Non-crop herbicide composition and use thereof

Abstract

The application provides a non-cultivated land herbicide composition and application thereof, and belongs to the technical field of non-cultivated land herbicides. The effective component of the non-cultivated land herbicide composition comprises hexazinone, diuron, 2,4-D and glyphosate; further, the non-cultivated land herbicide composition further comprises a synergist. The non-cultivated land herbicide composition provided by the application has the advantages of high efficiency, low toxicity, broad-spectrum eradication, rapid effect, long persistence, simple operation and easy implementation; the addition of the synergist can improve the penetration, adhesion and rainwater erosion resistance of the herbicide to weed stems and leaves and soil, improve the herbicidal efficacy and reduce the occurrence probability of phytotoxicity; further, the synergist can accelerate the effect speed of the herbicide and improve the utilization efficiency of the herbicide. The application can overcome the shortcomings of the development of weed resistance caused by the long-term use of conventional single herbicide or binary compound preparation, make up for the deficiencies of the existing non-cultivated land herbicides and guarantee the efficient and safe control of non-cultivated land weeds.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of herbicides for non-arable land, specifically to a herbicide composition for non-arable land and its application. Background Technology

[0002] Non-arable land areas such as roadsides, power plants, and warehouses are mostly located in open, undeveloped areas where weeds thrive, especially under conditions of abundant rain and sunshine. This not only affects aesthetics but also negatively impacts the normal operation and maintenance of these areas. To address this issue, frontline maintenance workers typically use single-component herbicides such as glyphosate or mefensulfuron-methyl for chemical weed control. However, glyphosate, an organophosphorus herbicide, is easily deactivated after application to the soil, has a short residual effect, and does not suppress weed seed germination, leading to rapid weed regeneration. This is not only labor-intensive and time-consuming but also results in increasingly higher dosages per acre each year. Some maintenance units have switched to single-component herbicides such as mefensulfuron-methyl, which have improved weed control and reduced the number of annual applications. However, the weed composition in non-arable land is complex, with annual and perennial weeds mixed together, and grasses and broadleaf weeds coexisting. When used alone, the aforementioned single-component herbicides all have varying degrees of shortcomings and limitations. Furthermore, long-term, large-scale application of these single-component or binary compound formulations will exacerbate weed resistance and lead to a continuous decline in control efficacy. Applicants often resort to increasing dosage and frequency of application, which not only increases the total amount of pesticides used and procurement costs but also negatively impacts surrounding vegetation and crops, creating a vicious cycle. Especially during the rainy season, frequent rainfall directly affects herbicide absorption and efficacy. Even more troubling for maintenance companies is that rainwater runoff can cause herbicides to drift and seep into nearby farmland, leading to pesticide damage.

[0003] Based on the above challenges, it is essential to develop a compound herbicide for non-arable land and its application technology to significantly improve the control effect, especially the control effect on resistant weeds in non-arable land, thereby reducing the frequency of application and improving construction efficiency. At the same time, it is particularly necessary to improve the herbicide's spreadability, penetration, adhesion and rain washout resistance on weed stems and leaves, thereby improving efficacy and reducing the risk of phytotoxicity. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the aforementioned technical problems, one objective of this invention is to provide a non-cultivated land herbicide composition that is low in toxicity, highly effective, and a non-selective herbicide capable of effectively controlling resistant weeds in non-cultivated land. A second objective of this invention is to provide an application of the non-cultivated land herbicide composition.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solution:

[0006] A non-cultivated land herbicide composition comprising the active ingredients cycloazinone, diuron, 2,4-D and glyphosate, wherein, by weight, cycloazinone is 37.5-87.5 parts, diuron is 63-189 parts, 2,4-D is 12-30 parts, and glyphosate is 60-150 parts.

[0007] The non-cultivated land herbicide composition described above further includes 100 to 300 parts of a synergist, said synergist comprising plant essential oils, penetrants, triacontaminants, and polyethylene glycol.

[0008] Furthermore, the plant essential oil comprises 20-60 parts, the penetrant comprises 30-70 parts, the triaconite comprises 5-20 parts, and the balance is polyethylene glycol.

[0009] In the non-cultivated land herbicide composition described above, preferably, the plant essential oil is aloe vera essential oil and the penetrant is isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether.

[0010] In the non-cultivated land herbicide composition described above, preferably, the cycloazinone is a 25% cycloazinone soluble concentrate, with a weight of 250-350 parts; the diuron is a 63% diuron suspension concentrate, with a weight of 100-200 parts; and the 2,4-D and glyphosate are aqueous solutions containing 6% 2,4-D and 30% glyphosate, with a weight of 350-500 parts.

[0011] Furthermore, the synergist is in the form of 100-200 parts.

[0012] In the non-cultivated land herbicide composition described above, preferably, the cycloazinone is a 25% cycloazinone soluble concentrate, comprising 250 parts by weight; the diuron is a 63% diuron suspension concentrate, comprising 200 parts by weight; and the 2,4-D and glyphosate are aqueous solutions containing 6% 2,4-D and 30% glyphosate, comprising 350 parts by weight. Further, the synergist comprises 200 parts.

