could be the differences in mode of action of the herbicides.
The available information is sufficient for evaluating the effectiveness of Proman against annual broad-leaved weeds in potatoes for the Maritime climatic zone.
The available information is limited for evaluating the efficacy of Proman against the whole group of annual grass weeds in potatoes for the Maritime climatic zone. Poa annua and Echinochloa crus-galli can be claimed but for a broader claim against all annual grass weeds, data on additional grass weeds is required.
Conclusion
The product complies with the Uniform Principles because it does in accordance with article 2.1 control annual broad leaved weeds, Poa annua and Echinochloa crus-galli in potatoes in a pre emergence application at a dose rate of 3-4 L/ha.
8.2 Harmful effects