USE OF 3-ISOXAZOLIDINONE COMPOUNDS AS SELECTIVE HERBICIDES

Abstract

Herbicide compositions containing 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone (2,4-DC) or 2-(2,5-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone (2,5-DC) are described. Compositions containing 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC and a second herbicide are disclosed, wherein the combination does not contain both 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC. Methods of use of these compositions are also described.

Description

USE OF 3-ISOXAZOLIDINONE COMPOUNDS AS SELECTIVE HERBICIDES Cross reference to related requests This application claims the benefit of priority of United States provisional application number 61 / 943,437 filed on February 23, 2014 and 61 / 951,269 filed on March 11, 2014, the description of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. field of invention The present invention is directed to compositions and uses of at least one 3-isoxazolidinone analog herbicide selected from 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazole. Dinone (2,4-DC) and 2(2,5-dichlorophen¡l)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazol¡dinone (2,5-DC), which include combinations with a second herbicide. Background of the invention Protecting crops from undesirable plants known as weeds that can interfere with crop growth and can reduce crop yields has long been a goal in agriculture. One process that has been taken to achieve this goal is the development of selective herbicides that can control weeds without exhibiting unacceptable phytotoxicity to the crops they are intended to protect. More recently, crops have been protected from weeds by genetically modifying crops to be tolerant to a non-selective herbicide (such as glyphosate or glufosinate) and applying such herbicide on the top of such crops. Unfortunately, this latter process has led to the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds, with the result that there is still a need for a means to selectively control undesirable vegetation in crops. US Patent 4,405,357 discloses certain 3-isoxazolidinones that exhibit desirable selective herbicidal activity. Specifically, such compounds are shown to be effective in controlling grassy species and broadleaf weeds, leaving legumes, particularly soybeans, unaffected. Among the compounds specifically disclosed in this patent are 2-(2,4dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazolidínone and 2-(2,5dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4- dimethyl-3-soxazolidone. Both such compounds are effective against a number of weeds. However, there is still a need for effective combinations of herbicides to reduce or nullify damage to crop plants by using selective formulations while not affecting the herbicidal action on the weeds to be controlled. Brief description of the invention The present invention addresses such a need. The present invention discloses new compositions for protecting crops from undesirable vegetation. One aspect of the invention is directed to a composition containing a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3 ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ isoxazolidinone (2,4-DC) and 2-(2,5-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone (2,5-DC); and at least a second herbicide and its use to control undesirable vegetation, which interferes with the growth of the crop. Another aspect of the invention is directed to a composition comprising a herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2-(2,4-dichlorofenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl 1-3-isoxazolidinone (2,4- DC) and 2-(2,5-d ichlorof en i l)methyl-4,4-d i met 1-3-isoxazolidinone (2,5-DC); at least one formulation component selected from the group consisting of adjuvants for an EC formulation, adjuvants for a SC formulation, and adjuvants for a CS formulation; and optionally, one or more additional active ingredients. In at least one aspect of the present invention, the disclosed composition contains 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC and the second herbicide that is different from the first herbicide, wherein when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5-DC, and when the first herbicide is 2,5-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,4-DC. In one embodiment, the first herbicide is 2,4-DC. In another embodiment, the first herbicide is 2,5-DC. In another embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, alachlor, metolachlor, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, pretilachlor, benzofluoro, cambendichlor, chloramben, dicamba, bispyribac, pyrithiobac; mesotrione, sulcotrione, tef u r i It r i o n a, tembotrione, benfuresate, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ asulam, barban, aloxidim isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalf luralin, pendimethalin, trif I ural i na, acifluorfen, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofen, fomesafene, imazametabenz, bromobonil, bromo xynyl, methiozoline, monisouron, pyroxasulfone , topramezone, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, clorazifop, clodinafop , clofop, cihalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, difenzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachloro, fluazolate, brompirazon, clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine, metoprotrine, simethrin, terbutrine, etiozine, hex azinone , metribuzin, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, tiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, metobromuron, methoxuron, tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, prosulfuron , thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein , flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifen, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac-sodium, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4 -DB, 2,4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalfluralin, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfuronmethyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron -methyl, trifluralin, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In yet another embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of napropamide, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, mesotrione, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In another aspect, methods are described for controlling undesirable vegetation and protecting a crop using a composition containing a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC; and at least one second herbicide selected from the group including acetochlor, aclonifen, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2,4- DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etal f I u ral i n a, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, methobromuron, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron , metsulfuronmethyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, tifensulfuron, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ thifensulfuron-methyl, trifluralin, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In one embodiment, susceptible crops include plants from groups such as bananas, beans, beets, cassava, cereals, citrus fruits, cocoas, coconut, coffee, corn, cotton, fiber crops, flowers, forage crops, forestry, peanuts, peanuts, hops. , horticultural, non-land crops, oil palm, rapeseed, peas, pomos, potatoes, rice, pome fruits, spices, sugar cane, sunflower, tea, tobacco, nuts, dried fruits, grass, vegetables, vines and grapes. In at least one embodiment, the crops are selected from potatoes, soybeans, corn, rice, sorghum, rapeseed, barley, rye, cowpeas and canola. The present disclosure also describes a method of controlling unwanted vegetation on a crop that includes applying to the locus of such vegetation a herbicidically effective amount of a composition. The composition includes a first herbicide and a second herbicide. The first herbicide is selected from the group including 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC. The second herbicide is different from the first herbicide. The crop is selected from the group that includes potatoes, soybeans, corn, rice, sorghum, rapeseed, barley, rye and canola. In yet another embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group including dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, methobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. . ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Detailed description of the invention As used in this application and unless otherwise indicated, the term herbicide refers to a mixture of composition that is produced, sold, or used in a field for the purpose of killing or inhibiting the growth of unwanted plants such as , but not limited to, but not limited to, noxious or nuisance weeds, broadleaf plants, grasses and sedges; and can be used for crop protection, building protection or lawn protection. The term herbicide includes the end-use herbicide product. This composition may be a pure compound, a solution of chemical compounds, a mixture of chemical compounds, an emulsion, a suspension, a solid-liquid mixture, or a liquid-liquid mixture. The term herbicide also refers to the product that passes through commercial channels from the manufacturer to the end user, who can apply the herbicide to the affected field, as sold, or mix it with other excipients. The term weed means and includes any plant that grows where it is not wanted. The term herbicidally effective amount means an amount necessary to produce an observable herbicidal effect on the growth of the undesired plant, which includes one or more of the effects of necrosis, death, growth inhibition, reproduction inhibition, proliferation inhibition and elimination, destruction, or otherwise diminish the occurrence and activity of ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ unwanted plants. The definition of the term herbicidal composition refers to a herbicide and, furthermore, to any composition comprising a herbicidally active ingredient. This composition can be a solution or a mixture. Additionally, the definition of the term herbicidal composition also refers to a product proposed for use in manufacturing, or any product proposed for formulation or repackaging into other agricultural products. The term herbicidally active ingredient means the active ingredient in the herbicide that causes the herbicide to prevent, destroy, repel or mitigate any weed. Other herbicide ingredients that are not herbicidically active ingredients are excipients that assist in the formation, storage or delivery of the herbicidally active ingredient to the target. Examples of excipients in the present embodiment include, without limitation, an organic liquid in which the herbicidally active ingredient is dissolved, a polyurea coating, a water-soluble polymer, and one or more salts. The term 2,4-DC refers to 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone. The term 2,5-DC refers to 2-(2,5-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone. The compositions of the present disclosure may be in any form useful in conventional agriculture, for example, in the form of a double pack, or in a ready-to-use formulation, or in the form of a tank mix. Additionally, the active compounds can be supplied (separately or pre-mixed) in any type of suitable formulation, for example, an emulsifiable concentrate (EC), a suspension concentrate (SC) , a suspension emulsion (SE), a capsule suspension (CS), a water-dispersed granule (WG), an emulsifiable granule (EG) acronym), a water-in-oil emulsion (EO), an oil-in-water emulsion (EW), a microemulsion (ME), a oil dispersion (OD), an oil-miscible fluid (OF), an oil-miscible liquid (OL), a soluble concentrate (SL) Ultra Low Volume Suspension (SU), Ultra Low Volume Liquid (UL), Disperse Concentrate (DC) , a wettable powder (WP) or any other technically possible formulation in combination with agriculturally acceptable adjuvants. In a preferred embodiment, the compositions of the present disclosure are supplied as an emulsifiable concentrate, a suspension concentrate or a capsule suspension. At least one aspect of the present invention is directed to compositions comprising a first herdicide selected from ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ group consisting of 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC; and a second herbicide with the proviso that when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5-DC or 2,4-DC respectively. Accordingly, the compositions of the present invention contain 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC in combination with at least one other herbicide wherein when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5- DC, and when the first herbicide is 2,5-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,4-DC. As such, the composition of the present invention may be in any of the formulation SC, SE, CS, WG, EC, EG, EO, EW, ME, OD, OF, OL, SL, SU, UL, DC or WP in combination with agriculturally acceptable adjuvants. Second herbicides disclosed in connection with the present invention include, but are not limited to, the following: Acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACS) inhibitors, for example, cyclohexenone oxime ethers, such as alloxidim, clethodim, cloproxidim, cycloxidim, sethoxydim, tralkoxydim, butroxidim, clefoxidim or tepraloxidim; phenoxyphenoxypropionic esters, such as clodinafop-propargyl, cyhalofop-butyl, diclofop-methyl, fenoxaprop-ethyl, fenoxaprop-P-ethyl, fenthiapropethyl, fl uazifop-butyl, f I u az if o p-P-b u t i I o, haloxyfop-ethoxyethyl, haloxyfopmethyl , haloxyfop-P-methyl, isoxapyrifop, propaquizafop, quizalophopetil, quizalofop-P-ethyl or quizalofop-tefuryl; or arylaminopropionic acids, such as flamprop-methyl or flamprop-isopropyl; Acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors, for example imidazolinones, such as imazapyr, imazaquin, imazametabenz-methyl (imazame), imazamox, imazapic or imazethapyr; pyrimidyl ethers, such as pyrithiobac-acid, pyrithiobac-sodium, bispyribac-sodium. KIH-6127 or piribenzoxim; sulfonamides, such as florasulam, flumetsulam or metosulam; or sulfonylureas, such as amidosulfuron, azimsulfuron, bensulfuron-methyl, chlorimuron-ethyl, chlorsulfuron, cinosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethametsulfuron-methyl, ethoxysulfuron, flazasulfuron, halosulfuron-methyl, imazosulfuron, metsulfuron-methyl, nicosulfuron, primisul furon-methyl, prosulfuron, pyrazosulfuron -ethyl, rimsulfuron, sulfometuron-methyl, thifensulfuronmethyl, triasulfuron, tribenuron-methyl, triflusulfuron-methyl, tritosulfuron, sulfosulfuron, foramsulfuron or iodosulfuron; Amides, for example alidochlor (CDAA), benzoylprop-ethyl, bromobutide, chlorthiamide, dipenamide, ethobenzanide, fluthiamide, fosamine or monalide; At least one aspect of the present invention employs the use of a second herbicide that provides improved safety and effectiveness in controlling undesirable vegetation. In a more preferred embodiment, the herbicide used improves the selectivity of the actions on the crops to be treated. Provided below is a list of herbicides that are suitable for use as a second herbicide. Amide herbicides include, but are not limited to, alidochlor, amicarbazone, beflubutamide, benzadox, benzipram, bromobutide, cafenstrol, CDEA, ciprazole, dimethenamide, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, epronaz, etnipromid, fentrazamide, flucarbazone, flupoxam, fomesafen, halosafen, huangcaoling, socarbamide, isoxabene, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propyzamide, quino namid, saflufenacil, tebutam and tiafenacil and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Anilide herbicides include, but are not limited to, chloranocril, cisanilide, clomeprop, cypromide, erlujixiancaoan, etobenzanide, fenasulam, flufenacet, flufenican, ipfencarbazone, mefenacet, mefluidide, metamifop, monalide, naproanilide, pentanochlor, picolinafene, propanil, and triaphamone and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Arylalanine herbicides include, but are not limited to, benzoylprop, flamprop and flamprop-M and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Chloroacetanilide herbicides include, but are not limited to, acetochlor, alachlor, butachlor, butenachlor, delachlor, diethyl, dimetachlor, etachlor, etaprochlor, metazachlor, metolachlor, Smetolachlor, pretilachlor, propachlor, propisochlor, prinachlor, terbuchlor, tenylchlor, xyllachlor herbicides. sulfonamide; benzofluoro, chloransulam, diclosulam, florasulam, flumetsulam, metosulam, perfluidone, profluazole, and pirimisulfan and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Sulfonamide herbicides include, but are not limited to, asulam, carbasulam, fenasulam, oryzalin, penoxsulam and pyroxsulam and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Thioamide herbicides include, but are not limited to, bencarbazone, and chlorthiamide and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Benzoic acid herbicides include, but are not limited to, cambendichlor, chloramben, dicamba, 2,3,6-TBA, tricamba, pyrimidinyloxybenzoic acid herbicides; bispyribac and piriminobac and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyrimidinylthiobenzoic acid herbicides include, but are not limited to, pyrithiobac and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phthalic acid herbicides include, but are not limited to, chlorthal and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Picolinic acid herbicides include, but are not limited to, aminopyralid, clopyralid, halauxifen and picloram and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Guinolinecarboxylic acid herbicides include, but are not limited to, quinclorac and quinmerac and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Arsenical herbicides include, but are not limited to, cacodylic acid, CMA, DSMA, hexaflurate, MAA, MAMA, MSMA, potassium arsenite and sodium arsenite and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Benzoylcyclohexandione herbicides include, but are not limited to, phenchynotrione, ketospiradox, mesotrione, sulcotrione, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ tef u r i I tr i o n a and tembotrione. Benzofuranylalkylsulfonate herbicides include, but are not limited to, benfuresate, and ethofumesate and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Benzothiazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, benzoline, benzthiazuron, fenthiaprop, mefenacet and metabenzthiazuron and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Carbamate herbicides include, but are not limited to, asulam, carboxazole, chlorprocarb, dichlormate, fenasulam, karbutylate, terbucarb and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Carbanylate herbicides include, but are not limited to, barban, CMPC, carbasulam, carbetamide, CEPC, chlorbufam, chlorpropham, CPPC, desmedifam, fenisofam, fenmedipham, fenmedifamethyl, profam, and swep and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Carbonate herbicides include but are not limited to bromobonyl, dinophenate and iodobonyl and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Cyclohexene-oxime herbicides include, but are not limited to, alloxidim, butroxidim, clethodim, cloproxidim, cycloxidim, profoxidim, sethoxidim, tepraloxidim and tralkoxydim. Cyclopropylisoxazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, isoxachlortol and isoxaflutol and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Dicarboximide herbicides include, but are not limited to ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ ci nido η - et i I o, flumezine, flumiclorac, flumioxazine and flumipropine and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Dinitroaniline herbicides include, but are not limited to, benfluralin, butralin, clonidine, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalph I u ra I i n a, fluchloraline, isopropaline, metalpropaline, nitralin, oryzalin, pendimethalin, prodiamine, profluralin, and trifluralin and salts and agriculturally acceptable asters thereof. Dinitrophenol herbicides include, but are not limited to dinofenate, dinoprop, dinosam, dinoseb, dinoterb, DNOC, etinofen, medinoterb and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Diphenyl ether herbicides include, but are not limited to, ethoxyfen and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Nitrophenyl ether herbicides include, but are not limited to, acifluorfen, aclonifen, bifenox, clomethoxifene, chlornitrofen, etnipromid, fluorodifen, fluoroglycene, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, fucaomi, furiloxifene, halosafen, lactofen, nitrofen, nitrofluorfen, and oxyfluorfen. Dithiocarbamate herbicides include, but are not limited to, dazomet and metam and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Halogenated aliphatic herbicides include, but are not limited to, alorac, chloropon, dalapon, flupropanate, hexachloroacetone, methyl bromide, methyl iodide, monochloroacetic acid, SMA and TCA and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Imidazolinone herbicides include, but are not limited to, imazametabenz, imazamox, imazapic, imazapyr, imazaquin, imazethapyr and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Inorganic herbicides include, but are not limited to, ammonium sulfamate, borax, calcium chlorate, copper sulfate, ferrous sulfate, potassium azide, potassium cyanate, sodium azide, sodium chlorate, and sulfuric acid and salts and esters agriculturally. acceptable of them. Nitrile herbicides include, but are not limited to, bromobonyl, bromoxynyl, chloroxynyl, dichlobenyl, iodobonyl, ioxynyl and pyraclonyl and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Organophosphate herbicides include, but are not limited to, amiprofos-methyl, amiprofos, anilophos, bensulide, bilanaphos, butamiphos, claciphos, 2,4-DEP, DMPA, EBEP, fosamine, glufosinate, glufosinate-P, glyphosate, huangcaoling, piperophos, and shuangjiaankaolin and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Oxadiazolone herbicides include, but are not limited to, dimefuron, methazole, oxadiargyl, oxadiazone and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Oxazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, carboxazole, phenoxasulfone, isouron, isoxaben, isoxachlortol, isoxaflutol, methiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone and topramezone and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phenoxy herbicides include, but are not limited to, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, diphenopentene, disulfide, erbon, etnipromid, phenteracol and triphopsime and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phenoxyacetic herbicides include, but are not limited to, clacyphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 3,4-DA, MCPA, MCPA-thioethyl, 2,4,5-T and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. . Phenoxybutyric herbicides include, but are not limited to, 4CPB, 2,4-DB, 3,4-DB, MCPB, 2,4,5-TB and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phenoxyoropionic herbicides include, but are not limited to, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, dichlorprop-P, 3,4-DP, fenoprop, mecoprop, mecoprop-P and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Aryloxyphenoxypropionic herbicides include, but are not limited to, clorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cyhalofop, diclofop, fenoxaprop, fenoxaprop-P, fentiaprop, fluazifop, fluazifop-P, haloxifop, haloxifop-P, isoxapyrifop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, quizalofop-P, and trifop and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phenylenediamine herbicides