[0013] Furthermore, the synergist is composed of 40 parts aloe vera essential oil, 50 parts isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether, 10 parts Triton, and 100 parts polyethylene glycol.

[0014] The non-cultivated land herbicide composition described above is not limited to being applied in the prescribed compound form during actual use. Depending on application conditions or more convenient circumstances, the active ingredients may be freely combined before application, or the individual components may be pre-mixed in tanks. As long as all active ingredients are used within the effective dosage range for the desired treatment, the desired effect can be achieved. Preferably, each component is packaged separately and then mixed with water and a synergist before application for better results.

[0015] The non-arable land herbicide composition described above is used by mixing the various formulations containing the active ingredients, diluting them with water, and adding an synergist before use.

[0016] The non-cultivated land herbicide composition described above is used by mixing 500-1000 parts of the formulation with water to a total of 40,000 parts.

[0017] The above-mentioned non-cultivated land herbicide composition is prepared at a dosage of 800g of active ingredient per mu (667 square meters) and diluted with water to a concentration of 40kg per mu (667 square meters). After stirring, it is sprayed on the stems, leaves and soil.

[0018] The above-described non-cultivated land herbicide composition is used for chemical weed control in non-cultivated land areas such as roads, power plants, and warehouses.

[0019] A synergist for rapid action in the herbicide composition for non-cultivated land as described above, comprising 20-60 parts by weight of aloe vera essential oil, 30-70 parts by weight of isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether, 5-20 parts by weight of Triton, and 45-150 parts by weight of polyethylene glycol.

[0020] The synergist described above is prepared as follows: S1. Weigh the raw materials of each component according to the synergist raw materials and their weight proportions; S2. Add the isomeric deca-ol polyoxyethylene ether and Triton to 1 / 2 of the total weight of polyethylene glycol, heat to 40-60℃ to dissolve, stir magnetically until uniform, and then cool to room temperature for later use. S3. Add aloe vera essential oil to the remaining 1 / 2 weight of polyethylene glycol, dissolve at room temperature, stir magnetically until well mixed, and set aside. S4. Add the mixture from step S2 to the solution obtained in step S3 and mix them together with magnetic force to obtain the synergist.

[0021] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: The present invention provides a non-cultivated land herbicide composition, which is a broad-spectrum, systemic, multi-component non-selective herbicide. It has the characteristics of high efficiency and low toxicity, broad-spectrum non-selective action, rapid effect and long-lasting effect, and is easy to apply and promote.

[0022] The synergist added to the non-cultivated land herbicide composition provided by this invention can significantly improve the herbicide's penetration, adhesion, and resistance to rain washout on weed stems, leaves, and soil surfaces. This enhances efficacy while reducing the risk of phytotoxicity, further accelerating the herbicide's onset of action and improving its utilization rate. This composition effectively overcomes the problem of herbicide resistance development in weeds caused by long-term use of conventional single-agent or binary compound formulations, making up for the technical shortcomings of existing non-cultivated land herbicides and achieving efficient and safe control of weeds in non-cultivated land.

[0023] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following advantages: (1) The non-cultivated land herbicide formulation composition provided by the present invention is composed of 25% cyclomethazine soluble concentrate, 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution. The components exhibit significant synergistic effects under certain ratios, effectively delaying the problem of weed resistance that is easily generated by using single-component formulations such as methamidosulfuron and glyphosate alone. Its comprehensive control effect on non-cultivated land weeds is significantly better than that of single-agent and binary compound formulations, while reducing the cost of application.

[0024] (2) The control effect on weeds in non-cultivated land is significantly improved 7 days and 150 days after application. This means that the onset of the drug is accelerated and the duration of the effect is extended to more than 150 days, achieving a control effect that is difficult to achieve with a single component. It can greatly reduce the number of applications per year, saving time and labor and resulting in outstanding economic benefits.

[0025] (3) It effectively solves the problem of resistance of non-arable land weeds to conventional herbicides and overcomes the difficulty of controlling common weeds in non-arable land. The inventors unexpectedly discovered that the composition has a better control effect on highly resistant non-arable land weeds such as ryegrass and alfalfa, which are difficult to control with conventional pesticides.

[0026] (4) The non-arable land herbicide composition provided by the present invention, with the addition of a special synergist, can significantly improve the extensibility, penetration, adhesion and rain erosion resistance of the herbicide on the surface of weed stems and leaves after mixing with water and applying it. While improving the efficacy, it can reduce the incidence of herbicide damage by more than 75% and shorten the time of effectiveness of the herbicide to less than 3 days, thus significantly improving the utilization efficiency of the herbicide. Detailed Implementation

[0027] This invention, through extensive experimentation and screening of different components for optimal combination, and by leveraging their strengths, scientifically compounding, and determining reasonable concentration ratios, ultimately identified the optimal combination of components for a non-cultivated land herbicide formulation. This composition utilizes a compound formulation of different components combined with a specialized synergist, diluted with water, and applied as a spray. This non-cultivated land herbicide composition significantly improves the actual control efficacy against weeds in non-cultivated land, broadens the control spectrum, reduces pesticide dosage, lowers control costs, mitigates environmental impact, delays the development and emergence of herbicide resistance in non-cultivated land weeds, and saves time and labor. It is of great significance for achieving efficient and safe control of weeds in non-cultivated land.

[0028] This invention also provides an synergist for accelerating the onset of action of herbicides. This synergist improves leaf adhesion and spread, making the herbicide solution spread more evenly on the weed surface and less prone to rolling off; enhances penetration and absorption: helps the herbicide quickly penetrate the waxy layer and cuticle layer and enter the weed body; improves resistance to rain washout: it is less likely to be washed away by rain after application, significantly reducing the decrease in efficacy and herbicide damage to farmland caused by rain washout; accelerates the onset of action: shortens the time to within 3 days to show obvious herbicide damage symptoms; reduces the risk of herbicide damage: reduces herbicide drift and leaching, improving safety for surrounding crops / green plants; improves herbicide utilization: reduces waste and lowers the amount of herbicide used per unit area and the cost.

[0029] This invention provides an synergist for accelerating the onset of action of the herbicide composition described above, comprising: 20-60 parts of plant essential oil, 30-70 parts of penetrant, 5-20 parts of triaconazole, and 45-150 parts of polyethylene glycol. The plant essential oil is preferably aloe vera oil, which softens the waxy epidermal layer of weeds, significantly increasing the herbicide penetration rate; reduces the surface tension of the herbicide solution, enhancing adhesion and spread on hydrophobic leaf surfaces; reduces herbicide evaporation, prolonging the residence time of the active ingredient on the leaf surface, thereby stabilizing efficacy; aloe vera oil is of natural origin, reducing the risk of phytotoxicity from the adjuvant itself and improving environmental compatibility. The penetrant is preferably isomeric deca-ol polyoxyethylene ether, which can quickly penetrate the cuticle of weeds, promoting systemic conduction of the herbicide; strongly wets and disperses the herbicide solution, avoiding excessively high local concentrations that could burn the leaf surface, and has a wetting and emulsifying effect; improves the adhesion of the herbicide solution on the leaf surface and its resistance to rain washout, exhibiting rain resistance stability. The addition of triacontaminant further reduces surface tension, allowing the herbicide solution to evenly cover the entire weed plant; it prevents the herbicide formulation from stratifying and settling, improving emulsion stability; when combined with isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether, the penetration effect is greater than the sum of its parts (1+1>2), synergistically penetrating and accelerating herbicide absorption. The addition of polyethylene glycol dissolves essential oils and surfactants, ensuring the homogeneity and stability of the synergist system; it has a moisturizing and film-forming effect, forming a moisturizing protective film on the leaf surface after application, delaying water evaporation and prolonging the herbicide absorption time; it can slowly release the active ingredient, extending the duration of efficacy; it is low in toxicity and safe, being an inert carrier, non-phytotoxic, easily degradable, and environmentally friendly.

[0030] This invention provides an synergist for accelerating the onset of action of herbicides. Through the synergistic combination of aloe vera essential oil to promote penetration and spreading, isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether to enhance penetration, Triton to provide wetting and stabilization, and polyethylene glycol to provide moisturizing and slow-release properties, it significantly improves the adhesion, spread, penetration, and rain washout resistance of herbicides, accelerates the onset of action, improves efficacy, reduces phytotoxicity, delays resistance, and achieves efficient and safe control of weeds in non-arable land.

[0031] The following embodiments are used to further illustrate the present invention, but should not be construed as limiting the present invention. Any modifications or substitutions made to the present invention without departing from its spirit and essence are within the scope of the present invention.

[0032] Unless otherwise specified, the technical means used in the examples are conventional means well known to those skilled in the art. Unless otherwise specified, the reagents used in the examples may be commercially available products, such as 25% cycloazinone soluble concentrate which can be purchased from Anhui Huaxing Chemical Co., Ltd., 63% diuron suspension which can be purchased from Ningxia Xin'an Technology Co., Ltd., and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution which can be purchased from Anhui Huaxing Chemical Co., Ltd.

[0033] Example 1: Outdoor small-area quadrat test

[0034] This embodiment selects resistant weeds such as ryegrass, barnyard grass, alfalfa, and white clover, which are difficult to control effectively with conventional herbicides, as the test subjects in non-cultivated land. The application time is spring (mid-April) of 2024, and the test site is an open non-cultivated land plot north of the South Ring Railway Bridge in Fengtai District, Beijing. The study investigates the control effects of different weight ratios of 25% cyclophosphamide soluble concentrate, 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution and comparative examples of each component on weeds in non-cultivated land.