include, but are not limited to, dinitramine and prodiamine and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyrazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, azimsulfuron, dienzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachlor, ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ metazosulfuron, pyrazosulfuron, pyroxasulfone and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Benzoylpyrazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, benzofenap, pyrasulfotol, pyrazolinate, pyrazoxifene, and topramezone and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phenylpyrazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, fluazclate, nipyraclcfenc, pinoxadene and pyraflufenc and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyridazine herbicides include, but are not limited to, credazine, cyclopyrimorate, pyridafol and pyridate and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyridazinone herbicides include, but are not limited to, brcmpirazone, clcridazon, dimidazna, flufenpyr, metflurazone, norflurazone, oxapyrazone, and pydanone and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyridine herbicides include, but are not limited to, aminopyralid, cliodinate, clopyralid, diflufenican, dithiopyr, flufenican, fluroxypyr, halauxifen, haloxidin, picloram, picolinafene, pyrichlor, pyroxsulam, thiazopyr and triclopyr and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyrimidinediamine herbicides include, but are not limited to, iprimidam, and thiochlorim and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Pyrimidinyloxybenzylamine herbicides include, but are not limited to, pyribambenz-isopropyl, quaternary ammonium herbicides. pyribambenz-propyl ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ; ciperquat, dietmquat, dienzoquat, diquat, morfamquat, paraquat and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Thiocarbamate herbicides include, but are not limited to butylate, cycloate, di-alate, EPTC, esprocarb, etiolate, isopolinate, methiobencarb, molinate, orbencarb, pebulate, prosulfocarb, pyributicarb, sulfalate, thiobencarb, thiocarbazil, tri-allate, vernolate and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Thiocarbonate herbicides include, but are not limited to, dimexane, EXD and proxan and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Thiourea herbicides include, but are not limited to, methiuron and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Triazine herbicides include, but are not limited to, dipropethrin, fucaojing and trihydroxytriazine and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Chlorotriazine herbicides include, but are not limited to, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine, cyprazine, eglinazine, ipazine, mesoprazine, procyazine, proglinazine, propazine, sebutylazine, simazine, terbuthylazine and trietazine and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Fluoroalkyltriazine herbicides include, but are not limited to, indaziflam and triaziflam and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Methoxytriazine herbicides include, but are not limited to, atraton, metometon, prometon, secbumeton, simeton and terbumeton and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Methylthiotriazine herbicides include, but are not limited to, amethrin, aziprothrin, cyanathrin, desmethrin, dimetamethrin, metoprotrin, promethrin, simethrin and terbutrin and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Triazinone herbicides include, but are not limited to, ametridione, amibuzin, ethiozin, hexazinone, isomethiozine, metamitron and metribuzin and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Triazole herbicides include, but are not limited to, amitrol, cafenstrol, epronaz and flupoxam and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Triazolone herbicides include, but are not limited to, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, flucarbazone, ipfencarbazone, propoxycarbazone, sulfentrazone and thiencarbazone and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Triazolopyrimidine herbicides include, but are not limited to, chloransulam, diclosulam, florasulam, flumetsulam, metosulam, penoxsulam and pyroxsulam and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Uracil herbicides include, but are not limited to, benzphendizone, bromacil, butafenacil, flupropacil, isocyl, lenacil, Saflufenacil, terbacil and thiafenacil and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Urea herbicides include, but are not limited to, benzthiazuron, cumiluron, cycloron, dichloralurea, diflufenzopyr, isonoruron, isouron, metabenzthiazuron, monisouron and noruron and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Phenylurea herbicides include, but are not limited to, anisoron, buturon, chlorbromuron, chloreturon, chlorotoluron, chloroxuron, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ daimuron, difenoxuron, dimefuron, diuron, fenuron, fluometuron, fluothiuron, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, methyldimron, methobenzuron, metobromuron, metoxuron, monolinuron, monuron, neburon, for fluron, phenobenzuron, siduron, tetraflurone and tidiazuron and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. Sulfonylurea herbicides include, but amidosulfuron, azimsulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, f I u p ¡ rs u If u r ó n, mesosulfuron, nicosulfuron, ethoxysulfuron, foramsulfuron, metazosulfuron, orthosulfamuron, bensulfuron, flazasulfuron, halosulfuron, methiopyrisulfuron, oxasulfur ón, are not limited to chlorimuron, flucetosulfuron, imazosulfuron, monosulfuron, primisulfuron, sulfometuron, salts and esters but not propyrisulfuron, pyrazosulfuron, rimsulfuron, sulfosulfuron, trifIoxysuIfuron and zuomihuanglong and agriculturally acceptable thereof. Triazinylsulfonylurea herbicides include, but are not limited to, chlorsulfuron, cinosulfuron, ethametsulfuron, iodosulfuron, iofensulfuron, and metsulfuron, prosulfuron, thifensulfuron, triasulfuron, tribenuron, trif I u s u If u ron, tri a t os u If u ro n, and salts and esters. agriculturally acceptable of them. Thiadiazolylurea herbicides include, but are not limited to, buthiuron, etidimuron, tebuthiuron, thiazafluron, and thidiazuron and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. Protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) is selected from the group consisting of carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, fluthiacet-methyl, saflufenacil, diphenyl ethers, oxadiazoles, imides and cyclic pyrazoles. Examples of these classes of PPOs include, without limitation, acifluorfen, acifluorfen-sodium, azaphenidine, bifenox, butafenacil, clomethoxifene, chlornitrofen, ethoxyfen-ethyl, fluorodifen, fluoroglycophen-ethyl, fluoronitrofen, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, furiloxifene, halosafen, lactofen , nitrofen, nitrofluorfen, oxyfluorfen, flumiclorac-pentyl, flumioxazine, profluazol, pyrazogyl, oxadiargyl, oxadiazone, pentoxazone, fluazolate, pyraflufenethyl, benzphendizone, butafenacil, cinidon-ethyl, flumipropine, flupropacil, fluthiacet-methyl, thidiazimine, azaphenidine, carfentrazone , carfentrazone -ethyl, sulfentrazone, Saflufenacil, f I u f e n p i r - et i I o, ET-751, JV 485, nipyraclofen, or mixtures of two or more thereof. Preferably, PPO inhibitors are selected from the group consisting of carfentrazone, sulfentrazone, fluthiacet-methyl, saflufenacil and mixtures of two or more thereof. Other herbicides include, but are not limited to, acrolein, allyl alcohol, aminocyclopyrachlor, azaphenidine, bentazone, bentranyl, benzobicyclone, bicyclopyrone, butidazole, calcium cyanamide, chlorfenac, chlorfenprop, chlorflurazole, chlorflurenol, cinmethylline, clomazone, CPMF, cresol, cyanamide, ortho dichlorobenzene, dimepiperate, dithioether, endothal, fluoromidine, fluridone, flurochloridone, flurtamone, funaihecaoling, glyphosate, glufosinate, herbimycin, huancaiwo, indanofan, methoxyphenone, methyl isothiocyanate, OCH, oxaziclomefone, pelargonic acid, pentachlorophenol, pentoxazone, a phenylmercury cetate, prosulfaline, piribenzoxim, piriftalid, quinoclamine, rodetanil, saflufenacil, sulglicapine, tavron, thidiazimine, tridiphane, trimeturon, tripropindan, tritac and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, alachlor, dimetachlor, F? / S-metolachlor, S-metolachlor, pretilachlor, benzofluoro, cambendichloro, chloramben, dicamba, bispyribac, pyrithiobac; mesotrione, sulcotrione, tef u r i 11 r i o n a, tembotrione, benfuresate, asulam, Barban, alloxidim isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalfluralin, pendimethalin, trifluralin, acifluorfen, aclonifene, etnipromid, clomazone, sulfentrazone, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, glyph sato, glufosinate, Saflufenacil, imazametabenz, bromobonil, bromoxynil, methiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone, topramezone, bromophenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4 -CPP, dichlorprop, clorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cihalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, difenzoquat, halosulfuron, zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi metazachlor, fluazolate, brompirazon, clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine , ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine, metoprotrine, simethrine, terbutrine, etiozine, hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, thiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, metobromuron, metoxuron, tetraflurone , thidiazuron , amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, prosulfuron, thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling and agriculturally acceptable salts and asters thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifene, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4DB, 2, 4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalfluralin, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, glyphosate, glufosinate, saflufenacil, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, S-metola chlorine, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfuronmethyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron-methyl, t r if I u ral i n a, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more of them. In a more preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group including dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, methobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters of the same. In another embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group including metazachlor, napropamide, sulfentrazone and mesotrione. In yet another embodiment, the first herbicide is 2,4-DC and the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, dimetachlor, pretilachlor, dicamba, bispyribac, mesotrione, etalfluralin, pendimethalin, trif I u ral i na, fomesafene, bromoxynil, 2,4-DEB, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, cyhalofop, metamifop, quizalofop, atrazine, aclonifen, ametrine, hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone- ethyl, linuron, ethoxysulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, napropamide, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, methobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. In a further embodiment, the first herbicide is 2,5-DC and the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, dimetachlor, pretilachlor, dicamba, bispyribac, mesotrione, etalfluralin, pendimethalin, t r i f I u r al i na, fomesafene, bromoxynil, 2,4-DEB, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, cyhalofop, metamifop, quizalofop, atrazine, aclonifen, ametrine, hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone- ethyl, linuron, ethoxysulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, napropamide, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, methobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof. In another embodiment, the second herbicide is any of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, metobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof that has a particle size of less than 250, 100 or preferably 50 microns. In yet another embodiment, the second herbicide may be any of napropamide, aclonifene, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, mesotrione, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron and agriculturally acceptable salts and esters thereof having particle sizes of less than 250, 100 or preferably 50 microns. In one aspect of the present invention, the compositions of the present invention selectively protect crops that are a member of any of the following groups of crops, including, bananas, beans, beets, cassava, cereals, citrus fruits, cocoas, coconut, coffee , corn, cotton, fiber crops, flowers, forage crops, forestry, groundnuts, peanuts, hops, horticultural crops, non-land crops, oil palm, rapeseed, peas, pomes, potatoes, rice, pome fruits, spices, sugar cane, sunflower, tea, tobacco, tomatoes, nuts, grass, vegetables, vines, grapes. In at least one embodiment, the crops are potato, soybeans, corn, rice, sorghum, rapeseed oil, barley, rye, cowpeas or canola. More specifically, these crops include, but are not limited to, bananas, plantains, beets: fodder, beets, sugar beets, cassava, barley, spring barley, winter barley, oats, oats+triticale-winter, oatsspring, oats -winter, rye, winter-rye, stubble, triticale, triticale+rye, wheat, wheat / barley, durum wheat, spring wheat, winter wheat, citrus, grapefruits, lemons, oranges / limes, cocoa, coconut, coffee, corn, corn: fodder, corn: wheat, sweet corn, corn+sorghum-spring, cotton, flax, carnation, chrysanthemum, flowers, gladiolus, ornamental plants: nursery, roses, alfalfa, brassica: fodder, clover: seed, forage crops, seed of grasses, pastures, pastures, rye: seed, forestry, peanuts, groundnuts, hops, horticulture, industrial markets, aquatic weeds, fallows, resting croplands, land reclamation, summer fallow, oil palm, canola, seed rapeseed, spring rapeseed, winter rapeseed, flaxseed, lupine, mustard, oilseed, safflower seed, sesame, olives, berries, blackberries, blueberries, currants, durian, guava, kiwi, lychees, mangoes, papayas, persimmon, pineapple, rambutan, strawberries, tropical fruits, beans, chickpeas, lentils, mung beans, peas, legumes / chickpeas, apples, apricots, avocados, cherries, fruit, peaches, nectarines, pears, plums, pome fruits, fruit seed / stone, tree crops: water pears, potatoes, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ potatoes: seed, potatoes: sweet, rice, rice: paddy, rice: highland, gum, millet, sm.grain: others, sorghum, soybeans, cardamom, cloves, ginsing, black pepper , spices, sugar cane, sunflower, tea, tobacco, tomato, field nuts, green nuts, red nuts, almonds, betel nuts, cashews, hazelnuts, macadamia nuts, pecans, pistachios, walnuts, grass / grass, agave, asparagus, brassica: vegetables, broccoli, cabbage, bok choy, carrot, chicory, cruciferous, cucumbers, cucurbits, eggplant, garlic, herbs, lettuce, melon, onion, onion / garlic, peppers / chili, field peppers , Japanese radish, pumpkin, vegetables, field vegetables, other vegetables, watermelons and grapes. Cucurbits include crops such as melon: Benincasa spp, Citrullus spp, Cucumis spp, Momordica spp.; Watermelon: Citrullus lanatus; pumpkin: Cucurbita pepo; chayóte: Cucúrbita argyrosperma, C. ficifolia, C. maxima, C moschata; and cucumber: Cucumis sativus. In one embodiment, the crop includes wheat varieties such as Bloc, Kord, Wyalkatchem and Mace. In another aspect of the present invention, the presently claimed composition are selective against weeds including, but not limited to, catnip, lockgrass, grass weed, toothgrass, toothgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli), jimsonweed (Datura stramonium) ΖΛβΙτΩη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ minor), chickweed (Stellaria media) and wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas), Persicaria pensylvanica (Polygonum pennsylvanicum), palm amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri), abutilon (Abutilón theophrasti), abutilon (Setaria viridis), bellflower (Ipomoea spp.) recutita, solanum nigrum, Stellaria media, Viola arvensis. In yet another embodiment, the activity of the first and second herbicides may be additive. As such, when the observed activity is the same as expected, the activity of the combination is additive. In another embodiment, the combination of the first and second herbicides provides an activity that is greater than the expected additive, and therefore the combination provides synergistic properties. In contrast, when the combined activity is less than expected, the activity will be considered antagonistic. According to at least one aspect of the present invention, combinations of the first and second herbicides provide synergistic effects in terms of weed control. In at least one embodiment, synergistic effects of the currently described combinations are observed in such species, including annual winter grass, commelina, nightshade, field alope, tares, chickweed, common burdock, common quelite, common ragweed, acotillo, Italian ryegrass, ivy-leaved bellflower, jimsonweed, Aleppo sorghum, wild canary grass, Persicaria pensylvanica, foveolated bellflower, paprika, reed, shepherd's purse, abutilon, guinagua, wild mustard, wild oat, casalina, yellow nutsedge. In another embodiment, methods for controlling unwanted vegetation in a crop are described by applying to the locus of such vegetation a herbicidically effective amount of a composition containing a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2,4-DC and 2,5- DC and, optionally, a second herbicide that is different from the first herbicide, where the crop is selected from wheat, potato, soybean, corn, rice, sorghum, rapeseed, barley, rye, cowpea, oats, sunflower and canola. In a more preferred embodiment, the crop is wheat, sunflower and canola. In at least one aspect of the present invention, the present compositions comprising 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC can be applied pre-emergence or post-emergence. The amount that constitutes an effective amount is variable and generally depends on a number of factors such as the type of soil, the expected rainfall or irrigation pattern, the plant species to be controlled, and the susceptibility of the particular crop involved. However, effective amounts which are commonly between about 1 and about 4000 grams of the herbicidal active ingredient may need to be applied per hectare. Such compounds are generally applied at a rate of between 75 to about ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 2000 grams a.¡. / hectare. In more preferred embodiments, the amounts are applied at a rate of between approximately 125 and 1500 grams a.i. / hectare. The compositions of the present invention may further contain one or more adjuvants or carriers. In at least one embodiment, the herbicidal active ingredients are present in concentrations ranging from 0.01% to about 95%. In another embodiment, the agriculturally acceptable carriers constitute about 4% to about 98.5%. Surface active agents or surfactants, viscosity improving agents, and solvents respectively may constitute approximately 1% to 15% of the final formulation by weight. In a preferred embodiment, the compositions of the present invention are formulated as a CE, SC or CS. In yet another aspect of the present invention, unique compositions containing only a 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC in a suitable delivery vehicle are described. In one embodiment, 2,4-DC or 2,5DC contains amounts ranging from about 25 to about 40% w / w, calcium chloride is present in amounts ranging from about 3 to about 8% w / w, and the sodium nitrate is in an amount ranging from about 3 to about 8% w / w, while in another embodiment, the present invention may contain a formulation of 2,5-DC, wherein the 2,4-DC is in an amount of about 36% w / w, calcium chloride is in an amount of about 6.156% w / w, and sodium nitrate is in an amount of about 6.156% w / w. In yet another aspect of this invention, the compositions of the present invention contain: (i) a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC; (i) at least one inactive component selected from the group consisting of at least one antimicrobial agent, at least one surfactant, at least one thickener, at least one antifoam, at least one antifreeze, at least one solvent, and at least one cosolvent; and (i¡) optionally, one or more additional active ingredients. In yet another aspect of this invention, a composition is described, for example, in an SC form that may contain a surfactant from a very large variety of surfactants known in the art that may also be commercially available. Surfactants can belong to different classes, such as cationic surfactants, anionic surfactants, nonionic surfactants, ionic surfactants and amphoteric surfactants. According to the invention, the surfactant may be any surfactant or combination of two or more surfactants useful for dissolving the herbicidal compound, for example, in its acid form to produce a microemulsion-forming concentrate. Examples of some preferred surfactants include cationic, nonionic and anionic surfactants. Of these, some even more specific types of preferred surfactants include nonionic or linear alcohol ethoxylate surfactants. Branched ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ, anionic phosphoric acid ester surfactants (sometimes referred to as phosphate ester surfactants), and cationic ethoxylated tallow amine surfactants. Nonionic surfactants suitable for the present invention include ethoxylated linear alcohol, ethoxylated alkylphenol, alkyl EO / PO copolymer, ethoxylated polyalkylene glycol monobutyl ether fatty acids / oils, sorbitan laurate, polysorbate, sorbitan oleate, ethoxylated fatty acid alcohols, or alkylphenols. In another aspect of the present invention, the preadjusted composition of the invention may contain a thickener. The suitable thickener is rice, starch, gum arabic, gum tragacanth, guar flour, British gum, starch ethers and starch asters, gum resins, galactomannans, magnesium aluminum silicate, xanthan gum, carrageenan, derivatives of cellulose, methylcellulose, alginates and combinations thereof. Other known commercial products may include Lattice NTC 50, Lattice NTC 60, methocel, clay, Veegum silica. In another embodiment, the compositions of the present invention may contain an antifreeze agent such as ethylene chloride, propylene chloride, urea, sodium calcium chloride nitrate, magnesium chloride and ammonium sulfate. Other inactive agents may include an antimicrobial such as Proxel GXL, Bronopol, BHT, BHA, Dowcided A Kathon; solvents including aromatic and linear solvents. Aromatic solvents include aromatic 100, aromatic 150, aromatic 150 ND, aromatic 200 ND, Isopar M, paraffinic oil, Sunspray 6 or 11 N, vegetable oil, fatty acid methyl ester, dimethylcaprylamide. Antifoam agents, such as Xiameter AFE100, Dow Corning AFs, Dow Corning 1520, 1530 or 1540 may also be used in the currently claimed formulations. At least one other embodiment is directed to the composition containing 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC in amounts ranging from about 30 to about 50% w / w, preferably from about 35 to about 45% and more preferably of approximately 40% w / w. In another embodiment, the compositions of the present invention contain antifreeze agents in amounts ranging from about 1 to about 15%, preferably from about 3 to about 8% and more preferably from about 5 to about 7% w / w. In another embodiment, the amounts of surfactant within the compositions of the present invention range from about 1 to about 