[0035] The experimental groups consisted of combinations of two or more herbicide components, each with a mass concentration of 25% cyclomethazine soluble concentrate, 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution (6% 2,4-methyl + 30% glyphosate). The proportions of each component varied, as detailed in Table 1. The control groups 1-3 were single-component formulations containing one of the three components: 25% cyclomethazine soluble concentrate, 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution. The control group 4 was a single-component formulation containing 41% glyphosate isopropylamine salt. A blank control was used without any of the above active ingredients. The weight proportions of each component are shown in Table 1.

[0036] The method for preparing the non-cultivated land herbicide compositions for each experimental group and control group was as follows: ① Weigh out the corresponding parts of each component formulation according to the components and their weight parts shown in Table 1: 25% cyclomethazine soluble concentrate, 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution; ② Mix each component formulation in a sprayer (model: Shixia SX-MD20I, capacity 20L) and dilute with water until the sprayer is full. For each treatment, mix and dilute with water to a total of 40,000 parts. (A blank control was prepared by adding only the above-mentioned equal amount of water until the sprayer is full, without adding any formulation components).

[0037] Table 1: Weight fractions of each component in each experimental group and control group

[0038] Each treatment in the experimental and control groups was repeated four times, and 50m samples were taken from each plot. 2The blocks were arranged in a randomized block design. Except for the different component ratios applied according to the above scheme, all other conditions in each treatment area were exactly the same; the weeds to be treated in each area were growing naturally and their growth conditions were similar or close.

[0039] The application method was to use a shoulder-mounted sprayer (model: Shixia SX-MD20I). The dosage of the formulation per unit area (acre) (referring to the actual dosage of 25% cyclophosphamide soluble concentrate, 63% diuron, or 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution) was prepared at 1g per weight part, i.e., 800 weight parts listed in the table correspond to an actual application rate of 800g / acre. To ensure uniform spraying and control for a single variable in the experiment, each treatment was applied using the same amount of diluted solution from two sprayers per acre, i.e., per 50m²... 2 The amount of diluted solution used for spraying was 3 kg. Observations and measurements were conducted three times after spraying the herbicide on non-cultivated land, at 7, 35, and 150 days post-application. The weed control rate of the treated area was investigated and recorded. During the investigation, five random samples were taken from each plot, with a sample area of ​​5 m². 2 The average weed control effects of each experimental group and control group are detailed in Table 2. The weed control effects in the table are calculated based on the control effect per plant in a fixed area. That is, weed control rate % = (number of normally growing weeds in the blank control area - number of surviving weeds in the treatment area) / number of normally growing weeds in the blank control area × 100%.

[0040] Table 2: Statistics on weed control efficacy (control rate / %) of each treatment group

[0041] As can be seen from Table 2 above, by comparing experimental groups 1 to 12, it was found that experimental group 11 had the best comprehensive weed control effect at all stages. Therefore, experimental group 11 was selected as the optimal formula combination for the distribution ratio of each group.

[0042] By comparing experimental groups 1-12 with control groups 1-4, it can be seen that compared with the use of individual single-component formulations or binary compound formulations alone, the weed control rate of the herbicide using the three-component combination is significantly improved, showing a significant synergistic or additive effect.

[0043] By comparing the weed control effects of experimental groups 1-9 over 7 days, it can be seen that increasing the ratio of 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate has a significant effect on improving the rapid-acting effect of herbicides. From the perspective of the 150-day effect, increasing the ratio of 25% cyclomethazine has a certain effect on improving the weed control effect over 150 days, that is, extending the residual effect period. The addition of 63% diuron has a further enhancing effect on promoting the rapid-acting effect over 7 days.

[0044] The results of the 150-day trials in groups 7-9 show that without the addition of 36% glyphosate, simply increasing the ratio of either 25% cyclomethazine or 63% diuron does not significantly increase the long-term efficacy. Only when the ratio of 25% cyclomethazine or 63% diuron is reasonable can a better long-term blocking effect be achieved.

[0045] The 35-day results of experimental groups 1-9 show that when the three active ingredients are combined in pairs, the best effect is achieved when two of the components reach a suitable balanced ratio. Too high or too low a ratio reduces the weed control effect, and all treatments reach the optimal control effect after 35 days.

[0046] From experimental groups 1-12 and control groups 1-4, it can be seen that the weed control efficacy of each single-component formulation is relatively poor, with certain defects and limitations. However, unusually, the common non-selective herbicide component glyphosate isopropylamine salt (control group 4) showed weak efficacy at all stages, especially after 35 days, far from achieving its expected effect, and the problem of weed resistance was significant. When the three components were combined, the efficacy at all stages increased significantly and reached its optimal value under appropriate ratio.

[0047] As can be seen from the above, the combination of the three components has a complementary and synergistic effect. Reducing one or two of the components will significantly reduce the weed control effect. Only when the three components are combined in appropriate proportions can the comprehensive weed control effect be optimal.

[0048] Furthermore, by comparing the weed control effects of experimental groups 10-12 with other experimental groups and the control group at 7 days and 150 days, it was found that the weed control effect of the combination of the three components of the non-cultivated land herbicide of this invention was significantly improved at both 7 days and 150 days, far exceeding the immediate and sustained effects achievable by the individual components. This indicates that the non-cultivated land herbicide of this invention has a significant effect on improving the speed of weed control and extending the duration of weed control effectiveness.

[0049] Example 2 Indoor Bioactivity Test

[0050] To further verify whether the optimal combination of components of the non-cultivated land herbicide (experimental group 1.11) produced a synergistic or additive effect in controlling weeds in non-cultivated land, and to evaluate the synergistic effects of different dosage ratios of the three components, as well as the synergistic effects of pairwise combinations of each component at its corresponding dosage ratio, white clover and ryegrass, typical resistant broadleaf weeds in non-cultivated land, were selected as test targets, and related indoor activity tests were conducted. Application time: December 2025; Test location: Laboratory of the School of Chemical Engineering, Zhengzhou University. Specific experimental implementation methods are as follows:

[0051] Test reagents: Using an electronic balance (sensitivity 0.1 mg), weigh out 1.7662 g, 2.9437 g, and 4.1212 g of 25% cycloazinone soluble concentrate, respectively. Dissolve each in 10 ml of methanol, then dilute to 500 ml with a 0.1% Tween-80 aqueous solution to prepare solutions with active ingredients of cycloazinone at concentrations of 37.5 g / mu, 62.5 g / mu, and 87.5 g / mu. Weigh out 1.1775 g, 2.3550 g, and 3.5325 g of 63% diuron suspension concentrate, respectively. Dissolve each in 10 ml of methanol, then dilute to 500 ml with a 0.1% Tween-80 aqueous solution to prepare solutions with active ingredients of 63 g / mu, 126 g / mu, and 189 g / mu. Weigh out 36%... 2.3550 g, 4.1212 g, and 5.8875 g of 2,M·glyphosate aqueous solution were dissolved in 10 ml of methanol and diluted to 500 ml with a 0.1% Tween-80 aqueous solution to prepare solutions of 72 g.ai / mu, 126 g.ai / mu, and 180 g.ai / mu of active ingredient 2,M·glyphosate (the above active ingredient dosages are calculated based on the amount of active ingredient required to spray 2 ml of the solution onto the soil area in a 20 cm diameter culture pot). Based on the above single-agent preparation method or using the above single-agent solution as the treatment group stock solution, a series of ratios were set according to the purpose of mixing. The following treatments were set (the blank control did not add any reagent components, that is, only 10 ml of methanol was added and the volume was adjusted to 500 ml with 0.1% Tween-80 aqueous solution, which served as the blank control treatment stock solution). The details of each treatment are shown in Tables 3 and 4 below (where treatments 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, and 2.23 in Tables 3 and 4 are common treatments; treatments 2.37, 2.38, and 2.39 are the combination of two components corresponding to the optimal combination ratio).

[0052] Table 3: Dosage configuration of each treatment agent (1)

[0053] Table 4: Dosage Configuration Table for Each Treatment (2)

[0054] Experimental soil: Neutral pH, well-drained non-arable topsoil was used, naturally air-dried, sieved, and quantitatively filled to 4 / 5 of the culture pot.

[0055] Culture of test materials: Seeds of the target weeds (white clover and ryegrass) produced in non-arable land were stratified and germinated separately. After the seeds showed signs of sprouting, they were sown. The pretreated test seeds were evenly sown in soil at a rate of 15 seeds per pot, covered with 0.5-1.0 cm of soil, and placed in a tray containing water. The water was allowed to gradually seep in from the bottom. After the water reached the soil surface, the tray was transferred to a culture room for further cultivation.

[0056] Chemical treatment: When the weed seedlings have grown to the 2-3 leaf stage, the stems and leaves are sprayed using a Potter spray tower. 2 ml of the chemical solution is sprayed per pot, and each treatment is repeated 4 times. A blank control is set up with no chemical component. After treatment, the test materials are placed in a culture room for incubation.

[0057] Investigation methods: After treatment, the growth status of the target plants was observed and recorded regularly, and the symptoms of damage to weed seedlings were recorded. 21 days after treatment, the activity of the herbicide was investigated and recorded according to the growth inhibition method, and the fresh weight of the weed seedlings was weighed.

[0058] Data statistical method: Based on the survey data, the fresh weight inhibition rate (fresh weight inhibition rate) of each treatment was calculated according to the formula, and the unit is percentage (%).

[0059] Reference absolute value method: actual fresh weight control efficacy e value (%) = (fresh weight of weed seedlings in the control area - fresh weight of weed seedlings in the treatment area) / fresh weight of weed seedlings in the control area × 100%.