10%, preferably from about 3 to about 8%, and more preferably from about 5 to about 7% w / w. In one embodiment, the antifreeze agent is propylene glycol in an amount ranging from about 3 to about 8% w / w, and the surfactant is Tergiot in an amount ranging from about 6% w / w. In yet another aspect of the present invention, unique compositions containing a first herbicide selected ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ from the group consisting of 2-(2,4-dichlorophen¡l)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone (2,4-DC) and 2-(2,5 -dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone (2,5-DC); and a second herbicide; provided that when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5-DC or 2,4-DC respectively. In a more preferred embodiment, the composition is in the form of an SC comprising at least one surfactant, a thickener and a solvent and, optionally, an antifoam agent. In yet another embodiment, the formulation is a CS formulation comprising a thickener, Reax or lignin derivatives, and a solvent. In yet another embodiment, the formulation is an EC formulation comprising a solvent, a surfactant, ethoxylated castor oil or nonylphenol and DDBS or equivalents thereof. In another aspect of the present invention, the compositions of the present invention are prepared by a process that applies the steps of combining the herbicidal active ingredient in effective amounts with suitable surface active agent, desired amounts of emulsifier, viscosity improving agents and solvent. appropriate. In another embodiment, the mixture is subjected to a grinding process until a suitable particle size ranging from about 1 to about 250 microns is obtained. In a preferred embodiment, the mixture is ground until 90% of the particle size (D90) is less than about 50 microns. One aspect of the invention is directed to a composition comprising: i) a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3 -soxazol¡dinone (2,4-DC) and 2-(2,5-dichlorophen¡l)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazol¡dinone (2 ,5-DC); i) at least one formulation component selected from the group consisting of adjuvants for an EC formulation; adjuvants for a SC formulation; and adjuvants for a CS formulation; and iii) optionally, one or more additional active ingredients. Adjuvants for an EC formulation may be selected from the group consisting of Pluronic or Tergitol, ethoxylated castor oil or nonylphenol, DDBS or equivalents, and a solvent. Adjuvants for a SC formulation can be selected from the group consisting of Tergitols, Pluronics, Dextrol, Soprophor FLK, glycol, glycerin, water, antifoam, clay and a thickener. Adjuvants for a CS formulation are selected from the group consisting of solvent, polymeric material, Reax or lignin derivatives, salts and thickeners such as xanthan. In general, glycols can also be used in CS, EW, SE or SS type formulations as an antifreeze agent. In one embodiment, the additional active ingredients are selected from the group consisting of herbicides such as clomazone. One embodiment of the composition comprises 2,4-DC, propylene and surfactants. In a preferred embodiment, the composition comprises approximately 36% by weight of 2,4-DC, the propylene I comprises approximately 6% by weight, and the mixture of surfactants comprises approximately 3% by weight of the composition. Another embodiment of the composition comprises 2,4-DC, calcium chloride and sodium nitrate. In a preferred embodiment, the composition comprises approximately 36% by weight of 2,4-DC, calcium chloride comprises approximately 6,156% by weight, and sodium nitrate comprises approximately 6,156%) by weight of the composition. In yet another embodiment, the present description describes an agricultural formulation containing approximately 36% 2,4dichlorophenyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazolidinone (410 g / l), approximately 6% of propylene glycol, about 3% of a mixture of surfactants, and about 55% of other ingredients, which may include agriculturally acceptable formulation ingredients known to one skilled in the art. In one embodiment, this agricultural formulation is a suspension concentrate (SC). In another embodiment, the formulation contains approximately 36% 2,4-dichlorophenyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazolidinone (430 g / l), approximately 6.156% sodium chloride hexahydrate. calcium (CAS No. 7774-34-7), about 6.156% sodium nitrate (CAS No. 7631-99-4), and about 51.69% other ingredients, which may include agriculturally acceptable formulation ingredients known to one skilled in the art. in the technique. In one embodiment, this agricultural formulation is a capsule suspension (CS). Another aspect of the invention is directed to a composition that ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ comprises: i) a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2-(2,4-dichlorophen¡l)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazole dinon (2,4-DC) and 2-(2,5-dichlorophen¡l)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazol¡dinone (2,5-DC); and i) a second herbicide; provided that when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5-DC or 2,4-DC respectively. The second herbicide can be selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propanil, acetochlor, alachlor, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, pretilachlor, benzofluoro, cambendichloro, chloramben, dicamba, bispyribac, pyrithiobac, mesotrione, sulcotrione, tefuryltrione, tembotrione, benfuresate, asulam, barban, aloxidim, isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalfluralin, pendimethalin, trifluralin, acifluorfen, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, imazametabenz, bromobonil, bromoxynil, me tiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone, topramezone, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, chlorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cihalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, dienzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachlor, fluazolate, brompirazon, clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine, metoprotrine, simethrine, terbutrine, etiozine , hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, thiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, metobromuron, methoxuron, tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, pro sulfuron, thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, asters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In one embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifene, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2,4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalf I ural ina, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, Smetolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron , metsulfuron-methyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron methyl, sulfentrazone, t r if I u ral i n a, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more of them. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of napropamide, aclonifene, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, mesotrione, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, asters thereof and mixtures of two or more. thereof. One aspect of the invention is directed to a composition wherein the first herbicide is 2,4-DC. Another aspect of the invention is directed to a composition wherein the herbicide is 2,5-DC. In one aspect of the invention, the first herbicide of the composition is 2,4-DC and the second herbicide can be selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, alachlor, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, pretilachlor, benzofluoro, cambendichloro, chloramben, dicamba, bispyribac, pyrithiobac, mesotrione, sulcotrione, tef uri Itrione, tembotrione, benfuresate, asulam, barban, aloxidim, isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalfluralin, pendi metalin, t r if I u ral i n a, acifluorfen, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, imazametabenz, bromobonil, bromoxynil, methiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone, topramezone, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2 ,4-D, 2, 4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, clorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cyhalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, dienzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachlor, fluazolate, brompirazon , clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine, metoprotrine, simethrine, terbutrine, etiozine, hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, thiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron , methiuron, metobromuron, metoxuron, tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, prosulfuron, thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, salts agriculturally Acceptable ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In one embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifene, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4DB, 2, 4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalf luraline, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfur on -methyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachloro, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron-methyl, sulfentrazone, trifluralin, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, Smetolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, methobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters of the same and mixtures of two or more of the same. In another aspect of the invention, the first herbicide of the composition is 2,5-DC and the second herbicide can be selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifen, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2,4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalfluralin, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfuronmethyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron-methyl, sulfentrazone, tr if I u ral i na, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifene, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, metobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. Another aspect of the invention is directed to a method for controlling unwanted vegetation in a crop comprising applying to the locus of such vegetation a herbicidally effective amount of a composition comprising a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2,4-DC and 2 , 5-DC and a second herbicide, provided that when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5-DC or 2,4-DC, respectively, wherein the crop may be selected from the group consisting of broadleaf crops and grass crops, and the unwanted vegetation is selected from the group consisting of grass weeds and broadleaf weeds. In one embodiment, the second herbicide is Ζαβιτπη / ζζηζ / ε / υιλι selects from the group consisting of telltenamide-p, difenamide, napropamid Dicamba , bispiribac, pyrithiobac, mesotrione, sulcotrione, tef uri Itrione, tembotrione, benfuresate, asulam, barban, aloxidim, isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalf I u r al i n a, pendimethalin, trifluralin, acifluorfen, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, imazametabenz , bromobonil, bromoxynil, methiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone, topramezone, bromophenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop , 4-CPP, dichlorprop, clorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cihalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, difenzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachloro, fluazolate, brompirazon, clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine , methoprothrin, simethrine, terbutrine, etiozine, hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, thiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, metobromuron, metoxuron, tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, et oxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron , metsulfuron, prosulfuron, thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, asters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In another embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifene, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4DB, 2, 4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalfluralin, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfuron - methyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron-methyl, sulfentrazone, trifluralin, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, Smetolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, methobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters of the same and mixtures of two or more of the same. In one embodiment, the crop is selected from the group consisting of wheat, potato, soybeans, corn, rice, sorghum, rapeseed, barley, rye, cowpeas, oats and canola. In a preferred embodiment, the crop is wheat. In one aspect of the invention, the first herbicide of the method is 2,4-DC. In another aspect of the invention, the first herbicide is 2,5-DC. In one embodiment of the method, the first herbicide is 2,4-DC and the second herbicide can be selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, alachlor, dimetachlor, S-metholacloro, pretilacloro, benzofloro, changendicloro, chloramben, dicamba, bispiribac, pyritiobac, mesotriona, sulcotriona, tefuri11r¡ona, tempo, benfuresate, astulam, barban, aloxidim, isoxaflutol, dyitramine, diproaline, ethalflural, ethalfluraline INA, TRIF I U RAL i n a, acifluorfen, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, imazametabenz, bromobonil, bromoxynil, methiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone, topramezone, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2,4- DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, clorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cyhalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, dienzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachlor, fluazolate, brompirazon, clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chlorazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine, metoprotrine, simethrine, terbutrine, etiozine, hexazinone, metribuzin, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, tiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, metobromur on, metoxuron, tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, prosulfuron, thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In one embodiment, the second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifene, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2,4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalfluralin, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, Smetolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfur on- methyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron methyl, sulfentrazone, t r if I u ral i n a, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more of the same. In one embodiment, the second herbicide may be selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, metobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters. of the same and mixtures of two or more of the same. In another embodiment of the method, the first herbicide is 2,5-DC, and the second herbicide can be selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, dipenamide, napropamide, napropamide-M, naptalam, petoxamide, propanyl, acetochlor, alachlor, dimetachlor , S-metolachlor, pretilachlor, benzofluoro, cambendichloro, chloramben, dicamba, bispyribac, pyrithiobac, mesotrione, sulcotrione, tefuriItrione, tembotrione, benfuresate, asulam, Barban, aloxidim, isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropaline, etalfluralin, pendimethalin, trif I u ral i n a , acifluorfen, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofen, fomesafen, imazametabenz, bromobonil, bromoxynil, methiozolin, monisouron, pyroxasulfone, topramezone, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, etnipromid, claciphos, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2 ,4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, clorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cyhalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, dienzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachlor, fluazolate, brompirazon, clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine , chlorazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametrine, metoprotrine, simethrin, terbutrine, etiozine, hexazinone, metribuzine, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, tiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methiuron, metobromuron, methoxuron , tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, prosulfuron, thifensulfuron, tebuthiuron, acrolein, flurtamone, fluthiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more of the themselves. In one embodiment, the second herbicide can be selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifene, ametrine, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispyribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2 ,4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamide-P, etalph lural ina, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, hexazinone, soxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, metobromuron, Smetolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfuron methyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretilachlor, propanyl, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebuthiuron, thifensulfuron, thifensulfuron methyl, sulfentrazone, t r if I u ral i n a, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In a preferred embodiment, the second herbicide may be selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, metobromuron, metsulfuron, thifensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. In one embodiment of the method, the crop is wheat or corn. In a preferred embodiment, the crop is wheat. Still another aspect of the invention is directed to a method of controlling unwanted vegetation in a crop comprising applying to the locus of such vegetation a herbicidically effective amount of a composition comprising a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC, wherein the crop can be selected from the group consisting of banana, beans, beet, cassava, cereals, citrus fruits, cocoa, coconut, coffee, corn, fiber crops, flowers, forestry, forage crops, grapes, peanuts, hops, horticultural crops, non-land crops, oil palm, rapeseed, peas, groundnuts, pomes, potatoes, rice, spices, pome fruits, sugar cane, sunflower, tea, tobacco, nuts, grass, vegetables, vines, wheat and unwanted vegetation can be selected from the group consisting of annual winter grass, commelina, field alopecuro, nightshade, flag grass, thistle thistle, tares, common hogweed (Xanthium pensylvanicum), common ragweed, wild poppy, field violet, giant field violet, white grass, almorejo, Guinean sorghum, acetillo, herbicide-resistant field violet, Erigeron, Italian ryegrass, jimsonweed, Aleppo sorghum (Sorghum halepense), large crabgrass, wild canary grass, Morningglory spp., persicaria pensylvanica, foveolated bellflower, huinar, reed, sorrel, sedge, shepherd's purse, smoked hay, sunflower (as a weed in potatoes), wild buckwheat (Polygonum convolvulus), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis), wild oats ( Avena fatua), casalina, hopillo, yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus). In one embodiment the crop is selected from the group consisting of beets, cereals, corn, peanuts, peanuts, oil palm, rapeseed, peas, potatoes, rice, sugar cane, sunflower, tobacco, vegetables and wheat. In a preferred embodiment, the crop is wheat. In yet another preferred embodiment, new methods of using 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC only in crops such as bananas, beans, beets, cassava, cereals, citrus fruits, cocoas, coconuts, coffee, fiber crops, flowers, forestry, fodder crops, grapes, peanuts, hops, horticultural crops, non-land crops, oil palm, rapeseed, peas, pomes, potatoes, spices, pome fruits, sugar cane, sunflower, tea, tobacco, nuts , grass, vegetables, vines, wheat. In yet another embodiment, the preferred crops are beets, cereals, corn, peanuts, peanuts, oil palm, rapeseed, peas, potatoes, rice, sugar cane, sunflower, tobacco, vegetables, wheat. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ In yet another preferred embodiment, the method of controlling undesirable plants and weeds is described by using either 2,4-DC or 2,5-DC alone against annual winter grass, commelina, alopecuro de los campo, nightshade, flag grass. , thistle thistle, tares, common burdock (Xanthium pensylvanicum), common ragweed, wild poppies, field violet, giant beetle, escobilla, beetle, guinea grass, acetillo, herbicide-resistant field alopecuro, erigerón, Italian ryegrass, jimsonweed, Aleppo sorghum (Sorghum halepense), white grass, wild canary grass, morning glory, persicaria pensylvanica, foveolated morning glory, huinar, reed, sorrel, zahina, shepherd's purse, smoked hay, sunflower (as a weed in potatoes), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus ), wild mustard (Brassica kaber), wild oats (Avena fatua), casalina, hopillo, yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus). The following examples serve only to illustrate the invention and should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention in any way, as additional modifications encompassed by the disclosed invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art. All such modifications are considered to be within the scope of the invention as defined in this specification and the claims. EXAMPLES Example 1: Suspension Concentrate (SC) Formulations of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone (2,4-DC) Formulation 1A: A SC formulation of 2,4-DC was prepared by combining 37.89% 2,4-DC, 1.50% TERGITOL™ XD (Dow Chemical Company), 1.50% Dextrol™ OC-180 (Ashland Specialty Company) , 1.00% INDULIN® C, 0.10% XIAMETER® AFE 100, 6.0% propylene glycol, 0.15% Kelzan® M % in weigh). In at least one embodiment, the present formulations are prepared using the following microencapsulation procedures as follows: using sludge and dissolution containers, mill, TERGITOL® XD melted in an oven at 55°C before use. Preparation of KELZAN / Glycol suspension: Into a separate container, weigh the propylene glycol. While mixing vigorously, gradually add the KELZAN M. Mix until uniform. Preparation of preground suspension: Charge the water to the mixing container and add the XIAMETER® AFE-100, TERGITOL® XD, DEXTROL® OC-180, and PROXEL® GXL to the tank and mix until uniform. Next, add the 2,4-DC technician in portions, allowing each portion to mix before adding more. Measure the initial viscosity. Grinding stages: Load a portion of the suspension to the mill and grind. Measure zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi particle size every 20 minutes and continue grinding until the D90 is <10 microns. Discharge the ground portion into a calibrated dissolution tank and charge the remaining portions of the preground slurry. Grind the remaining portions as before and collect. Once grinding is complete, load 500 grams of holding water to the mill, rinse, and combine with ground base. Record the weight and viscosity of the ground base. Based on the recovered weight, the amount of INDULIN® C added is determined using the following calculation: Grams of INDULIN® C added = (mill base weight recovered, in grams / 9149.6) x 104. Next, add the INDULI ® C and allow to mix completely. Finally, add half of the KELZA® / glycol suspension to the batch, mix for a minimum of 4 hours, and test in process. Continue shaking the batch overnight. Viscosity measurements should be made after stirring. Based on in-process assay and viscosity, add KELZAN® / glycol and / or additional water, as necessary and stir. 2,4-DC test Particle size Wet sieve Viscosity Density -100 mesh +200 mesh D90 D50 36.5% 11.52 5.21 0 0.0018 1200 1.1232 Formulation 1B: SC formulation of 2,4-DC was prepared by combining 44.1% 2,4-DC (42.0% active Al), 1.5% TERGITOL™ XD (Dow Chemical Company), 1.17% DEXTROL™ OC-180 (Ashland Specialty Company), 6.0% propr i le n g I i co 1, 0.13% > 2% aqueous solution of KELZAN® M xanthan gum (CPKelco A Huber Company) and 46.77% water (% by weight) and grinding the mixture until a particle size of D90 is less than approximately 50 microns. Formulation 1C: The SC formulation of 2,4-DC was prepared by combining 44.0% 2.4-DC, 1.5% TERGITOL™ of a 2% aqueous solution of KELZAN® M xanthan gum (CPKelco A Huber Company), 0.15%> DOW AF antifoam (Dow Chemical Company) and 46.7% water (all % by weight) and grinding the mixture until a D90 particle size is less than about 50 microns. 