[0060] Referring to the Colby method: Taking the mixture of three agents A, B, and C as an example, the theoretical fresh weight inhibition effect of the mixture in the above proportions is calculated by the formula: e0(%)=A+B+C+ .......N=Inhibition effect of agent 1 + Inhibition effect of agent 2 + Inhibition effect of agent 3 + ....... Inhibition effect of agent n.

[0061] In the table, A, B, C, ..., N represent the actual fresh weight inhibitory effects of single agents such as Agent 1, Agent 2, Agent 3, ..., Agent N, respectively, and n is the number of mixed agents. e-e0>10% indicates synergistic effect; e-e0<-10% indicates antagonistic effect; and e-e0 values ​​between ±10% indicate additive effect. The treatment results are shown in Tables 5 and 6 below.

[0062] Table 5. Statistical table of fresh weight inhibition rate data (1)

[0063] As shown in Table 5, when the three components cyclophosphamide, diuron, and 2,4-methyl glyphosate are used in combination, all ratios of gramineous ryegrass and broadleaf white clover show synergistic or additive effects. Among them, only three groups (treatments 2.20, 2.23, and 2.24) showed synergistic effects for both ryegrass and white clover, while the rest showed additive effects. It should be noted that the e-e0 values ​​of the treatment 2.23 (D2+E2+F2) were significantly higher than those of other combinations, meaning that the effective components of cycloazinone + diuron + 2,4-methyl glyphosate were 62.5 + 126 + 126 (gai / mu). This corresponds to the most significant synergistic effect of the compound combination of 250 parts of cycloazinone, 200 parts of 63% diuron, and 350 parts of 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate on the inhibitory effect of ryegrass and white clover, with e-e0 values ​​of 16.8% and 15.2%, respectively.

[0064] Table 6. Statistical table of fresh weight inhibition rate (2)

[0065] As shown in Table 6, the optimal combination treatment (treatment 2.23) of the three components—cycloazinone, diuron, and 2,3-methyl glyphosate—is 62.5 + 126 + 126 g / mu (approximately 0.067 hectares). This corresponds to an e-e0 value greater than 10% for the inhibitory effects of 250 parts of 25% cycloazinone soluble concentrate, 200 parts of 63% diuron, and 350 parts of 36% 2,3-methyl glyphosate on gramineous ryegrass and broadleaf white clover. This indicates that the optimal combination treatment of the three components has a significant synergistic effect compared to single-agent treatments. At this dosage ratio, any two of the three components were combined in three treatments (treatments 2.37–2.39), all of which showed only an additive effect and no synergistic effect. Furthermore, their e-e0 values ​​were significantly lower than those of the corresponding three-component combination treatments. This demonstrates that when the optimal combination of the above three components is used, its synergistic effect is significantly better than that of any two of the corresponding components.

[0066] Example 3: Large-scale field application test

[0067] The present invention also develops an synergist to enhance the efficacy and safety of the above-mentioned preferred non-arable land herbicide formulation composition, and further establishes relevant field application tests.

[0068] Test location: Non-farmland section of Zengcheng West Line Workshop, Guangzhou Engineering Section, under Guangzhou Railway Bureau of China Railway. The test section is located directly below a section of farmland where pesticide damage has been frequent in the past.

[0069] Application time: early April 2025. The experimental agents were based on the agent configuration corresponding to the above-mentioned optimal embodiment (experimental group 1.11) and the agent dosage corresponding to the optimal treatment (treatment 2.23) in indoor experimental embodiment 2. Different amounts of synergist were selected to set the following five treatments: TR3.1 800 parts of non-cultivated land herbicide three-component combination + 100 parts of synergist; TR3.2 800 parts of non-cultivated land herbicide three-component combination + 200 parts of synergist; treatment TR3.3 non-cultivated land herbicide three-component combination + 300 parts of synergist; treatment TR3.4 non-cultivated land herbicide three-component combination + no synergist added; conventional control CK was conventional non-cultivated land herbicide (10% methamidosulfuron suspension); and an equal amount of water without any of the above active ingredients was used as a blank control. The method for preparing herbicide formulations for treating TR3.1 to TR3.4 on non-cultivated land is the same as that for the above-mentioned test group 1.11 (i.e., 250 parts of 25% cyclomethazine soluble concentrate, 200 parts of 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 350 parts of 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution).

[0070] The method for preparing and processing the synergists in TR3.1 to TR3.3 is as follows: Step 1: Weigh each component raw material according to the synergist raw material and its weight proportions; Step 2: Add the isomeric deca-ol polyoxyethylene ether and Triton to 1 / 2 of the total weight of polyethylene glycol, heat to 40-60℃ to dissolve, stir magnetically until uniform, and then cool to room temperature for later use. Step 3: Add aloe vera essential oil to the remaining 1 / 2 weight of polyethylene glycol, dissolve at room temperature, stir magnetically until well mixed, and set aside. Step 4: Add the mixture from Step 2 to the solution obtained in Step 3 and mix them together with magnetic force to obtain the synergist.

[0071] The 10% methimazole suspension used in the control group (CK) was purchased from the market and manufactured by Anhui Sida Pesticide & Chemical Co., Ltd.

[0072] Table 7: Component dosage for each treatment

[0073] Each treatment consisted of four road sections, each 2 km long with a shoulder width of approximately 1 m, serving as four replicates arranged in a randomized block design. Apart from applying different component ratios according to the above scheme, other conditions in each treatment area were largely consistent, with weeds growing naturally and the weed composition being generally similar (primarily resistant weeds with both grass and broadleaf varieties, such as barnyard grass, ryegrass, white clover, beggar-ticks, and fleabane; subsequent statistics were based on the total control efficacy commonly used in non-cultivated land).

[0074] Application was carried out by maintenance workers using shoulder-mounted sprayers (model: Shixia SX-MD20I). The dosage of the formulation (a combination of three components: 25% cyclophosphamide soluble concentrate, 63% diuron suspension concentrate, and 36% 2,4-methyl glyphosate aqueous solution, or 10% methamidosulfuron suspension concentrate) was 800g / mu, which corresponds to 1g per mu for each part by weight in the table. To ensure uniform spraying and control for a single variable in the experiment, each treatment was applied using the amount of diluted solution from two sprayers per mu, i.e., 40kg of diluted solution per mu. Treatments containing synergists were added to the herbicide formulation during dilution in non-cultivated land, i.e., each group was mixed according to the weight parts of the herbicide formulation and synergist in Table 7 and diluted with water to a total weight of 40,000 parts. An equal volume of water without any added herbicide was used as a blank control.

[0075] Three days after each treatment was applied, the pharmacological symptoms of weed damage were observed and recorded to characterize the speed of effectiveness. The pharmacological symptoms of weeds were divided into five levels: ① Level 0: No obvious curling or chlorosis was observed in the weeds, and the treated area appeared bluish-green overall, with almost no difference from the blank control; ② Level I: Some leaves (less than 50%) of the weeds showed curling or slight yellowing and chlorosis, and the treated area appeared predominantly green; ③ Level II: Most leaves (more than 50%) of the weeds showed curling or moderate yellowing and chlorosis, and the treated area appeared predominantly yellow; ④ Level III: Almost all leaves of the weeds showed curling or severe yellowing and chlorosis, and the treated area appeared ashen yellow; ⑤ Level IV: Almost all leaves of the weeds were withered, faded, and chlorotic, and the treated area appeared wilted.

[0076] Thirty days after the application of pesticides in each treatment area, the weed control rate was investigated and recorded. During the investigation, five random samples were taken from each treatment area, with each sample plot covering an area of ​​5 m². 2 The weed control effect was statistically calculated based on the control effect per plant in a fixed area, i.e., weed control rate % = (number of normally growing weeds in the blank control area - number of surviving weeds in the treatment area) / number of normally growing weeds in the blank control area × 100%. Weed control effect data processing: data statistics and mean calculation were performed using Excel, and significance analysis of differences was conducted using DPS7.05 software (LSD method).

[0077] Within 180 days (six months) after the application of pesticides for each treatment, local rainfall and the occurrence of pesticide damage in farmland and green plants directly below each treated road section were continuously recorded. The number of times pesticide damage occurred in each treated area within 180 days was recorded (pesticide damage occurring at different points directly below each road section within the same treatment area was counted as 1 time, and the total number was calculated by summing the results). The above observations and statistical results are shown in Table 8 below.

[0078] Table 8: Statistical table of herbaceous symptoms of weeds 3 days after application, weed control rate at 30 days, and occurrence of herbicide damage within 6 months for each treatment.

[0079] Note: The 30-day weed control rate counted here includes the total weed control rate, including all grass and broadleaf weeds. For the same indicator, the five treatments are marked with lowercase letters and the differences between different representations are significant (P<0.05), and the treatments are marked with uppercase letters and the differences between different representations are extremely significant (P<0.01).

[0080] As shown in Table 8: (1) There were certain differences in the pharmacological symptoms of weed damage 3 days after the application of the herbicide. Among them, the conventional herbicide group CK had the mildest pharmacological symptoms of weed damage and had not yet shown obvious effects; the non-arable land herbicide formulation TR3.4 without the addition of synergist only showed mild pharmacological symptoms of grade I; the non-arable land herbicide composition TR3.1 with 100 parts of low-dose synergist aggravated the pharmacological symptoms of weeds, showing grade II; the non-arable land herbicide compositions TR3.2 and TR3.3 with 200 parts and 300 parts of medium and high-dose synergist aggravated the pharmacological symptoms of weeds, all showing grade III (due to the short time after the application and the relatively low temperature in the Zengcheng West Line workshop area of ​​Guangzhou Railway Bureau in April, grade IV pharmacological symptoms have not yet appeared 3 days after the application). In summary, the non-cultivated land herbicide composition of the present invention has a significantly faster onset of action within 3 days than the conventional non-cultivated land herbicide 10% methamidosulfuron suspension. The combination of non-cultivated land herbicide formulations with the addition of synergists further enhances the speed of action. However, although the addition of more than 200 parts of synergist can further improve the speed of action, the further improvement effect is no longer significant.