1D Formulation: SC formulation of 2,4-DC was prepared by combining 38% > 2,4-DC (36% active Al), 1.17% TERGITOL™ XD (Dow Chemical Company), 1.17% DEXTROL™ OC-180 (Ashland Specialty Company), 0.078 XIAMETER® AFE 100 AF Emulsion (Dow Chemical Company), 0.12 PROXEL™ GXL Antimicrobials (Arch Chemicals Inc.) 4.68% Propylene Glycol, 3.0% ATTAFLOW® AF (BASF), 1.0% INDULIN® C (MeadWestvaco) 0.12% 2% aqueous solution of KELZAN® M xanthan gum (CPKelco A Huber Company) and 50.662% water (wt%) and grinding the mixture to a particle size D90 is less than about 50 microns. Formulation 1E: SC formulation of 2,4-DC was prepared ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ combining 37.5% 2,4-DC, 1.5% Dextrol™, 1.5% TERGITOL™ XD, 1.0% INDULIN® C, 0.1% XIAMETER® AFE 100, 0.15% PROXEL® GXL , 0.2% KELZAN® M, 6.0% propylene glycol, and 52.05% water. Raw material % by weight 2,4-DC 36.00 DEXTROL® OC-180 2.00 INDULIN® C 2.00 TERGITOL® , 4-DC with sulfentrazone: Raw material % by weight 95% of 2,4-DC Tech 24.00 Sulfentrazone 12.00 DEXTROL® OC-180 2.00 TERGITOL® XD 2.00 Veegum 0.50 Propylene glycol 6.00 KELZAN® M 0.30 > s N C N N C C Raw material % by weight « N PROXEL® GXL 0.15 Water 53.05 total 100.00 Formulation 1H: SC formulation of 2,4-DC with diflufenican: Raw material % by weight 2,4-DC 20.00 Diflufenican Tech 16.00 DEXTROL® OC-180 2.00 TERGITOL® XH 1.40 TERGITOL® 00 Formulation 11: SC formulation of 2,4-DC with metolachlor: Raw material % by weight 2,4-DC 10.00 metolachlor 42.00 AGNIQUE® CSO-40 5.00 Raw material % by weight CaDDBS 5.00 TERGITOL® XD 2.00 Aromatic 1 50 36.00 total 100.00 Example 2: Pre-emergent herbicidal evaluation of 2-(2,4dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazolidinone in mixtures with Metazachlor The compositions of the present description were tested for herbicidal efficacy as follows: Test compositions containing 2,4-DC from Example 1B and metazachlor (Butisan® S, 43.1% active ingredient, BASF) and mixtures of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4 -dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone and metazachlor, were diluted with water to provide the appropriate test index concentrations. The test crops were wheat and canola (Brassica napus), the test weeds were Italian ryegrass (IR) (Lolium perenne. Multiflorum), annual winter grass (AB) ( Pea annua), common quelite (CL) (Chenopodium album), wild grass seed (LC) (Phalaris minor), chickweed (CC) (Stellaria media) and wild poppy (CP) (Papa see rhoeas). For preemergence testing, four disposable fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) for each application rate of each herbicide solution were filled with topsoil, in which seeds of each species were planted in furrows. made by a mold pressed into the top of the earth. The furrows were covered with soil after sowing the seed and watered well before application of the test compounds. The fiber trays designated for treatment were placed in a spray chamber that has a static platform and a moving sprayer and the height of the spray nozzle was 10.5 inches (26.67 cm) above ground level. Once the sprayer was calibrated using water for spray volume of 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre, the trays were sprayed with the sprayer at a rate to receive a coverage equivalent of 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre. Application rates are as shown in Table 1 below for the individual herbicidal solutions and herbicidal compositions of the present invention. The pre-emergent trays were immediately placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered after treatment. Thereafter they were watered regularly and fertilized for the duration of the trial. Weed control was assessed in each experimental trial at 21 days after treatment (DAT) for wild poppy and wheat and 28 DAT for all other species. The results, shown as an average of the repetitions, were compared with the results observed in ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ untreated control trays in the same tests. The results are in table 1 below. As shown the effectiveness of the present combination is much higher compared to the individual ingredients. Percent control was determined using a method similar to the 0 to 100 category system disclosed in Research Methods in Weed Science, 2§ed., B. Truelove, Ed.; Southern Weed Science Society; Auburn University, Auburn, Ala., 1977. The category system is as follows: ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Weed Control Category System Category Percentage Control Major Categories Description Weed Description 0 No Effect No Weed Control 10 Very Poor Weed Control 20 Slight Effect Poor Weed Control 30 Poor to Poor Weed Control Percentage Control category Description of main categories Weed description Weed Control Category System 40 Poor Weed Control 50 Moderate Effect Poor to Moderate Weed Control 60 Moderate Weed Control 70 Somewhat Less Than Satisfactory Control 80 Severe Satisfactory to Good Weed Control 90 Very Good to Excellent Weed Control 100 Complete effect Complete destruction of weeds Table 1: Percent crop damage and percent weed control using mixtures of 2,4-DC and metazachlor at 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT) (three or four replicates) Treatment index % damage / % control Untreated control — 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,4-DC + metazachlor 31.25 + 250 8 68 100 93 93 100 90 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 31.25 + 500 14 92 100 100 99 100 98 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 31.25 + 750 27 90 100 100 98 100 95 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 62.5 + 250 15 75 100 100 100 99 93 1 00 2,4-DC + metazachlor 62.5 + 500 20 85 100 100 98 100 93 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 62.5 + 750 35 93 100 100 99 100 99 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 125 + 250 25 70 100 100 99 100 90 100 2.4 -DC + metazachlor 125 + 500 35 93 100 100 100 100 98 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 125 + 750 28 88 100 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 250 + 250 40 82 100 100 100 100 87 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 250 + 500 40 87 100 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 250 + 750 40 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 375 + 250 43 75 100 100 100 100 96 100 2,4-DC + metazachlor 735 + 500 47 88 100 100 100 100 99 100 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Treatment index % damage / % control 2,4-DC + metazachlor 735 + 500 55 88 100 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC 31.25 27 4 53 3 57 27 0 100 2,4-DC 62.5 25 5 28 47 68 23 7 100 2,4-DC 125 35 9 53 63 85 50 22 100 2,4-DC 250 40 16 85 63 98 73 38 100 2,4-DC 375 40 53 90 77 99 82 58 100 Metazachlor or 250 23 72 100 100 96 100 99 100 Metazachlor 500 28 98 100 100 98 100 100 100 Metazachlor 750 35 96 100 100 99 100 100 100 zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi Example 3: Pre-emergent herbicidal evaluation of 2-(2,4dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazolidinone in mixtures with napropamide. The compositions of the present disclosure were tested for herbicidal efficacy as follows: Test compositions containing 2,4-DC from Example 1C and napropamide (Devrinol® 50-DF, 50% active ingredient, United Phosphorus Inc.) and mixtures of 2-(2,4dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4- dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone and napropamide were diluted with water to provide the appropriate test index concentrations. The test crop was cane (Brassica napus) and wheat, the test weeds were Italian ryegrass (IR) (Lolium perenne, multiflorum), annual winter grass (AB) ( Poa annua), nightshade (BG) (Alopecurus myosuroides), guinagua (BM) (Polygonum convolvulus), chickweed (CC) (Stellaria media), canary grass wild oats (LC) (Phalaris minor) and wild oats (WO) (Avena fatua). For preemergence testing, four disposable fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) for each application rate of each herbicide solution were filled with topsoil, in which seeds of each species were planted in furrows. made by a mold pressed into the top of the earth. The seed furrows were covered with soil and watered well before application of the test compounds. The fiber trays designated for treatment were placed in a spray chamber having a static platform and a moving sprayer and the height of the spray nozzle was 10.5 inches (26.67 cm) above ground level. Once the sprayer was calibrated using water for spray volume of 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre, the trays were sprayed with the sprayer at a rate to receive coverage equivalent to 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre. Application rates are as shown in Table 2 below for the individual herbicidal solutions and herbicidal compositions of the present invention. The pre-emergent trays were immediately placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered after treatment. Thereafter they were watered and fertilized regularly for the duration of the test. Weed control was evaluated in each experimental trial at 27 days after treatment (DAT) for all species. The results, shown as an average of the repetitions, were compared with the results observed in the untreated control trays in the same tests. The results are in table 2 below. Accordingly, the compositions of the present invention provide much superior results compared to the individual agents respectively. Percent Control was determined using a method similar to the 0 to 100 category system disclosed in Research Methods in Weed Science, 2§ed., B. Truelove, Ed.; Southern Weed Science Society; Auburn University, Auburn, Ala., 1977. Table 2: Percent crop damage and weed control when using mixtures of 2,4-DC and napropamide Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control Canola LC BG WB WO AB CC IR 2,4-DC + napropamide 31.2 + 315 12 84 10 22 10 0 93 23 Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control Cañóla Cañóla Cañóla 2,4-DC + napropamide 31.2 + 630 10 93 62 30 18 85 95 57 2,4-DC + napropamide 31.2 + 1260 10 96 67 27 37 94 95 53 2.4-DC + Napropamide 62.5 + 315 13 78 70 37 33 82 97 60 2.4-DC + Napropamide 62.5 + 630 12 96 72 42 37 82 99 79 2.4-DC + Napropamide 62.5 + 1260 10 100 100 100 83 43 65 83 98 86 2,4-DC + napropamide 125 + 315 18 77 89 73 33 83 99 89 2,4-DC + napropamide 125 + 630 25 98 91 80 83 89 99 88 2,4-DC + napropamide 125 + 1260 23 98 85 73 76 100 99 93 2.4-DC + NAPROPAMIDE 250 + 315 33 88 93 75 57 87 99 97 2.4-DC + NAPROPAMIDE 250 + 630 37 95 96 86 73 90 99 99 2.4- DC + napropamide 250 + 1260 37 100 95 80 84 100 100 98 2,4-DC + napropamide 375 + 315 43 87 97 57 70 86 100 99 2,4-DC + napropamide 375 + 630 50 90 97 82 82 9 5 100 100 2,4-DC + napropamide 375 + 1260 53 99 97 78 85 99 99 100 ΖΑβΙτηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control Canola Canola Canola 2,4-DC 31.2 7 8 10 10 7 0 94 23 2,4-DC 62.5 10 12 18 8 13 2 99 60 2,4-DC 125 27 18 84 8 53 12 100 83 2,4-DC 250 32 27 93 23 65 40 100 97 2,4-DC 375 50 53 97 37 78 63 100 98 napropamide 315 7 50 5 23 7 1 80 15 na propamide 630 10 87 7 23 8 77 81 20 napropamide 1260 8 100 15 38 81 92 83 90 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ The compositions of the present disclosure were tested for herbicidal efficacy as follows: Test compositions containing 2,4-DC from Example 1B and sulfentrazone (Spartan® 4F, 39.6% active ingredient, FMC Corp.) and mixtures of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4 -dimethyl3-isoxazolidinone and sulfentrazone were diluted with water to provide the appropriate test index concentration. The test weeds were Persicaria pensylvanica (PS) (Polygonum pennsylvanicum), tropical quintanilO (PA) (Amaranthus palmeri), abutilon (VL) (Abutilon theophrasti ), yellow sedge (GF) (Setaria viridis), morning glory (MG) (Ipomoea spp.), yellow sedge (YN) (Cyperus esculentus), paprika (PN) (Cyperus rotundus), and commelina (BD) (Commelina benghalensis). The crops included in the evaluation were corn, wheat and cowpeas. For the preemergence test, four disposable fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) for each application rate of each herbicide solution were filled with topsoil, in which seeds of each species were planted in grooves made by a mold pressed into the top of the earth. The rows with crop / weed seeds were covered with soil and watered well before application of the test compounds. The trays designated for treatment were placed in a spray chamber that has a static platform and a moving sprayer and the height of the spray nozzle was 10.5 inches (26.67 cm) above ground level. Once the sprayer was calibrated using water for spray volume of 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre, the trays were sprayed with the sprayer at a rate to receive coverage equivalent to 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre. Application rates are as shown in Table 3, 3A and 3B below for the individual herbicidal solutions and herbicidal compositions of the present invention. The pre-emergent trays were immediately placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered after treatment for herbicide activation. Thereafter they were regularly watered and fertilized for the duration of the trial. Weed control was evaluated in each experimental trial at 28 days after treatment (DAT), 14 DAT for crops. The results, shown as an average of the repetitions, were compared with the results observed in untreated control trays in the same tests. The results are in table 3, 3A and 3B below. Percent Weed Control was determined using a method similar to the 0 to 100 category system disclosed in Research Methods in Weed Science, 2§ed., B. Truelove, Ed.; Southern Weed Science Society; Auburn University, Auburn, Ala., 1977. Table 3: Percent weed control using mixtures of 2,4-DC and sulfentrazone at 28 days after treatment (DAT) (Four replicates) Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control PS PA VL GF MG 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 31.2 + 105 100 100 73 80 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 31.2+210 100 100 100 99 100 2, 4-DC + sulfentrazone 31.2 + 315 100 100 100 93 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 62.5 + 105 100 100 100 91 100 Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control PS PA VL GF MG 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 62.5 + 210 100 100 100 99 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 62.5 + 315 100 100 100 99 100 2, 4-DC + sulfentrazone 125 + 105 100 100 90 85 95 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 125 + 210 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 125 + 315 100 100 100 100 100 2.4 -DC + sulfentrazone 250 + 105 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 250 + 210 100 100 90 100 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 250 + 315 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 375 + 105 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 375 + 210 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 375 + 315 100 100 100 100 100 2,4-DC 31.2 17 0 22 12 0 2.4 -DC 62.5 83 0 3 85 0 2.4-DC 125 97 13 40 99 18 Treatment index (gram ai / ha) % damage control PS PA VL GF MG 2,4-DC 250 100 448 58 99 32 2,4-DC 375 100 67 58 100 37 sulfentrazone 105 100 100 100 84 100 sulfentrazone 210 100 100 100 100 100 sulfentrazone 315 100 100 100 100 100 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Table 3A: Percent weed control using mixtures of 2,4-CC and sulfentrazone at 28 days after treatment (DAT) (Four replicates) Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % control YN PN BD Untreated control — 0 0 0 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 50+105 88 70 69 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 50 + 210 97 77 82 2.4 -DC + sulfentrazone 50 + 315 100 87 95 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 100+105 70 65 60 Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % control YN PN BD 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 100 + 210 93 84 90 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 100 + 315 95 85 97 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 200+ 105 78 60 72 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 200 + 210 94 73 93 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 200 + 315 95 90 100 2,4-DC 50 10 7 8 2,4-DC 100 12 7 50 2.4 -DC 200 13 20 82 sulfentrazone 105 85 77 72 sulfentrazone 210 95 77 88 sulfentrazone 315 100 83 90 Table 3B: Percent crop damage using 2,4-DC and Sulfentrazone mixtures at 14 days after treatment (DAT) (Four replicates) ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control dwarf bean Corn Wheat Cowpea 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 31.2 + 105 33 0 0 0 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 31.2 + 210 50 0 7 1 2.4- DC + sulfentrazone 31.2 + 315 50 2 4 4 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 62.5 + 105 33 1 4 4 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 62.5 + 210 68 5 15 6 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 62.5 + 315 78 5 10 20 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 125 + 105 20 2 6 4 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 125+210 53 2 17 10 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 125 + 315 70 8 17 22 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 250 + 105 40 4 11 10 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 250 + 315 77 9 20 13 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 375 + 105 37 11 12 7 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 375 +210 65 15 15 15 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone 375 + 315 72 17 28 37 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % damage control dwarf bean Corn Wheat Cowpea 2,4-DC 31.2 3 0 0 0 2,4-DC 62.5 6 1 6 2 2,4-DC 125 8 2 8 5 2, 4-DC 250 5 3 6 3 2,4-DC 375 3 4 9 6 sulfentrazone 105 10 1 4 5 sulfentrazone 210 56 50 10 10 sulfentrazone 315 75 75 13 20 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Example: Pre-emergence herbicidal evaluation of 2-(2,4dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-soxazolidinone in mixtures with mesotrione The compositions of the present disclosure were tested for herbicidal efficacy as follows: Test compositions containing 2,4-DC from Example 1C and mesotrione (Callisto® herbicide, 40% active ingredient, Syngenta) and mixtures of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone and mesotrione, were diluted with water to provide the appropriate test index concentration. The test weeds were toothgrass (BG) (Echinochloa crus-galli), jimsonweed (PA) (Datura stramonium), abutilon (VL) (Abutilon theophrasti), cadillo (CC) (Xanthium strumarium) and acetillo (HB) (Bidens pilosa). The crops included in the evaluation were corn and sorghum fields. For the preemergence test, four disposable fiber trays (6” x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) for each application rate of each herbicide solution were filled with topsoil, in which seeds of each species were planted in furrows. made by a mold pressed into the top of the earth. The seed furrows were covered with soil and watered well before application of the test compounds. The trays designated for treatment were placed in a spray chamber that has a static platform and a moving sprayer and the height of the spray nozzle was 10.5 inches (26.67 cm) above ground level. Once the sprayer was calibrated using water for spray volume of 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre, the trays were sprayed with the sprayer at a rate to receive coverage equivalent to 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre. Application rates are as shown in Table 4 below for the individual herbicidal solutions and herbicidal compositions of the present invention. The pre-emergent trays were immediately placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered after treatment. From then on ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ watered regularly and fertilized throughout the duration of the trial. Weed control and crop damage were evaluated in each experimental trial at 28 days after treatment (DAT). The results, shown as an average of replicates, were compared to results observed in untreated control trays in the same tests and indicated far superior efficacy compared to their single-ingredient counterparts. The results are in table 4 below. Percent control was determined using a method similar to the 0 to 100 category system described in Research Methods in Weed Science, 2nd ed., B. Truelove, Ed.; Southern Weed Science Society; Auburn University, Auburn, Ala., 1977. Table 4: Percentage weed control using mixtures of 2,4-DC and mesotrione at 28 days after treatment (DAT) ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ in English) (Four replicas) Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % control (damage) Corn field Sorghum untreated control — 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,4-DC + mesotrione 50 + 25 3 1 98 87 73 80 2,4-DC + mesotrione 50 + 50 1 4 97 82 87 55 Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % control (damage) Corn field Sorghum 2,4-DC + mesotrione 50+100 7 10 99 100 98 98 2,4-DC + mesotrione 100+25 4 9 100 77 77 50 2,4-DC + mesotrione 100 + 50 3 5 100 99 100 31 2,4-DC + mesotrione 100+100 6 18 99 100 98 66 2,4-DC + mesotrione 200+25 12 21 100 78 87 63 2, 4-DC + mesotrione 200 + 50 11 26 100 98 98 100 2,4-DC + mesotrione 200 + 100 9 32 100 100 98 100 2,4-DC 50 0 3 97 25 33 28 2,4-DC 100 3 15 99 13 35 28 2,4-DC 200 17 22 99 38 68 63 mesotrione 25 0 0 48 73 68 60 mesotrione 50 0 0 61 87 90 0 mesotrione 100 4 12 73 100 93 90 Example 6: 2-(2,5-Dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone (2,5-DC) Emulsified Concentrate (EC) Formulation An EC formulation of 2,5-DC was prepared by combining 46.5% of 2,5-DC, 0.71% of a mixture of 80% calcium dodecylbenzene sulfonate and 20% of 6 mol of nonylphenol ethylene oxide adduct , 5.47% of a mixture of 60% calcium dodecylbenzenesulfonate and 40% of 30 mol of nonylphenol ethylene oxide adduct, 1.56 of TERGITOL™ XD (Dow Chemical Company), and 45.689% of Aormatic 100 fluid (ExxonMobile Chemical) . The mixture was subjected to shear mixing for approximately 1 minute and then stirred until a homogeneous mixture was obtained. Example 7: Evaluation of 2(2,5-dichlorophen¡l)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-¡soxazol¡dinone pre-emergence herbicide The 2,5-DC-containing test compositions of Example 6 were diluted with water to provide the appropriate test index concentration. The test weeds were