[0081] (2) The weed control rates of each treatment showed significant differences 30 days after application (P<0.05). Among them, the weed control effects of the three-component formulation of non-cultivated land herbicide and the treatments with added synergists (TR3.1–TR3.4) were significantly better than those of the conventional non-cultivated land herbicide (CK). Furthermore, the weed control rate showed an increasing trend with the increase of the amount of synergist additive, but there was no significant difference between the two treatments (TR3.2 and TR3.3, which had the same letter). The above data indicate that the weed control effect of the non-cultivated land herbicide composition of the present invention is significantly better than that of conventional non-cultivated land herbicide 30 days after application. The addition of an appropriate dose of synergist further significantly improved the weed control effect of the non-cultivated land herbicide formulation.

[0082] (3) Upon verification, within six months after the application of the herbicide, the area under the jurisdiction of the Zengcheng West Line Workshop of the Guangzhou Engineering Section experienced 34 heavy rains or above, 64 moderate rains or above, and a relatively high number of heavy to torrential rains, indicating frequent rainfall. As can be seen from the statistical data in Table 8, the frequency of phytotoxicity with the conventional non-cultivated land herbicide 10% methamidosulfuron suspension was relatively high (4 times); while the frequency of phytotoxicity with the combination of the three formulation components of the non-cultivated land herbicide of this invention (TR3.4) was significantly reduced to 1 time, a reduction of 75%; no phytotoxicity incidents were observed with the combination of the three formulation components of the non-cultivated land herbicide of this invention plus the synergist (TR3.1 to TR3.3).

[0083] As can be seen from the above, the non-arable land herbicide formulation combination of the present invention and the composition thereof with added synergists can effectively reduce or avoid the occurrence of herbicide damage to farmland and green plants along non-arable land caused by rainwater erosion and other reasons, making the use of herbicides safer.

Claims

1. A herbicide composition for non-cultivated land, characterized in that, It includes the active ingredients cycloazinone, diuron, 2,4-D and glyphosate, wherein, by weight, cycloazinone is 37.5-87.5 parts, diuron is 63-189 parts, 2,4-D is 12-30 parts and glyphosate is 60-150 parts.

2. The non-arable land herbicide composition as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The non-cultivated land herbicide composition also includes 100-300 parts of a synergist, which comprises plant essential oils, penetrants, trilateraton, and polyethylene glycol.

3. The non-cultivated land herbicide composition as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The plant essential oil comprises 20-60 parts, the penetrant comprises 30-70 parts, the triaconite comprises 5-20 parts, and the balance is polyethylene glycol.

4. The non-cultivated land herbicide composition as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The plant essential oil is aloe vera essential oil, and the penetrant is isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether.

5. The non-cultivated land herbicide composition as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The cycloazinone is a 25% cycloazinone soluble concentrate, with a weight of 250-350 parts; the diuron is a 63% diuron suspension concentrate, with a weight of 100-200 parts; and the 2,4-D and glyphosate are aqueous solutions containing 6% 2,4-D and 30% glyphosate, with a weight of 350-500 parts.

6. The non-cultivated land herbicide composition according to any one of claims 1-5, characterized in that, When using herbicide compositions, the formulations containing the active ingredients are mixed together, then diluted with water and a synergist is added before use.

7. The non-cultivated land herbicide composition as described in claim 6, characterized in that, The dosage of the active ingredient per mu is 800g, and the amount of water to be diluted is 40kg per mu. After stirring well, spray the stems, leaves and soil.

8. The use of the non-cultivated land herbicide composition according to any one of claims 1-5 in chemical weeding in non-cultivated land.

9. A synergist for rapid onset of action in the non-cultivated land herbicide composition as described in claim 1, characterized in that, It includes, by weight, 20-60 parts of aloe vera essential oil, 30-70 parts of isomeric decaol polyoxyethylene ether, 5-20 parts of triathlon, and 45-150 parts of polyethylene glycol.

10. The synergist as described in claim 9, characterized in that, Its preparation method is as follows: S1. Weigh the raw materials of each component according to the synergist raw materials and their weight proportions; S2. Add the isomeric deca-ol polyoxyethylene ether and Triton to 1 / 2 of the total weight of polyethylene glycol, heat to 40-60℃ to dissolve, stir magnetically until uniform, and then cool to room temperature for later use. S3. Add aloe vera essential oil to the remaining 1 / 2 weight of polyethylene glycol, dissolve at room temperature, stir magnetically until well mixed, and set aside. S4. Add the mixture from step S2 to the solution obtained in step S3 and mix them together with magnetic force to obtain the synergist.

Images