horseweed (GF) (Setaria viridis), nightshade (BG) (Alopecurus myosuroides), and chickweed (CC) (Stellaria half). The crops included in the evaluation were corn and sorghum fields. For the preemergence test, four disposable fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) for each application rate of each herbicide solution were filled with topsoil, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ in which seeds of each species were planted in furrows made by a mold pressed into the top of the earth. The furrows were covered with soil and watered well before application of the test compounds. The trays designated for treatment were placed in a spray chamber that has a static platform and a moving sprayer and the height of the spray nozzle was 10.5 inches (26.67 cm) above ground level. Once the sprayer was calibrated using water for spray volume of 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre, the trays were sprayed with the sprayer at a rate to receive coverage equivalent to 30 gallons (113.4 liters) per acre. Application rates are as shown in Table 5 below for the individual herbicidal solutions and herbicidal compositions of the present invention. The pre-emergent trays were immediately placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered after treatment. Thereafter the trays were regularly watered and fertilized for the duration of the trial. Weed control and crop damage were evaluated in each experimental test 28 days after Index treatment (gram ai / ha) % control (damage) Wheat Sorghum GF BG CW EXAMPLE 31 0 0 0 0 95 INDEX TREATMENT (GRAMO AI / H) % CONTROL (DAMAGE) GF GF TRIGATION BG CW Example 6 63 6 0 13 3 99 Example 6 125 17 6 ​​88 15 100 Example 6 250 50 21 96 17 100 Exam 100 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ The results, shown as an average of the repetitions, were compared with the results observed in untreated control trays in the same tests. The results are in table 5 below. Percent control was determined using a method similar to the 0 to 100 category system disclosed in Research Methods in Weed Science, 2§ed., B. Truelove, Ed.; Southern Weed Science Society; Auburn University, Auburn, Ala., 1977. Table 5: Percent control of weeds and crop damage using the 2,5-DC EC formulation Example 8: 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3isoxazolidinone (2,4-DC) emulsifiable concentrate (EC) formulation Two different EC formulations were prepared for 2,4-DC using the procedure of Example 6, with the components and proportions found in Table 6 below (with and without alkylphenol ethoxylated (APE)). . Table 6: Component 8A: Formula free of APE*, % by weight 8B: Formula containing APE*, % by weight 2,4-DC technical 20.74 20.74 Aromatic 100 64.6 67.71 RHODACAL® 70 / B 6.69 ANTAROX® B848 3.34 RHODASURF® BC 840 4.63 NIAGARA® 1 1.15 NIAGARA® 2 8.1 TERGITOL®XD 2.3 *ΑΡΕ = alkylphenol ethoxylate Example 9A: A capsule suspension (CS) formulation of 2,4-DC was prepared using the following microencapsulation procedures as follows: Organic phase: 36.29% of 2,4-DC and 6.48% of Aromatic 200ND. Aqueous phase: 1.15% REAX® 88B, 5.33% sodium nitrate, 5.33% anhydrous calcium chloride, 3.68% 2% KELZAN® / 2% PROXEL® mixture, 0.03% glacial acetic acid, 2.16% of hexamethylenediamine (HMDA), 2.16% polymethylene polyphenylisocyanate (polymeric MDI; PAPI® 27) and 37.39% water. Feeding speed: 420 grams / minute Duration: 44.02 minutes Organic feeding rate 209.78 grams / minute Aqueous feeding rate: 189.03 grams / minute PAPI® 27 feeding rate: 10.59 grams / minute HMDA feeding rate: 10.59 grams / minute Procedure: First, heat the aqueous and organic feed containers. Next, heat the organic rinse unit to 80°C for circulated heating of the static mixer, and rinse solvent to 80eC. Start heating the microlid unit to a target temperature of 85°C. Adjust the temperature of the curing reactor to 55°C and prepare the data recording. Feeding solutions: Add the organic solvent to the organic reactor preheated to 80-85°C. Charge the 2.4-DC technique and heat to 80-85°C. Maintain at temperature, stirring until the solution is clear and uniform. Complete preparation of the aqueous phase. Prepare solution feeds of 43% HMDA, PAPI, and 2% Kelzan / 2% Proxel. Unit configuration and implementation: Then circulate the organic rinse stream to heat static mixer and prepare it. Configure PAPI and amine feed systems and begin recirculation of both lines approaching the established speeds. Once the feed solutions and vessels are at set temperature, first add the aqueous feed system to the reactor tank. Maintain the system until the set temperature reaches the system monitoring and logging data for feed rate fluctuations and wait until the system is stable. Once stable, transfer the organic phase to the organic feed tank. Keep feeding forward before. Maintain circulation of organic rinse solvent. Establish a separate garbage container to collect 2,4-DC waste. Once ready, directly feed the aqueous solution to the waste container. Slowly increase the speed of the homogenizer to around 3000 rpm, feed the solvent rinse directly over a 30 second period, and then change the current organic feed immediately (this keeps the organic return line coated with solvent). Immediately increase the RPM of the homogenizer to the setting level. Feed the amine and PAPI streams directly over a period of 30 seconds. Manually control feed rates so that they approach target levels. Once close, set the feed speeds to automatic and set the target feed speeds. Confirm the system if it is operating at set feed rates. Once stable, feed forward into the cure reactor. Reaction and preparation of cure: Keep the reactor at 55°C for 4 hours. Cool to zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi room temperature. Add the calcium chloride and sodium nitrate salts. Allow each to dissolve before adding more. If necessary, adjust the pH when using acetic acid to between 6.0 and 7.5. Add the required amount of 2% Kelzan / 2% Proxel based on recovery and mix. Test sample and continue shaking to hydrate Kelzan screen through 200 mesh sieve, pack and complete physical examinations. % by weight of 2,4-DC Particle size Clear sieve Density (g / ml) Viscosity pH 36.3% 13.50 7.264 0.19% 0.80% 1.1665 1560 7.34 Example 9B: CS formulation of 2,4-DC: Raw materials % by weight 2,4-DC 36.00 15 Aromatic 200ND 6.00 REAX® 88B 1.00 Calcium chloride 5.00 Sodium nitrate 5.00 Acetic acid 0.08 RUBINATE® M 20 (polymeric MDI) 1.97 KELZAN® S 0.10 hexamethylenediamine 1.28 PROX EL® GXL 0.15 Water 43.42 25 total 100.00 Example 9B: CS formulation of 2,4-DC: Both examples 9F and 9G were prepared, in separate batches, from 255 gm of 2,4-DC, 45 gm of Aromatic 200ND, 31 gm of PAPI 27, 288 gm of water, 8 gm of REAX 88B, 31 gm of 43% HMDA and 37 gm sodium nitrate. Biological tests Consideration of weed control - for the purposes of the present invention, weed control at 85% or more is acceptable and most importantly desirable. When weeds have 85% or greater damage, they cannot compete with crops for water, nutrients and physical space, and the likelihood of a significant reduction in crop yield is minimized. In general, weed control was evaluated at 28 DAT. In view of these considerations, synergy was evaluated at 28 DAT, while crop safety was evaluated at 7 or 14 DAT. Synergy was calculated using the Colby method. As used herein, the terms synergy and synergistic, or the phrase in a synergistic manner, refer to the in vivo interaction of two or more biologically active compounds, in the present case 3-isoaxzolidinone compounds with an active compound secondary, so their combined effect when administered together is greater than the sum of the effects observed when each is administered individually. That is, the herbicidal effect of the administration of the combination of, for example, 2,4-DC and the second agent as disclosed above and exemplified below ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ continued. In this way, the rate applied to the herbicide combination may be lower than the recorded use rates, thus reducing the total chemical load in the field to which such combination is applied. Colby's method for synergism is described in Colby, S.R., Calculating Synergistic and Antagonistic Responses of Herbicide Combinations, Weeds 1967, 15, pages 20-22, which is incorporated herein by reference. According to this methodology, the presence of a synergistic effect between the two active ingredients is established with the help of the Colby equation: E = X+Y-(XY / 1 00). Using the Colby method, the presence of a synergistic interaction between two active ingredients is established by first calculating the expected activity, Έ', of the mixture based on the activities of the two components applied alone. In the above equation, 'X' is the herbicidal activity in the percentage control of the disclosed 3-isoxazolidinone applied as a mixture at a rate 'x'. The term Ύ' is the herbicidal activity of the second active ingredient applied as a mixture at an index 'y'. The equation calculates Έ', the herbicidal activity of the mixture of 'X' at index 'x' with Ύ' at index 'y'. If Έ' is less than the observed activity, synergy is present. If the herbicidal effect is strictly additive and the interaction has not occurred, Έ' will be equal to or greater than the observed activity. The following tables in the examples below summarize the % weed control tested and the expected value against the % control observed for crop yields. Early crop security is desirable (within 7 to 14 DAT) so that the crop is able to compete with weeds for water, nutrients and physical space. The following examples are provided to further provide and emphasize the results of biological tests, in accordance with the present invention. Example 10: Weed control with combination of 2,4-DC tank mix and aclonifen. In this example a greenhouse study was carried out to determine the weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, when 2,4-DC alone or in combination with aclonifen as a pre-emergence (PRE) treatment against the following weeds: nightshade (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALMOY), sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE), wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), ivy-leaved morning glory (Ipomoea hederacea, IPOHE) , shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris, CAPBP), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), reed (Elymus repens, AGRRE), annual winter grass (Poa annua, POAAN), nightshade (Solanum nigrum, SOLNI). Methods: 2,4-DC (CS 36.7%)) was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with aclonifen (53% WP) and aclonifen rates for applications alone or tank mix were 1500, 1800 or 2100 g ai / ha. Treatments 1-12 of 2,4DC and aclonifen tank mix combination follow the same zARfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi ratios listed above. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. All plant species were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. Sulfentrazone (Spartan 4F® 39.6%) was applied at 280 g ai / ha, pendimethalin (Prowl 3.3®EC, 37.4%) at 784 g ai / ha, or S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum® 82.4%) at 1084 g ai. / ha as commercial standards. Treatments were repeated 3 times and the trays were watered after sowing but before treatment and lightly watered after treatment application. After this the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (whole plant death). The shepherd's bag was rated at only 21 and 28 DAT, due to delayed pre-emergence. Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at a 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: The twelve 2,4-DC and aclonifen tank mix combination gave >85% control of wild oats, common quelite, reed, nightshade, sorrel, wild canary grass, annual winter grass, nightshade, and bag of the Shepherd. No combination controls ivy-leafed morning glory. 2,4-DC alone at 250 g ai / ha controls ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ common quelite and shepherd's purse check were seen at all rates except 170g. Aclonifen alone in the three indices of common quelite controls common quelite, reed, sorrel, wild canary grass, annual winter grass, alopecuro of the fields, and shepherd's purse. Sulfentrazone at 280 g provides control of all weeds except reed, annual winter grass and nightshade. Pendimethalin at 784 g controlled 5 out of 10 weeds. S-metolachlor at 1064 g controls only two weeds. The tables emphasize the data analysis below represent the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. 2,4-DC + aclonifen- (28 DAT)- pre-emergent against wild oats-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt Y 170 1500 5 37 88 92.44 100 Y 170 1800 6 37 65 77.95 97 Y 170 2100 7 48 80 89.6 97 Y 210 1500 8 48 88 93.76 100 Y 210 1800 9 48 65 81.8 97 Y 210 2100 10 73 80 94.6 93 N 250 1500 11 73 88 96.76 100 Y 250 1800 12 73 65 90.55 100 AND 250 2100 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO index β and p - g ai / ha Tmt 100 AND 170 1500 5 47 88 90.99 100 AND 170 1800 6 47 65 87.81 100 Y 170 2100 7 67 80 93.4 100 Y 210 1500 10 8 67 83 94.39 100 Y 210 1800 9 67 77 92.41 100 Y 210 210 0 10 83 80 96.6 100 AND 250 1500 11 83 83 97.11 100 AND 250 1800 15 12 83 77 96.09 87 N 250 2100 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 11-: Pre-emergence efficacy (PRE) and selectivity of rapeseed with 2,4-DC and clomazone tank mix combination. In this example a greenhouse study was carried out to determine the effectiveness and damage to rapeseed, when combinations of the tank mix of 2,4-DC and clomazone are applied at a different rate as a pre-emergence treatment against the following weeds : sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE), purple bellflower (Ipomoea purpurea, PHBPU), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum, LOLMU), chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME), wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH), and guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO). The crop tested was rapeseed. Materials and methods To determine the effectiveness of PRE and damage to rapeseed, four rates of 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) and three rates of elomazone (Command 3ME®, 31.4%) were applied either alone or as a tank mix. 2,4-DC was applied at 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha and clomazone was applied at 60, 90 or 120 g ai / ha in 1-12 combination treatments. Additional treatments include applications of metazachlor (Butisan®, 43.1%) at 750 g ai / ha, napropamide (Devrinol DF®, 50%) at 1260 g, and dimetachlor (Teridox®, 48%) at 1000 g. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Treatments were applied just after sowing of bluebell, wild mustard, common quelite, Italian ryegrass, guinagua, sorrel, chickweed, wild poppy and rapeseed. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSL Visual percentage weed control and oilseed rape damage were recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Damage to rapeseed was estimated for discoloration and progressive weakening. Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at a 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: Data collected at 28 DAT suggested that of the twelve combinations of 2,4-DC and clomazone, no combination gave control of morning glory, wild mustard, sorrel and wild poppy. Eight combinations control the common quelite, seven combinations control the guinagua, and three combinations control the Italian ryegrass. All twelve combinations control chickweed. Six combinations of 2,4-DC and clomazone caused greater than 10% damage (discoloration) of rapeseed. 2,4-DC or clomazone alone in any case was not able to control any species except chickweed. Metazachlor controls all weeds except morning glory and wild mustard. Napropamide controls Italian ryegrass, guinagua, sorrel, chickweed, and wild poppy. Dimetachlor controls only two species, Italian ryegrass and wild poppy. All three herbicides, metazachlor, napropamide, or dimetachlor at the rates mentioned in the methodology are safe on rapeseed. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ In summary, all combinations of DC-2,4 plus clomazone control (85%) chickweed, while most combinations control common quelite and guinagua. Six combinations were safe (<10% damage) in rapeseed. The following tables emphasize the unexpected results observed in relation to this study. The tables below emphasize data analysis representing the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 10 2,4-DC + clomazone- common-28 DAT (28 DAT) - quelite pre-emergents Tmt 80 86 83 N 125 120 4 33 77 84.59 83 N 170 60 15 5 33 80 86.6 87 Y 170 90 6 33 80 86.6 85 N 170 120 7 42 77 86.6 85 N 210 60 8 42 80 88.4 86 N 210 90 9 42 80 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = SI; N = NO 25 β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + clomazone- (28 DAT) - Italian ryegrass pre-emergents-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 1 0 5 38 58 73.96 67 N 170 90 6 38 70 81.4 76 N 170 120 7 58 42 75.64 78 Y 210 60 8 58 58 82.36 88 Y 210 90 9 58 70 87.4 75 N 210 120 10 68 42 81.44 88 Y 250 60 11 68 58 86.56 76 N 250 90 12 68 70 90.4 93 Y 250 120 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N index β and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + clomazone- (28 DAT) -guinagua-28 DAT = NO Tmt 87 Y 125 90 3 10 81.1 86 Y 125 120 4 30 70 79 90 Y 170 60 5 30 80 86 78 N 170 90 6 30 79 85.3 88 Y 170 120 Tmt 0 11 27 80 85.4 90 AND 250 90 12 27 79 84.67 70 N 250 120 zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = SI; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 12 - Weed control and crop tolerance with combinations of 2,4-DC and dimethenamide In this example, a greenhouse study was carried out to determine the efficacy and tolerance of weed crops when 2,4-DC was applied alone or in combination with dimethenamide-P as a pre-emergent. Weeds tested include: guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO), abutilon (Abutilón theophrasti, ABUTH), tares (Bromus secalinus, BROSE), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), radish (Raphanus sativus, RAPSN), wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH), hopillo (Setaria pumila, SETLU), Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne ssp. multiflorum, LOLMU). The crop tested was rapeseed. Methods: This greenhouse study was carried out to evaluate weed control and tolerance to pre-emergent oilseed rape (PRE) with 2,4-DC (CS 36.7%) and dimethenamide-tank mix combination. P (Outlook®, 63.9%). 2,4-DC was applied at 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with dimethenamide-P. Dimethenamide-P rates for tank mix application were applied at 250, 375 or 500 g ai / ha for treatment numbers 1-12, while a single application of dimethenamide-P was made at 750 g, in addition to three aforementioned indices. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. All plant species were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. Metazachlor (Butisan, 43.1%), plus dimethenamide-P applied as a tank mix at 500 g each was applied as a commercial standard. Treatments were repeated 3 times and the trays were watered after sowing but before treatment and then lightly watered after treatment application. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percentage weed control and rapeseed damage were recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (weed death). the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: All twelve combinations of 2,4-DC and the P-dimethenamide tank mix gave >85% control of wild poppy, hopillo and Italian ryegrass. Of the 12 tank mixture combinations, tares and wild oats were controlled with 11 and 4 combinations, respectively. 2,4-DC alone with all indices did not control the weed species. Dimethenamide-P alone in the three indices controls tares, wild poppy, hopillo and Italian ryegrass. Wild oat control was observed at 500 g or 750 g ai / ha. The tank mix treatment of metazachlor plus dimethenamide-P controls all weeds except abutilon and radish. All 2,4-DC plus dimethenamide-P combinations are safe (<10% damage) in rapeseed. 2,4-DC alone or diflufenican alone is safe in rapeseed. Metazachlor plus dimethenamide-P is also safe in rapeseed. In summary, combinations of 2,4-DC and dimethenamide-P control (85%) 5 of 8 weeds. At the rates used in this study, 2,4-DC alone did not provide control of any of the weeds; On the other hand, dimethenamide-P controlled 5 weeds. In most cases, combinations of 2,4-DC plus dimethenamide-P are safe in rapeseed. The most emphasized analysis of data tables below represent the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. 2,4-DC + dimethenamide-P-guinagua-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 250 5 5 25 70 77.5 60 N 170 375 6 25 63 72.25 87 Y 170 500 7 28 32 51.04 56 Y 210 250 8 28 70 78.4 83 Y 210 375 9 28 63 73.36 65 N 2 10 500 10 10 38 32 57.84 37 N 250 250 11 38 63 81.4 60 N 250 375 12 38 63 77.06 43 N 250 500 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO 15 β index and P - g ia / ha 2,4- DC i - dimethenamide-P - wild oat-28 DAT Tmt 66 75.18 65 N 170 250 5 27 73 80.29 69 N 170 375 6 27 90 92.7 85 N 170 500 7 27 66 75.18 73 N 210 250 25 8 27 73 80.29 85 Y 21 0 375 ΖΑβΙτηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 89 N 250 500 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 13: Weed control with combinations of 2,4-DC and diflufenican. In this example a greenhouse study was carried out to determine the weed effectiveness of 2,4-DC, when 2,4-DC is applied alone or in combination with diflufenican as the pre-emergence (PRE) treatment. English) against field alopecurus (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALMOY), smoked hay (Apera spica-venti, APESV), sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE), wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO), almorejo (Setaria viridis, SETVI), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), purple bellflower (Ipomoea purpurea, PHPBU), shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris, CAPBP). Methods: 2,4-DC (CS 36.7%) was applied at 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with diflufenican. Diflufenican indices for application alone or tank mix were 50. 75, or 100 g ai / ha. All plant species were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. Pyroxasulfone (KIH-485, 85%) at 74.3 g ai / ha, pendimethalin (Prowl 3.3EC, 37.4%) at 1200 g ai / ha, or a premix of chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron-methyl (Extra report, 75%) at 15.8 g ai / ha were applied as commercial standards. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Treatments were repeated 3 times and the trays were watered after sowing before treatment and lightly watered after treatment application. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet IE 800 nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 DAT, using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (whole plant death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: The twelve tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC and diflufenican gave >85% control of smoked hay, sorrel, almorejo, common quelite, and shepherd's purse. Control of the almorejo was perceived when 2,4-DC was applied at 250 g with 75 g ai / ha or higher rates of diflufenican. Complete control of guinagua was observed with 2,4-DC at 210 g, plus diflufenican at 75 g. In addition to diflufenican ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 100 to 100 g of 2,4-DC at any rate controls (85%) wild mustard. Except for 2,4-DC for shepherd's purse alone with all indices it did not control most of the species. Diflufenican alone in the three indices to some extent controls smoked hay, sorrel, almorejo and shepherd's purse. The guinagua and wild mustard were controlled at 75 g or higher. Diflufenican controls common quelite at 100 g only. Pyroxasulfone at 74.3 g controls all weeds except morning glory and shepherd's purse. Pendimethalin at 1200 g controlled 6 out of 10 weeds. Chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron-methyl at 15.8 g controls the 10 weeds except field alopecia and wild canary grass. In summary, combinations of 2,4-DC and diflufenican control (85%) 8 out of 10 weeds. At the rates used in this study, 2,4-DC alone provided weed control, while diflufenican sol controlled 7 weeds. The tables below emphasize the analysis of the data representing the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 2,4-DC + diflufenican against hair loss of the fields 28 DAT Tmt 0 50 101 Tmt 210 75 9 66 27 75.18 77 Y 210 100 10 68 33 78.56 67 N 250 50 11 68 17 73.44 86 Y 250 75 12 68 27 76.64 88 Y 250 100 10 α - measurement of the β index and p - g 2,4-DC + diflufe synergistic behavior as ai / ha nican - common quelite-28 DAT Y = YES and N = NO Tmt 125 100 4 26 65 74.1 88 Y 170 50 5 26 73 80.02 93 Y 170 75 6 26 85 88.9 98 Y 170 100 20 7 58 65 85.3 96 Y 210 50 8 58 73 88.6 6 96 Y 210 75 9 58 85 93.7 93 N 210 100 10 60 65 86 87 Y 250 50 11 60 73 89.2 97 Y 250 75 25 12 60 85 94 92 N 250 100 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 102 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + diflufenican - wild mustard-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 0 50 5 15 89 90.65 83 N 170 75 10 6 15 100 100 100 N 170 100 7 26 42 57.08 88 Y 210 50 8 26 89 91.86 97 Y 210 75 9 26 100 100 100 N 210 100 10 23 42 55.34 79 Y 250 50 15 11 23 89 91.53 87 N 250 75 12 23 100 100 93 N 250 100 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 14 - POST crop selectivity and weed control with combinations of 2,4-DC and bromoxynil. In this example, a greenhouse study was carried out to study post-emergence weed control (POST) and selectivity of wheat and barley with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with tank mix. of bromoxynil against 103 following weeds of wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO), chickweed (Stellaria media, Sterne), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAPv), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum, LOLMU). The study also evaluated post-harvest safety of wheat and barley. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 125, 170, 210, or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with bromoxynil. Bromoxynil rates for application alone or tank mix were 140, 210 or 280 g ai / ha. Thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl + metsulfuron-methyl (extra precise, 37.5% + 18.75% + 15%) at 31.48 g ai / ha or thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl (extra harmony SG, 33.33% + 16.67%) at 19.95 g ai / ha are applied in commercial standards, an untreated control was also included for comparison. The nonionic surfactant at 0.5% (v / v) was included with the application of commercial standards. No adjuvant was applied with any other treatment. All plant species were sown directly in 3 (7.62 cm) plastic containers by meter mix as growth medium. In the application of the treatment, the common quelite was 1.75 (4.44 cm), the chickweed was 2 (5.8 cm), the wild mustard was 2.25 (4.71 cm), the wild oat was 5.5 (13.97 cm), the guinagua was 2-5 (5.8-12.7 cm), Italian ryegrass was 2-3 (5.8-7.62 cm), wheat was 5.5 (13.97 cm), and barley was 4.5 (11.43 cm) tall. The plants are 104 were watered well before application and were not watered 24 h after application. Plants were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was repeated four times. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Percent visual damage to wheat and barley and weed control were recorded at 7, 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale of 0 (no control / no damage to weed). crop) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: All applications of the tank mix of 2,4-DC (SC 36%) plus bromoxynil gave 85% control of guinagua and wild mustard, 11 combinations control common quelite, while 3 combinations control chickweed. Wild oats and Italian ryegrass were not controlled by any combination of tank mix, however, Italian ryegrass was suppressed (70-84% damage) by certain combinations. The wheat was not harmed by any combination; barley was moderately damaged by 1 combination and safe with all other tank mix combinations. 2,4-DC (SC 36%) applied alone did not control any weeds in the trial, and was safe at all indices in both wheat and barley. Bromoxynil ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 105 only controls guinagua, wild mustard, and quelite common to all indices and was safe in both crops at all indices. Thifensulfuron-methyl + common quelite + tribenuron-methyl + metsulfuron-methyl or thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl control guinagua, wild mustard, chickweed and common quelite were safe in barley and wheat; No treatment controls wild oats or Italian ryegrass. Italian ryegrass was not controlled by any application in the trial. It was observed, however, that when 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at > 210 g ai / ha with any rate of bromoxynil, the level of damage to Italian ryegrass increased to suppression levels in all cases. That same level of control was not achieved by either herbicide when applied alone. In summary, POST application of the twelve combinations of 2,4-DC and bromoxynil tank mixture controlled (85%) wild mustard and guinagua, common quelite was controlled with 11 combinations, chickweed was controlled with 3 combinations. Wild oats and Italian ryegrass were not controlled by any combination. All combinations except one are safe on barley and wheat. 2,4-DC alone does not control any of the weeds tested in this example, bromoxynil only controls guinagua, wild mustard and common quelite. The tables below emphasize the analysis of the data representing the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. 2,4-DC + bromoxynyl-31 29 (28 DAT)- chickweed-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 106 Tmt 140 5 7 65 67.45 83 Y 170 210 6 7 38 42.34 82 Y 170 280 7 14 35 44.1 88 Y 210 140 8 14 65 69.9 88 Y 210 210 10 9 14 38 46.68 80 Y 210 280 10 28 35 53.2 79 Y 250 140 11 28 65 74.8 84 Y 250 210 12 28 38 55.36 86 AND 250 280 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 15 - Pre-emergence efficacy (PRE) against weeds and combination selectivity of 2,4-DC and S-metolachlor tank mixture in corn. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weeding effectiveness of 2,4-DC in combination with Smetolachlor in combination tank mix as applied to corn at different rates. The weeds tested in this study were sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE), jimsonweed (Datura stramonium, DATST), nightshade (Solanum nigrum, SOLNI), 107 white grass (Digitaria sanguinalis, DIGSA), persicaria pensylvanica (Polygonum pensylvanicum, POLPY), erigerón (Conyza canadensis, ERICA), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO). The corn crop (var. Viking) was tested. Methods: To determine PRE effectiveness and damage to corn, five rates each of 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) and S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4%) were applied either alone or as the tank mix. 2,4-DC was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha and Smetolachlor was applied at 0, 267, 534, 801 or 1,070 g ai / ha. Additional treatments include application of pyroxasulfone premix plus fluthiacet-methyl (Anthem™ 23.3%) at 169.9 g ai / ha and mesotrione tank mix (Callisto®, 40% o) at 123 g plus S-metolachlor at 1252 g. The treatments were applied just after sowing white grass, jimsonweed, nightshade, sorrel, persicaria pensylvanica, Erigeron, guinagua, and corn. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Weed species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 108 Percent visual weed control and corn damage were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (whole plant death). Damage to corn is assessed in terms of discoloration and progressive weakening. Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: All sixteen combinations control (85%) white grass, nightshade, sorrel, persicaria pensylvanica and Erigeron. Nine combinations controlled jimsonweed and only three combinations controlled guinagua. All sixteen combinations caused 5% or less corn foliage discoloration while 12 combinations caused greater than 10% corn progressive weakening. 2.4DC alone controlled white grass at 170 g ai / ha or 250 g, and was safe on corn at all rates. S-metolachlor alone gave control of all species at different rates, except jimsonweed. S-metolachlor alone caused less than 10% discoloration and progressive weakening at 267 g or 534 g. The pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl premix and the mesotrione plus S-metolachlor tank mix control all species except pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl does not control stramonium. The damage to corn with pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl and mesotrione plus S-metolachlor was severe progressive weakening (50%). 109 In summary, all combinations of 2,4-DC plus Smetolachlor control (85%) whitegrass, nightshade, sorrel, persicaria pensylvanica, and erigeron. In many cases, these combinations caused greater than 10% progressive corn weakening. 2,4-DC alone controls only white grass, preferably at three indices of 170, 210 and 250 and is safe in corn at all indices. S-metolachlor controlled six of the seven species and was safe in corn at 534 g or higher rates. The tables below emphasize data analysis represent the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. ZARfrnn / ZZnZ / E / YIAI 2,4 -DC + S-metolachloro- stramonium-28 DAT Tmt 125 801 4 37 28 54.64 88 Y 125 1070 5 40 17 50.2 57 Y 170 267 6 40 17 50.2 80 Y 170 534 20 7 40 23 53.8 90 Y 170 801 8 40 28 56.8 92 AND 170 1070 9 48 17 56.84 85 AND 210 267 10 48 17 56.84 62 Y 210 534 11 48 23 59.96 68 Y 210 801 12 48 28 62.56 85 Y 210 1070 110 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + s-metolachloro- nightshade-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 5 Tmt 1 125 1070 5 33 46 63.82 90 Y 170 267 10 6 33 85 89.95 97 Y 170 534 7 33 90 93.3 93 N 170 801 8 33 95 96.65 99 Y 170 1070 9 47 46 71.38 93 Y 210 267 10 47 85 92.05 97 AND 210 534 15 11 47 90 94.7 100 Y 210 801 12 47 95 97.35 100 Y 210 1070 13 50 46 73 100 Y 250 267 14 50 85 92.5 99 Y 250 534 15 50 90 95 100 Y 250 80 1 20 16 50 95 97.5 100 AND 250 1070 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + s-metolachloro- persicaria pensylvanica-28 DAT 111 Tmt 125 1070 5 67 75 91.75 100 Y 170 267 6 67 95 98.35 100 Y 170 534 7 67 100 100 100 N 170 801 8 67 100 100 100 N 170 1070 10 9 80 75 95 100 Y 210 267 1 0 80 95 99 100 AND 210 534 11 80 100 100 100 N 210 801 12 80 100 100 100 N 210 1070 13 78 75 94.5 100 Y 250 267 15 14 78 95 98.9 100 Y 250 534 15 78 100 100 100 N 250 801 16 78 100 100 100 N 250 1070 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 20 2,4 -DC + s-metolachloro- guinagua- 28 DAT Tmt 125 267 2 15 65 70.25 43 N 125 534 3 15 82 84.7 62 N 125 801 25 4 15 85 87.25 97 Y 125 1070 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 112 Tmt N 170 1070 9 30 33 53.1 53 N 210 267 10 30 65 75.5 58 N 210 534 11 30 82 87.4 72 N 210 801 12 30 85 89.5 68 N 210 1070 10 13 32 33 54.44 37 N 250 267 14 32 65 76.2 63 N 250 534 15 32 82 87.76 92 Y 250 801 16 32 85 89.8 88 N 250 1070 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 16 – Pre-emergence effectiveness (PRE) of 2,4-DC and pyroxasulfone tank mix combination. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the preemergence effectiveness of 2,420 DC and pyroxasulfone tank mix when 2,4-DC or pyroxasulfone are applied at different rates against selected weeds from the giant grasshopper (Setaria faberi) group. , SETFA) 113 artemisufolia, AMBEL), toothed grass (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCG), white grass (Digitaria sanguinalis, DIGSA). Methods: To determine PRE efficacy, five levels of 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha and five levels of pyroxasulfone (KlH485-85WG) 0, 50, 65, 80 or 95 g ai / ha was applied either alone or as a tank mix. Additional treatments consisted of pyroxasulfone premix plus fluthiacet-methyl (Anthem™ 23.3%) at 169.9 g ai / ha, S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum, 82.4%) at 1388 g, and mesotrione tank mix (Calixto , 40%) at 123 g plus S-metolachlor at 1252 g. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied pre-emergents of nightshade, giant almorejo, almorejo, hopillo, white grass, coquia, acederón, common ragweed and toothed grass. Weed species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSL Visual percent weed control data were recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment using a scale of 0 (without ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 114 control) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: All sixteen combinations control (85%) nightshade, coquia, sorrel, toothed grass, white grass, giant almorejo, almorejo and hopillo. Of the 16 combinations, 14 combinations gave control of common ragweed. 2,4-DC alone controls coquia at 210 g ai / ha, toothed grass and white grass at 125 g, giant grass and green grass at 170 g. Regardless of the indices, pyroxasulfone controls all species except common ragweed, which is not controlled in any case. The pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl premix and the mesotrione plus S-metolachlor tank mix control all species. S-metolachlor controls nightshade grass, sorrel, toothed grass, white grass and the three species of alopecurus in the fields. In summary, almost all combinations are carried out effectively (85% control) on all weed species. 2,4DC alone provides control of coquia at 210 g ai / ha and controls all grass species, except hopillo at 170 g. Pyroxasulfone at all rates controls all weeds except common ragweed. The tables below emphasize data analysis representing the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. 115 2,4 í-DC + pyroxasulfone- common ragweed- 28 DAT Tmt 80 4 33 70 79.9 95 Y 125 95 5 40 40 64 80 Y 170 50 6 40 53 71.8 85 Y 170 65 7 40 40 64 90 Y 170 80 8 40 70 82 93 Y 170 95 9 40 40 64 90 AND 210 50 10 40 53 71.8 82 Y 210 65 11 40 40 64 93 Y 210 80 12 40 70 82 83 Y 210 95 13 45 40 67 90 Y 250 50 14 45 53 74.15 85 Y 250 65 15 45 4 0 67 90 AND 250 80 16 45 70 83.5 90 AND 250 95 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 17 – Pre-emergent weed efficiency and sugarcane selectivity with 2,4-DC and isoxaflutol tank mix combination. In this example, a study was carried out to determine the 116 weed effectiveness and damage to sugarcane, when 2,4-DC or isoxaflutole, are applied either alone or as a pre-emergent tank mix against weeds: Ivy-leaved morning glory (Ipomoea hederacea, IPOHE), acetyl (Bidens pilosa, BIDPI), yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus, CYPES), white grass (Digitaria sanguinalis, DIGSA), and sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE). The crop tested in this study was sugar cane (var. CTC 20). Methods: To determine weed efficiency and sugarcane selectivity, 2,4-DC (SC 36%) and isoxaflutole (Balance Flexx®, 20%) PRE were applied either alone or as tank mix members at the mentioned rates. next. 2,4-DC was applied at 500, 750, and 1000 g ai / ha, while isoxaflutol was applied at 80, 100, and 120 g ai / ha. Two commercial standards were included, clomazone (Comando®3ME, 31.4%) at 11 20 g ai / ha and mesotrione (Callisto® 40%) at 105 g. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied PRE to sugar cane (var. CTC 20), ivy-leaf morning glory, acetillo, yellow nutsedge, white grass and sorrel. Weed species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil. The soil was watered before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the spray chamber ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 117 compressed air line at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 PSI. Percentage weed control and sugarcane damage were recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (entire plant death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: Tank mix treatments of 2,4-DC with isoxaflutol at all controlled rates ((>85% weed control) ivy leaf morning glory, acetyl, whitegrass, and sorrel. No tank mix treatment. controlled yellow nutsedge. All tank mix treatments caused sugarcane discoloration greater than 20%. Control of ivy-leafed bellflower with 2,4-DC alone was achieved at 1000 g, while acetyl was controlled at 750 g of 2,4-DC. White grass and sorrel were controlled with 2,4-DC alone at 500 g or higher rates. Isoxaflutol alone at 80 g or higher rates controls acetyl, white grass and sorrel. Isoxaflutol alone at Three indices cause discoloration of sugar cane in the range of 26 to 42%. Mesotrione at 105 g controls all weeds except ivy-leaved morning glory. Clomazone at 1120 g controls acetyl, white grass and sorrel. In summary, the tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC and isoxaflutol control (>85% weed control) all weeds. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 118 except yellow nutsedge. All 12 tank mix combinations did >20% discoloration on sugarcane at 28 DAT. 2,4-DC alone controls four of the five, ivy-leaf morning glory, acetillo, white grass and sorrel were controlled. The tables below emphasize an analysis of data representing the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. 2,4-DC + isoxaflutol- ivy leaf morning glory-28 DAT Tmt 5 Y 750 80 5 78 73 94.06 98 Y 750 100 6 78 81 95.82 97 Y 750 120 15 7 88 69 96.28 98 Y 1000 80 8 88 73 96.76 99 Y 1000 100 9 88 81 97.72 100 Y 1000 120 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β and p index - g ia / ha Example 18 – Pre-Emergence Effectiveness (PRE) with 2,4-DC and Clomazone Tank Mix Combination. In this example the effectiveness of preemergence 25 was studied when the combination of 2,4-DC and clomazone tank mix 119 are applied to different indices against the following species: annual winter grass (Poa annua, POAAN); tares (Bromus secalinus, BROSE); wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA); reed (Elymus repens, AGRRE); field violet (Viola arvensis, VIOAR); field alopecuros (Alopecuros myosuroides, ALOMY); wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI); smoked hay (Apera spica-venti; APESP); hopillo (Setaria pumila, SETPU); white grass (Eleusine indica, ELEIN) Methods To determine PRE efficacy, four rates of 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) and three rates of clomazone (3ME Command, 31.4%) were applied either alone or as a tank mix. 2,4-DC was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha and clomazone was applied at 0, 60, 90 or 120 g ai / ha. Additional treatments include application of metazachlor (Butisan®, 43.1%) at 750 g ai / ha, napropamide (Devrinol DF®, 50%) at 1260 g ai / ha, and dimetachlor (Teridox®, 48%) at 1000 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied just after sowing annual winter grass, tares, wild oats, reeds, field violets, field alopecia, wild canary grass, smoked hay, hopillo and broom. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after the ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 120 treatment application. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (whole plant death). Raw data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: Of the twelve combinations of 2,4-DC and clomazone, no combination provided control (>85% damage) of annual winter grass, field alopecia, or wild canary grass. Three combinations suppress (70-84% damage) field violet, reed and hopillo, six combinations suppress smoked hay. Wild oats were controlled by five combinations, tares by 10 combinations, and brush were controlled by all tank mix combinations. Applied alone, 2,4-DC controls brush at >170 g ai / ha, while clomazone controls brush at all rates and tares at 120 g, other weeds were not controlled by any herbicide applied alone. Metazachlor controls all weeds; Napropamide controls all weeds, except field alopecia. Dimetachlor controls annual winter grass, reed, wild canary grass, smoked hay, hopillo and brush. In summary, 2,4-DC alone provides good coverage ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 121 against brush. Combinations of 2,4-DC plus clomazone control (>85%) brush. Tares were synergistically controlled by the test combinations. Although wild oats were controlled by 5 combinations, the following table provides unexpected synergistic effects specific to the present combinations. No combination controlled or repressed annual wintergrass, field alopecia, or wild canary grass. 2,4-DC + clomazone- tares-28 DAT Tm t 5 11 75 77.75 89 Y 170 90 15 6 11 97 97.33 98 Y 170 120 7 12 40 47.2 86 Y 210 60 8 12 75 78 92 Y 210 90 9 12 97 97.36 96 N 210 120 10 25 40 55 89 AND 250 60 20 11 25 75 81.25 85 Y 250 90 12 25 97 97.75 96 N 250 120 25 a - index measurement of synergistic behavior ¡ce β and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + clomazone- wild oats as Y = YES and -28 DAT N = NO 122 Tmt 77 Y 170 90 6 0 77 77 91 Y 170 120 7 10 40 46 63 Y 210 60 8 10 47 52.3 87 Y 210 90 10 9 10 77 79.3 94 Y 210 120 10 20 40 52 95 Y 25 0 60 11 20 47 57.6 82 AND 250 90 12 20 77 81.6 88 AND 250 120 ΖΛβΙτΩη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 19 - 2,4-DC weed efficacy and crop safety when tank mixed with diflufenican and PRE applied. In this example, a greenhouse study was conducted to determine crop selectivity and weed efficacy when 2,4-DC was applied at multiple pre-emergence (PRE) rates, alone or in combination with diflufenican against the following weeds: Ryegrass Italian (Lolium perenne L. ssp. multiflorum, LOLMU); wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH); wild oats (Avena 123 fatwa, AVEFA); annual winter grass (Poa annua, POAAN); reed (Elymus repens, AGRRE); tares (Bromus secalinus, BROSE). In this study, the crops tested include wheat, barley and rapeseed (OSR). Methods: To determine the weed effectiveness and selectivity of wheat, barley or OSR, 2,4-DC (CS 36.7%) and diflufenican (CS 19.5%) were applied as pre-emergents, either alone or as tank mix members at the following rates . 2,4-DC was applied at 125, 170, 210 and 250 g ai / ha, while diflufenican was applied at 50, 75 and 100 g ai / ha. Pyroxasulfone (KIH-485, 85%) at 74.3 g ai / ha, pendimethalin (Prowl 3.3EC, 37.4%) at 1200 g ai / ha, or a premix of chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron-methyl (Report Extra, 75%) at 15.8 g ai / ha were applied as commercial standards. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. All plants were sown directly into the 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. 2,4-DC and diflufenican were applied alone or in combination as a tank mix at each rate mentioned below. Herbicides included as standards for comparison were pyroxasulfone, pendimethalin, and a premix of chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron-methyl, all applied at rates labeled as above. The treatments were repeated 3 times. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After the application 124 the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSL Visual percent weed control and crop safety were recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT , for its acronym in English), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) applied at 125 g ai / ha provided suppression (70-84% damage) to wild poppy, higher rates controlled (85% damage) to wild poppy. No other weeds in this trial were controlled by any independent application of 2,4-DC. Wheat, barley and rapeseed (OSR) were safe (<10% damage) with all 2,4-DC treatments alone represented. 2,4-DC plus diflufenican as a tank mix controls field violet with all combinations, wild poppy with 11 of 12 combinations, annual winter grass with 7 combinations, and Italian ryegrass with 6 combinations. All combinations are barley safe; wheat was moderately damaged (12%) by a single tank mix combination, while OSR was damaged by all combinations of 2,4-DC plus 125 diflufenican. Herbicide standards tested for comparison of efficacy and safety include pyroxasulfone at 74.3 g, which controls all weeds except field violet and is safe on wheat only; pendimethalin applied at 1200 g controls wild poppy and field violet and is safe for barley; and a premix of chlorsulfuron plus metsulfuron-methyl (Report Extra) at 15.8 g, which also controls wild poppy and field violet, while providing wheat selectivity. In summary, 2,4-DC applied alone controls wild poppy when applied >170 g ai / ha and is safe in all crops at all rates. Wild poppy and annual winter grass were controlled with most combinations of 2,4-DC plus diflufenican, while field violet was controlled with all combinations. 2,4-DC plus diflufenican controlled Italian ryegrass with most combinations when 2,4-DC was applied at >210 g. Barley was not damaged by any combination while wheat was moderately damaged (12%) by one combination; rapeseed was damaged by all tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC plus diflufenican. The tables below highlighted the analysis of the data regarding the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested. 2,4-DC + diflufenican- Italian ryegrass-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 126 Tmt 50 5 37 20 49.6 70 Y 170 75 6 37 55 71.65 87 Y 170 100 7 47 1 47.53 73 Y 210 50 8 47 20 57.6 91 Y 210 75 10 9 47 55 76.15 93 Y 210 100 10 63 1 63. 37 86 AND 250 50 11 63 20 70.4 87 AND 250 75 12 63 55 83.35 93 Y 250 100 15 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as β index - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + diflufenican- winter grass an Y = YES and N = NO ual-28 DAT Tmt X Y Expected observed synergy0 2,4-DC^ Diflufenicanp 1 0 57 57 83 Y 125 50 20 2 0 85 85 68 N 125 75 3 0 86 86 81 N 125 100 4 0 57 57 85 Y 170 50 5 0 85 85 75 N 1 70 75 6 0 86 86 92 Y 170 100 7 3 57 58.29 73 Y 210 50 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 127 Tmt 0 75 12 13 86 87.82 90 AND 250 100 ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 20 - 2,4-DC plus dimethenamide-P-pre-emergent weed efficacy (PRE). In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness when 2,4-DC PRE is applied at multiple rates alone or combined with dimethenamide-P as a preemergence treatment against the following weeds: common quelite (Chenopodium album , CHEAL); thistle thistle (Cirsium arvense, SPIN); wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris, CAPBU); sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexas, AMARE); field alopecurus (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY), giant grasshopper (Setaria faberi, SETFA); brush (Eleusine indica, ELEIN); chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME). Materials: 2,4-DC-21 (36.7% CS): 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha alone and as a tank mix with dimethenamide-P 128 Dimethanamide-P (Outlook, 63.9%): 250, 375, 500 g ai / ha in combination with 2,4-DC and alone, additional treatment only with 750 g ai / ha. Weeds: common quelite glen thistle wild mustard Shepherd's Bag Acedrone Alopecuro of the fields giant almorejo Brush Chickweed Methods: All plants were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. 2,4-DC and dimethenamide-P were applied alone or in combination as a tank mix at each rate mentioned below. The herbicides included as standards for comparison were metazachlor plus dimethenamide-P (500 g) as a tank mix combination. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were repeated 3 times. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. Afterwards the application trays are placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 129 trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), with a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (whole plant death). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) applied alone at 125 g ai / ha controls (>85% damage) thistle, giant grasshopper, brushweed, and chickweed; at 210 g of shepherd's bag was also controlled by 2.4DC. All tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC plus dimethenamide-P control leaf thistle, giant beetle, brush, chickweed, shepherd's purse, and sorrel. Common quelite was controlled or eliminated (70-84% damage) when 2,4-DC was applied at 250 g as the tank mix with any dimethenamide-P rate. Wild mustard was suppressed with 4 tank mix combinations; the alopecury of the fields was suppressed with a combination. Dimethenamide-P alone controls sorrel, giant grasshopper and brush with all indices; chickweed at > 375 g; shepherd's purse at > 500 g; and thistle thistle at 750 g. The common quelite or wild mustard were suppressed by certain rates of dimethenamide-P alone, the field alopecurus was not controlled or suppressed by any rate of 130 dimethenamide-P applied alone. The combination of metazachlor at 500 g plus dimethenamide-P at 500 g included for comparison controls all weeds tested except wild mustard. In summary, 2,4-DC applied alone controls thistle, giant grasshopper, brush and chickweed at all indices, shepherd's purse was controlled at > 210 g ai / ha. Tank mixes of 2,4-DC with dimethenamide-P in all cases control all of the aforementioned weeds, in addition to sorrel; Common quelite was controlled with certain combinations when 2,4-DC was applied at 250 g. The tables below emphasize unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + dimethenamide-P- common quelite-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 70 250 5 28 43 58.96 58 N 170 375 6 28 84 88.48 48 N 170 500 7 33 22 47.74 48 Y 210 250 8 33 43 61.81 55 N 210 375 9 33 84 89.28 75 N 210 500 10 62 22 70.3 6 83 Y 250 250 11 62 43 78.34 94 Y 250 375 12 62 84 93.92 86 N 250 500 131 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + dimethenamide-P- shepherd's purse-28 DAT Tmt 250 5 68 58 86.56 95 Y 170 375 10 6 68 94 98.08 96 N 170 500 7 86 20 88.8 96 Y 210 250 8 86 58 94.12 96 Y 210 375 9 86 94 99.16 98 N 210 500 10 95 2 0 96 99 Y 250 250 15 11 95 58 97.9 98 Y 250 375 12 95 94 99.7 98 N 250 500 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 21 – Weed Efficacy of 2,4-DC When Mixed in S-Metolachlor Pre-Emergence (PRE) Tank on European Weeds In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weeding effectiveness when multiple rates of 2,4-DC are applied alone or as a tank mix with S-metolachlor at 132 various indices against weeds: Reed (Elymus repens, AGREE) chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME); abutilon (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH); hopillo (Setaria pumila, SETLU); almorejo (Setaria viridis, SETVI); common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL); toothed grass (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCG). Methods: 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) PRE was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4%) at 0, 267, 534, 801 or 1070 g ai / ha. Pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl (Anthem™, 23.3%) was applied at 1699 g ai / ha, and the mesotrione tank mix (Callisto®, 40%) was applied at 123 g plus S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum® , 82.4%) at 1252 g were included as norms for comparison. Reed, chickweed, abutilon, hopillo, almorejo, common quelite and toothed grass were direct sown in 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied using compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 40 psi and a spray volume of 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment. (DAT, for its acronym in English). Weed control was evaluated using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 133 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: 2,4-DC applied alone controls (>85% damage) chickweed at all indices, toothed grass at >210 g ai / ha, and horseweed at 250 g. S-metolachlor applied only controls hopillo, almorejo and toothed grass at all indices, reed or chickweed at 534 g, and common quelite at 801 g. The 16 tank mixes of encapsulated 2,4-DC plus Smetolachlor control chickweed, hopillo, moth, and toothgrass. The reed was controlled by 10 tank mix combinations; the other 6 combinations provide reed suppression (in the range of 70 - 84% control). Common quelite was controlled by 13 combinations of 2,4-DC plus S-metolachlor, suppressed by 2 combinations, and uncontrolled by 1 combination. Abutilone is not controlled or suppressed by any treatment containing 2,4-DC or S-metolachlor, either alone or in combination. Both standards tested, fluthiacetmethyl plus pyroxasulfone premix (Anthem), or mesotrione plus S-metolachlor as a tank mix, controlled all weeds in this study. In summary, 2,4-DC applied alone controlled chickweed at all indices, and toothed grass and horseweed at certain indices, while other species were not controlled by 2,4-DC alone, if at all. S-metolachlor only controls hopillo, almorejo, and dentate grass in all indices; reed, chickweed and common quelite ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 134 controlled certain indices. All tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC plus S-metolachlor control chickweed, hopillo, almorejo, and toothgrass; most combinations control common quelite and reed. The following table emphasizes the 5 unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + S-metolachloro- common quelite-28 DAT Tmt 1070 5 2 7 8.86 75 Y 170 267 6 2 75 15.5 87 Y 170 534 15 7 2 97 97.06 94 N 170 801 8 2 96 96.08 96 N 170 1070 9 8 7 14.44 86 Y 210 267 10 8 75 77 89 AND 210 534 11 8 97 97.24 95 N 210 801 20 12 8 96 96.32 96 N 210 1070 13 8 7 14.44 82 Y 250 267 14 8 75 77 91 Y 250 534 15 8 97 97.24 96 N 250 801 16 8 96 96.32 96 N 250 1070 135 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 22 – d 2,4-DC Weed Efficacy when Tank Mixed with S-metolachlor (PRE) Pre-Emergence in Brazilian Weed Spectrum In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness when multiple rates of 2,4-DC are applied alone or as a tank mix with S-metolachlor at various pre-emergent rates against the following weeds: sorghum Aleppo (Sorghum halepense, SORHA); wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR); Commelina (Commelina benghalensis, COMBE); huinar (Sida spinosa, SIDSP); acetyl (Bidens pilosa, BIDPI); bellflower (Ipomoea spp. IPO sp): common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL); brush (Eleusine indica, ELEIN). Materials and methods 2,4-DC (36.7% CS) PRE was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4%) at 0, 267, 534, 801 or 1070 g ai / ha. Pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl (Anthem™, 23.3%) applied at 169.9 g ai / ha, and mesotrione tank mix (CalIisto®, 40%) at 123 g plus S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4% ) at 1252 g were included as standards for comparison. Aleppo sorghum, wild mustard, commelina, huinar, acetillo, bellflower, common quelite, and broom were sown directly in fiber trays 136 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 40 psi and a spray volume of 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment. (DAT, for its acronym in English). Weed control was evaluated using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (entire plant death). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: The 2,4-DC applied alone control (>85% damage) Aleppo sorghum at 210 g ai / ha, common quelite at 250 g and brush at all indices. 2,4-DC plus S-metolachlor as a tank mix controls Aleppo sorghum, common quelite and brush with all combinations, commelina was controlled with 13 of 16 combinations, (the other 3 combinations provide control in the range of 70- 84%). Eleven combinations gave just control to huinar, while three combinations provided control. Five combinations control acetyl, and no combination controls wild mustard or morning glory. The S ΖΛβΙτΩη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 137 metolachlor is applied only to control Aleppo sorghum and broom at all indices and to control commelina, humar and common quelite at 801 g. Mesotrione plus S-metolachlor as a tank mix controls all weeds, fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone premix controls all weeds except acetyl. In summary, 2,4-DC applied alone controls brush at all indices, while it controls Aleppo sorghum and common quelite at certain indices, other species were not controlled by 2,4-DC alone. S-metolachlor only controls Aleppo sorghum and escobilla at all indices, commelina, huinar and quelite common at certain indices. All tank mix combinations control Aleppo sorghum, common quelite, and brush; and more controls commelina, while certain combinations control huinar and acetillo. Wild mustard and morning glory were not controlled by any type of treatment containing 2,4-DC or S-metolachlor. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + S-metolachloro-commelina-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 070 5 13 67 71.29 95 AND 170 267 138 Tmt 6 2 Y 210 267 10 43 72 84.04 92 Y 210 534 11 43 94 96.58 95 N 210 801 12 43 90 94.3 96 Y 210 1070 13 40 67 80.2 80 N 250 267 10 14 40 72 83.2 93 AND 250 534 15 40 94 96.4 97 AND 250 801 16 40 90 94 96 Y 250 1070 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO 15 β index and p - g ia / ha 2.4- DC + S-metolachloro- commeli na-28 DAT Tmt X Y Expected observed synergy0 2 ,4-DC*3 S-metolachlorp 1 37 40 62.2 40 N 125 267 2 37 50 68.5 40 N 125 534 20 3 37 52 69.76 65 N 125 801 4 37 62 76.06 53 N 125 1070 5 40 40 64 40 N 170 267 6 40 50 70 62 N 170 534 7 40 52 71.2 89 Y 170 801 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 139 Tmt 12 50 62 81 95 Y 210 1070 13 40 40 64 53 N 250 267 14 40 50 70 80 Y 250 534 15 40 52 71.2 90 Y 250 801 16 40 62 77.2 90 Y 250 1070 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 23 - Weed efficiency and sugarcane selectivity when 2,4-DC plus sulfentrazone are applied as pre-emergents (PRE) as a tank mix. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed efficacy and selectivity of sugarcane when 2,4-DC PRE was applied at multiple rates alone or in combination with sulfentrazone as a tank mix against the following weeds: grass white (Digitaria sanguinalis, DIGSA); sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE); yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus, CYPES); acetyl (Biden pilosa, BIDPI); Morgningglory sp. (Ipomoea spp). The crop tested in this study was sugarcane (CTC20). 140 Materials: Herbicides: 2,4-DC (36% SC): 500, 750 or 1000 g ai / ha alone and as a tank mix with sulfentrazone Sulfentrazone (Spartan 4F, 39.6%): 210, 315 or 420 g ai / ha alone or in combination with 2,4-DC Isoxaflutol (Balance Flexx, 20%): 85 g ai / ha Mesotrione (Callisto, 40%): 105 g ai / ha Clomazone (Command 3ME, 31.4%): 1,120 g ai / ha Weeds: white grass yellow nutsedge Acedrone Acetillo Morningglory sp Crop: Sugar cane (CTC20) Methods: All weeds were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. Sugarcane was sown directly into 6 (15.24 cm) plastic containers using 3-4 (7.62 cm x 10.16 cm) sugarcane cuttings, oriented up the shoot, with the shoot leaf gusset removed. 2,4-DC and sulfentrazone were applied alone or in combination as tank mix at each mentioned rate at zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi 141 continued. The herbicides included as standards for comparison were isoxaflutole, mesotrione and clomazone. The treatments were repeated 3 times. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percentage weed control was recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (complete plant death). Visual percentage sugarcane damage was recorded at 21 and 28 DAT, using a scale from 0 (no damage, observed as bleaching, progressive weakening or necrosis) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: 2,4-DC (36% SC) is applied alone at >500 g ai / ha controls (>85% damage) white grass and sorrel. The 2,4-DC at 1000 g suppresses (70-84% damage) acetyl and bell. All tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC plus sulfentrazone control whitegrass, yellow nutsedge, sorrel, acetyl, and bluebell. Sulfentrazone alone controls acetyl at 315 g; all other weeds were controlled with all sulfentrazone indices. 142 Mesotrione at 105 g controls all weeds except morning glory, isoxaflutol at 85 g or clomazone at 1120 g controls white grass, sorrel and acetyl. Sugarcane is safe (<10% damage) with all treatments in this trial except isoxaflutole, which caused 12% damage. The combination of 2,4-DC plus sulfentrazone provides good efficacy on all weeds, while maintaining crop selectivity. Other crop segments should be explored for weed spectrum and crop selectivity with these two herbicides. In summary, 2,4-DC-4 SC applied alone controls whitegrass and sorrel at all indices. All tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC with sulfentrazone controlled all weeds in the trial. Sugarcane is safe with all applications of 2,4-DC or sulfentrazone, alone or in combination. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone- acetyl-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 50 210 5 68 100 100 97 N 750 315 6 68 98 99.36 97 N 750 420 143 Tmt ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 24 - PRE Efficacy of 2,4-DC and Pyroxasulfone Tank Mix Combinations. In this example, a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the preemergence effectiveness (PRE) of 2,4-DC and pyroxasulfone tank mixtures when 2,4DC or pyroxasulfone are applied at different rates. The weeds tested include giant beetle (Setaria faberi, SETFA), beetle (Setaria virdis, SETVI), hopillo (Setaria pumila, SETLU), nightshade (Solanum nigrum, SOLNI), coquia (Coquia scoparia, KCHSC), sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia, AMBEL), toothed grass (Echínochloa crus-galli, ECHCG), white grass (Digitaria sanguinalis, DIGSA). Materials and methods To determine PRE efficacy, five levels of 2,4-DC-21 (36.7% CS) 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha and five levels of pyroxasulfone (KlH485-85WG) 0, 50, 65, 80 or 95 g ai / ha applied either alone or as a tank mix. Additional treatments consisted of pyroxasulfone premix plus fluthiacet-methyl 144 (Anthem™ 23.3%) at 169.9 g ai / ha, S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4%) at 1388 g, and mesotrione tank mix (CalIisto®, 40%) at 123 g more S-metolachlor at 1252 g. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied pre-emergents of nightshade, giant ambrosia, almorejo, hopillo, white grass, coquia, sorrel, common ragweed and toothed grass. Weed species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was repeated three times. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percentual weed control data were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (whole plant death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at a 95% confidence interval. Results: All sixteen combinations control (>85%) nightshade grass, coquia, sorrel, toothed grass, white grass, giant almorejo, almorejo and hopillo. Of the 16 combinations, 14 combinations gave control of common ragweed. 2,4-DC alone controls coquia at 210 g ai / ha, toothed grass and white grass at 145 125 g, giant almorejo and almorejo at 170 g. Regardless of the indices, pyroxasulfone controls all species except common ragweed, which does not control it at any indices. The pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl premix and the mesotrione plus S-metolachlor tank mix control all species. Smetolachlor controls nightshade grass, sorrel, toothed grass, white grass, and the three species of almorejo. In summary, almost all combinations are carried out effectively (>85% control) on all weed species. 2,4DC alone controlled coquia at 210 g ai / ha and controlled all grass species, except hopillo at 170 g. Pyroxasulfone at all rates controls all weeds except common ragweed. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects analyzed by the unexpected synergistic effects of the combinations tested 2,4-DC + pyroxasulfone- foveolated bell-28 DAT Tmt 5 6 28 73 80.56 95 AND 170 50 7 28 95 96.4 97 Y 170 65 8 28 97 97.84 98 Y 170 80 9 28 100 100 83 N 170 95 146 Tmt 5 N 210 95 14 27 73 80.29 98 Y 250 50 15 27 95 96.35 100 Y 250 65 16 27 97 97.81 92 N 250 80 10 17 27 100 100 97 N 250 95 ZARfrnn / ZZnZ / E / YIAI α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + pyroxasulfone- Aleppo sorghum PRE-28 DAT Tmt 0 N 125 95 6 14 69 73.34 100 Y 170 50 20 7 17 100 100 100 N 170 65 8 23 100 100 100 N 170 80 9 33 100 100 100 N 170 95 10 14 69 73.34 0 N 210 50 11 17 100 100 100 N 210 65 147 Tmt 00 N 250 65 16 23 100 100 100 N 250 80 16 27 97 97.81 92 N 250 80 17 27 100 100 97 N 250 95 10 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and ρ - g ia / ha 2,4- DC + pyroxasulfone i - reed- 28 DAT Tmt 92 AND 125 95 5 3 23 25.31 89 Y 170 50 6 3 35 36.95 83 Y 170 65 20 7 3 70 70.9 89 Y 170 80 8 3 85 85.45 92 Y 170 95 9 13 23 33.01 0 N 210 50 10 13 35 43.45 90 AND 210 65 11 13 70 73.9 83 AND 210 80 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 148 Tmt 74.5 86 AND 250 80 15 16 15 85 87.25 93 AND 250 95 16 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 25 – 2,4-DC Weed Efficacy and Crop Selectivity When Pyroxasulfone Pre-Emergence (PRE) Tank Mix. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness and crop selectivity with multiple rates of 2,4-DC applied alone or as a tank mix with pyroxasulfone at various PRE rates against jimsonweed (Datura stramonium , DATST); casalina (Euphorbia heterophylla, EUHHL), acetyl (Bidens pilosa, BIDPI); nightshade (Solarium nigrum, SOLNI). The crop tested in this study was corn. Materials and methods: 2,4-DC-21 (36.7% CS) PRE was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210 or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with pyroxasulfone (KIH-485, 85% WP) at 0, 50, 65, 80 or 95 g ai / ha. Pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl (Anthem™, 23.3%) applied at 169.9 g ai / ha, Smetolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4%) applied at 1389 g, and 149 tank mix of mesotrione (Callisto®, 40%) at 123 g plus Smetolachlor (Dual II Magnum®, 82.4%) at 1252 g were included as standards for comparison. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Strawberry, casalina, acetillo, nightshade, and corn were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application, the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 40 psi and a spray volume of 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle. Visual percent weed control and crop data data were recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT). Weed control was evaluated using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (entire plant death). Crop damage was evaluated for discoloration, progressive weakening and necrosis, using a scale from 0 (no damage) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4-DC applied only controls (>85% damage) nightshade at 170 g ai / ha, did not provide control of other weeds tested when applied alone at any of the rates, and is safe in ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 150 corn at all indices. 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone controls nightshade with all tank mix combinations, controls jimsonweed with all but one combination, controls casaline with two combinations, and acetyl with one combination. No tank mix combinations caused discoloration damage (>10%) to corn, 7 combinations caused moderate progressive weakening (11-20%) to corn, and 3 combinations caused severe progressive weakening (>20%) to corn. No tank mix combination of 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone caused necrosis greater than 10%. When total combined damage was considered, (percent discoloration + percent progressive weakening + percent necrosis) only one tank mix combination is safe in corn; 5 combinations were moderately safe while 10 combinations caused severe damage to corn. Fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone controlled jimsonweed and nightshade and caused serious progressive weakening of corn. S-metolachlor only controls nightshade and also causes serious progressive weakening of corn. Mesotrione plus S-metolachlor control all weeds tested and cause moderate progressive weakening of corn. In summary, 2,4-DC applied alone controls nightshade at most rates; other weeds were not controlled by 2,4-DC alone. 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone controls nightshade with all applications, jimsonweed with most combinations, and casaline or acetyl with certain applications. 151 tank mix. All rates of 2,4-DC alone are safe on corn, tank mixes of 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone damaged corn with most applications. The following table emphasizes the data analyzed for unexpected synergistic effects of the 5 combinations tested. 2,4-DC + pyroxasulfone- stramonium-28 DAT Tmt 1 47 60 78.8 91 Y 170 50 6 47 70 84.1 92 Y 170 65 7 47 85 92.05 93 Y 170 80 15 8 47 85 92.05 96 Y 170 95 9 70 60 88 91 Y 210 50 10 70 70 91 95 AND 210 65 11 70 85 95.5 93 N 210 80 12 70 85 95.5 92 N 210 95 20 13 73 60 89.2 98 Y 250 50 14 73 70 91.9 96 Y 250 65 15 73 85 95.95 97 Y 250 80 16 73 85 95.95 98 AND 250 95 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO 152 zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4- DC + pyroxasulfone- PRE- casalin-28 DAT Tmt 80 4 2 79 79.42 97 Y 125 95 5 7 40 44.2 10 N 170 50 6 7 47 50.71 50 N 170 65 10 7 7 60 62.8 80 Y 170 80 8 7 79 80.47 83 Y 170 95 9 38 40 62.8 20 N 210 50 10 38 47 67.14 87 Y 210 65 11 38 60 75.2 30 N 210 80 15 12 38 79 86.98 57 N 210 95 13 47 40 68.2 12 N 250 50 14 47 47 71.91 4 0 N 250 65 15 47 60 78.8 53 N 250 80 16 47 79 88.87 83 N 250 95 20 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2.4- DC + pyroxasulfone- acetyl-28 DAT Tmt X Y Expected observed synergy0 2.4 -DCp Pyroxasulfone” 25 1 35 47 65.55 83 Y 125 50 153 Tmt 50 6 50 63 81.5 74 N 170 65 7 50 60 80 77 N 170 80 8 50 75 87.5 73 N 170 95 9 57 47 77.21 84 Y 210 50 10 10 57 63 84.09 67 N 210 65 11 57 60 82.8 81 N 210 80 12 57 75 89.25 83 N 210 95 13 52 47 74.56 82 Y 250 50 14 52 63 82.24 65 N 250 65 15 15 52 60 80.8 60 N 250 80 16 52 75 88 70 N 250 95 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 26 – Pre-emergence efficacy (PRE) of 2,4-DC and sulfentrazone combinations in j uncies. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine sedge control when 2,4-DC or sulfentrazone are applied alone or in combination against yellow nutsedge (Cyperus 154 esculentus, CYPES), pimientillo (Cyperus rotundas, CYPRO), commelina (Commelina benghalensis, COMBE). Materials and methods: To evaluate the effectiveness of combinations of 2,4-DC (36% SC) and sulfentrazone (Spartan 4F®, 39.6%) of sedges, 2,4-DC at 50, 100 or 200 g ai / ha is applied as a mixture of tank with sulfentrazone at 105, 210 or 315 g ai / ha. Each herbicide was applied alone at the given rates and 2,4-DC alone at 400 g and clomazone (Command 3ME® 31.4%) at 100 g, plus sulfentrazone at 315 g were applied as additional treatments. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied at the time of sowing the yellow nutsedge, pepper and commelina. Plant species were planted in fiber trays containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control was recorded at 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control) to 100 (entire stand death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 155 When 2,4-DC and sulfentrazone were applied together, seven of the nine tank mix combinations provided yellow nutsedge control at 28 DAT. 2,4-DC at all rates when applied with sulfentrazone at 315 g provides pepper control. In most cases, commelina was controlled with combination when sulfentrazone was applied at 210 or 315 g. 2,4-DC alone does not provide sedge control at any rate except commelina at 400 g. Sulfentrazone alone controls yellow nutsedge at all rates, commelina at 210 or 315 g and does not control capsicum at any rate. The combination of clomazone and sulfentrazone controls all three sedges at 28 DAT. In summary, the combinations of 2,4-DC plus sulfentrazone control yellow nutsedge in most cases, while only three combinations control capsicum. Commelina control was observed with the tank mix combination when sulfentrazone was applied at 315 g ai / ha. 2,4-DC alone gave the commeline control at 400 g alone. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic results observed in the combination tested against paprika. 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone- p i m i e nt i I lo - 28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 156 Tmt 105 8 20 77 81.6 73 N 200 210 9 20 83 86.4 90 AND 200 315 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 27 - Weed Efficacy of Tank Mix / Culture Selectivity of 2,4-DC with Metazachlor. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness / cell selectivity of metazachlor preemergent 2,4-DC (PRE). The weeds tested in this study were Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne, multiflorum, LOLMU), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), annual winter grass (Poa annua, POAAN), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), alopecuro of the fields (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME), wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH). The crops tested were wheat and canola. Materials and methods To determine the effectiveness of PRE weed and selectivity of 157 crop, 2,4-DC (36% SC) was applied alone at 31.25, 62.5, 125, 250 or 375 or in combination with metazachlor (Butisan® S 43.1%) at 250, 500 and 750 g ai / ha. Other treatments include single application of metazachlor at the rate mentioned above, tank mix of clomazone plus metazachlor at 250 + 750 g, and a premix of clomazone plus metazachlor at 100 g ai / ha. Treatments were applied before pre-emergence of Italian ryegrass, wild oats, wild alopecia, wild canary grass, chickweed, common quelite, wild poppy, wild mustard, annual winter grass, canola and wheat. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (entire plant death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Wheat and wild poppy were estimated at 14 and 21 DAT. Results: In this study 2,4-DC when administered alone provides 158 good control of field alopecia at 375 g; controls Italian ryegrass at 125 g, and chickweed at all indices. Metazachlor only controls field alopecia at 750 g and also controls annual winter grass, Italian ryegrass, quelite, wild canary grass and chickweed at all indices. When administered together, all fifteen combinations of 2,4-DC in combination with metazachlor control wild poppy, annual winter grass, Italian ryegrass, quelite, wild canary grass, and chickweed. Of the 15 combinations, wild oats and field oats were controlled by 6 and 8 combinations, respectively. All combinations caused severe damage to wheat (>60%) at 21 DAT and to canola at 28 DAT. No combination produced control of wild mustard. Clomazone and metazachlor (tank mix) control annual wintergrass, Italian ryegrass, wild canary grass, quelite and chickweed. Clomazone and metazachlor (Premix) however, provide control of annual winter grass, Italian ryegrass, quelite, wild canary grass and chickweed. In summary, all combinations of 2,4-DC and metazachlor completely control wild poppy, annual winter grass, Italian ryegrass, quelite, wild canary grass, and chickweed at 28 DAT. Control of wild oats and field alopecia was observed with almost half of the combinations. All combinations resulted in greater damage to wheat at 21 DAT and canola at 28 DAT. 2,4-DC alone gave control of chickweed at all indices, ryegrass ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 159 Italian at 125 g and Alopecuro de los Campos at 375 g. The following tables emphasize the unexpected synergistic results observed in the combinations tested. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 5 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone- wild oat-28 DAT Tmt 25 750 10 4 27 53 65.69 60 N 62.5 250 5 27 73 80.29 75 N 62.5 500 6 27 80 85.4 85 N 62.5 750 7 37 53 70.39 65 N 125 250 8 37 73 82.99 7 8 N 125 500 15 9 37 80 87.4 87 N 125 750 10 55 53 78.85 72 N 250 250 11 55 73 87.85 80 N 250 500 12 55 80 91 90 N 250 750 13 43 53 73.21 75 Y 375 250 20 14 43 73 84.61 8 5 AND 375 500 15 43 80 88.6 95 AND 375 750 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone- wild oats-28 DAT 161 apply alone or in three-way combination. The weeds tested in this study are sorrel (Amaranth retroflexus, AMARE), Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne, multiflorum, LOLMU), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), annual winter grass (Pea annua, POAAN), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA); and smoked hay (Apera spicaventi, APESV). The crops tested are wheat and canola. Materials and methods To determine the culture efficiency and selectivity with 2,4-DC or its potential tank mix members, 2,4-DC or metazachlor plus napropamide were applied either alone or in three-way combinations at the following rates: 2,4- DC (36% SC) at 50, 100 or 200 g ai / ha; metazachlor (43.1% Butisan® S) at 250, 500 or 750 g ai / ha; and napropamide (Devrinol® 50DF) at 315 g ai / ha. Additionally, 2,4-DC was applied alone at 400 g ai / ha. Other treatments include tank mix application of clomazone (Command 3ME @31.4%) plus metazachlor plus napropamide at 100 + 750 + 315 g ai / ha and an application of clomazone (2.13%) plus metazachlor (13%) plus napropamide (13.6 %) premix at 1572 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied pre-emergent sorrel, 162 Italian ryegrass, wild oats, wild alopecia, wild canary grass, chickweed, common quelite, wild poppy, wild mustard, annual winter grass, smoked hay, canola and wheat. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 800IE nozzle at 40 PSL. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days. after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results at 28 DAT: 2,4-DC / metazachlor / napropamide in all three-way combinations provide good control of sorrel, wild poppy, Italian ryegrass, annual winter grass, wild oats, quelite, canary seed, chickweed and smoked hay. Alopecuro of the fields was controlled with eight combinations. Neither combination is safe in wheat and canola. 2,4-DC alone provides control of amaranth and wild poppy at 400 g, Italian ryegrass at > 200 g, wild alopecia ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 163 and quelite at 400 g and chickweed at all indices. 2,4-DC causes greater than 10% damage to canola at all indices and 2,4-DC is safe in wheat up to 200 g ai / ha. Metazachlor plus napropamide in all combinations provide control of almost all species at all indices, except mustard with metazachlor at <500 g and napropamide at 315 g and wild oats and field alopecia at the lowest indices of the combination. Neither combination is safe in cinnamon and wheat. Three-way clomazone / metazachlor / napropamide (tank mix / premix) provides control of all species except wild mustard and alopecurus in fields not controlled with premix. Both the tank mix and premix caused serious damage to wheat and canola. In summary, all combinations of 2,4-DC plus metazachlor plus napropamidal completely control sorrel, wild poppy, Italian ryegrass, annual winter grass, wild oat, common quelite, wild canary grass, chickweed, and smoked hay at 28 DAT. The hair loss control of the fields with eight combinations was greater than or equal to 85%. Damage to wheat was severe with all combinations. 2,4-DC alone controls sorrel, poppy, wild alopecia, quelite at 400 g, Italian ryegrass at 200 g and chickweed at all indices. Metazachlor plus napropamide gave similar control / crop damage compared to the 164 three-way combinations. The following tables emphasize the unexpected synergistic results observed in the combinations tested. 2,4-DC + metazachlorone-napropamide-28 DAT 5 Metazachlor + Tmt 10 4 43 82 89.74 88 N 100 250 + 315 5 43 93 96.01 92 N 100 500 + 315 6 43 93 96.01 91 N 100 750 + 315 7 43 82 89.74 91 Y 200 250 + 315 8 43 93 96.01 98 AND 200 500 + 315 9 43 93 96.01 95 N 200 750 + 315 15 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + metazachloro + naporpamide- alopecuro de los campo - 28 DAT 20 Metazachlor + Tmt 4 32 82 87.76 91 AND 100 250 + 315 165 Metazachlor + zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi Tmt 8 97 99 AND 200 500 + 315 9 75 87 96.75 99 AND 200 750 + 315 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 29 – Tank Mesela Weed Efficacy / Pre-Emergent Crop Selectivity of 2,4-DC with Dimetachlor (PRE). In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed selectivity / harvest efficiency of 2,4-DC with dimethachlor. Weeds tested include Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne, multiflorum, LOLMU), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), annual winter grass (Poa annua, POAAN), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), field alopecurus (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME), wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH), sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE, smoked hay ( Apera spica-venti, APSEV), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO). The crops tested were wheat and canola. 166 Materials and methods To determine PRE weed efficiency and crop selectivity, 2,4-DC (36% SC) alone was applied at 50, 100 or 200 g ai / ha in combination with dimetachlor (Teridox 48%) at 333, 667 or 1000 g ia / ha. Other treatments include single application of 2,4-DC at 400 g ai / ha, dimetachlor alone at the rate mentioned above, and clomazone tank mix (Command 3ME 31.4%), plus dimetachlor at 100 + 1000 g ai / ha . An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments were applied before the pre-emergence of Italian ryegrass, wild oats, guinagua, field alopecuro, wild canary grass, chickweed, common quelite, wild poppy, smoked hay, sorrel, wild mustard, annual winter grass, canola and wheat. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (entire plant death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 167 Result at 28 DAT: 2,4-DC alone gave control of sorrel and Italian ryegrass at >200 g ai / ha, wild poppy and wild oats at 400 g, field alope at > 100 g and chickweed at all indices. 2,4-DC was selective in wheat up to 200 g and in canola up to 100 g. Dimethachlor alone provides control of quelite at 1000 g ai / ha, wild oats, guinagua, wild canary grass and annual winter grass at >667 g, sorrel, smoked hay, wild poppy, Italian ryegrass and chickweed at all indices. Dimetachlor causes 18% damage to wheat at 100 g, which was not selective for wheat at any index. Any combination of 2,4-DC and dimethachlor almost controls wild poppy, annual winter grass, Italian ryegrass, quelite, sorrel, smoked hay, guinagua, wild canary grass, wild oats, wild alopecia and chickweed. However, all combinations caused severe damage to wheat (>60%) and canola at 28 DAT. No combination produced control of wild mustard. Clomazone and dimetachlor control all species except wild mustard. The tank mix combination causes serious damage to wheat and canola. In summary, in most cases, combinations of 2,4-DC and dimethachlor tank mix control all weed species at 28 DAT. Almost all combinations resulted in high damage to wheat and canola. 2,4-DC alone at 200 g was 168 selective for wheat and gave control of sorrel, Italian ryegrass, chickweed and alopecurus in the fields. The following tables emphasize the unexpected synergistic results observed in the combination tested. 2,4-DC + dimethachloro- common chelite-28 DAT Tmt 53 78 89.66 94 Y a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO index β y p - g ai / ha 2,4 -DC + dimetachloro- wild oats - 28 DAT 20 Tmt 93 94.26 91 N 50 100 4 37 67 79.21 85 Y 100 333 25 5 37 85 90.55 94 Y 100 667 169 Tmt observed 93 85 87 92 synergy0 N N N N 2,4-DC13 100 200 200 200 Dimetachlorop 100 333 667 100 57 57 α - Indi measurement of ce β and p - g 2,4-DC + synergistic behavior as Y = YES and ai / ha dimetachloro- guinagua - 28 DAT N = NO Tmt 50 667 3 20 100 100 100 N 50 100 4 23 67 74.59 100 Y 100 333 5 23 100 100 100 N 100 667 6 23 100 100 100 N 100 100 7 33 67 77 .89 100 Y 200 333 8 33 100 100 100 N 200 667 9 33 100 100 100 N 200 100 a - Indi measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = SI and ce β and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + dimetachloro- wild canary grass - 28 DAT N = NO Tmt ,4-DC13 Dimetachlorop 1 20 67 73.6 100 Y 50 333 2 20 100 100 100 N 50 667 170 Tmt 100 7 70 75 92.5 96 Y 200 333 8 70 90 97 99 Y 200 667 9 70 100 100 100 N 200 100 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4- DC + dimetachloro- alopecuro of fields - 28 DAT Tmt 8 N 100 333 5 91 77 97.93 99 Y 100 667 6 91 80 98.2 100 Y 100 100 7 97 57 98.71 100 Y 200 333 8 97 77 99.31 100 Y 200 667 9 97 80 99.4 100 Y 200 100 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + dimetachloro- annual winter grass - 28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 171 Tmt 33 5 30 100 100 100 N 100 667 6 30 100 100 100 N 100 100 7 47 82 90.46 100 Y 200 333 8 47 100 100 100 N 200 667 9 47 100 100 100 N 200 100 ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 30. Weed control with 2,4-DC and dimetachlor plus metazachlor tank mix combinations. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or tridirectional combination with dimetachlor plus metazachlor as a pre-emergence (PRE) treatment. ) against the following weeds: Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne, multiflorum, LOLMU), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), annual winter grass (Pea annua, POAAN), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), field alopecuro (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), chickweed (Stellaria media, 172 STEME), wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH), sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE), smoked hay (Apera spica-venti, APSEV). Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100 or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mixture with dimetachlor (48%) and metazachlor (43.1%). Dimetachlor rates for single or tank mix application were 500 or 1000 g ai / ha and metazachlor rates were 375 or 750 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The treatments included pre-emergent Italian ryegrass, wild oats, wild alopecia, wild canary grass, chickweed, common quelite, wild poppy, smoked hay, sorrel, wild mustard, annual winter grass, canola and wheat. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSL. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days later. of treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software in the 173 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4-DC alone gave control of sorrel, wild poppy and Italian ryegrass at >200 g ai / ha, wild oats at 400 g, field alope at > 100 g and chickweed at all indices. 2,4-DC causes 11% damage to wheat at 200g and 11% damage to wheat at 100g. (Dimetachlor + metazachlor) alone provide control of all weed species except mustard. All combinations were unsafe on wheat; All combinations did not show more than 15% damage to the barrel except one with higher rates that caused 28% damage. All combinations of 2,4-DC + dimetachlor + metazachlor gave control of all weed species except wild mustard which is controlled with only four combinations. All combinations caused severe damage to wheat (>80%), while damage to canola was >20%. In summary, all three-way tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC plus dimetachlor plus metazachlor control all weed species except mustard at 28 DAT. Almost all combinations resulted in greater damage to wheat and canola. 2,4-DC alone at 100 g and 200 g was selective for wheat and canola, respectively. 2,4-DC at 200 g controls fields, Italian ryegrass, sorrel, wild poppy and chickweed. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic results observed in the tested combination. 174 2,4-DC + dimetachloro- metazachloro- wild mustard- 28 DAT Metazachlor + Tmt 0 76 78.4 85 Y 50 1000 + 750 5 25 63 72.25 75 Y 100 500 + 375 6 25 73 79.75 82 Y 100 1000 + 375 10 7 25 73 79.75 85 Y 100 500 + 750 8 25 76 82 87 AND 100 1000 + 750 9 28 63 73.36 78 Y 200 500 + 375 10 28 73 80.56 73 N 200 1000 + 375 11 28 73 80.56 73 N 200 500 + 750 12 28 76 82.72 90 Y 200 1000 + 750 15 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β and p index - g ia / ha Example 31. Weed control with tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC and mesotrione. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weeding effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with mesotrione as the pre-emergence (PRE) treatment. against the following weeds: jimsonweed (Datura stramonium, DATST), abutilon (Abutilón theophrasti, ABUTH), acetillo (Asteraceae bidens, BIDPA), burdock 175 common (Xanthium strumarium, XANST), toothed grass (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCG). Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100 or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with mesotrione (Callisto® 40%) at 25, 50 or 100 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Other treatments include a tank mix application of mesotrione plus S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum® 82.4%) at 100 + 525 g and an application of 2,4-DC at 400 g applied alone only. The treatments were applied pre-emergents of jimsonweed, abutilon, acetyl, common burdock, toothed grass, sweet corn, yellow corn and sorghum. Plant species were planted in fiber trays (6” x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm)) containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (entire stand death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 176 2,4-DC alone is safe in sweet corn and yellow corn in all three indices; safe in sorghum at 25 and 50 g, and controls abutilon and jimsonweed at 50 or 100 g; controls common burdock and acetyl at 100 g. Of the nine combinations of 2,4-DC plus mesotrione, two combinations were safe (<10%) in sweet corn, five combinations were safe in sorghum, and seven combinations were safe in yellow corn. Toothed grass was controlled with all combinations. Abutilone and stramonium were controlled when mesotrione was added to 50 or 100 g of the combination, except abutilone was not controlled when mesotrione at 50 g was added to 2,4-DC at 50 g. Control of burdock and acetyl was seen with only three combinations. In summary, combinations of 2,4-DC and mesotrione were not safe in sweet corn, were not safe in sorghum with 2,4-DC at 100 g plus mesotrione at 100 g, and with combinations containing 2,4-DC at 200 g. The combinations were safe on yellow corn. All combinations were effective in dentate grass; almost all combinations control abutilon and jimsonweed; only three combinations control burdock and acetyl. 2,4-DC alone was not safe in sweet corn and sorghum at all but the lowest rates. 2,4-DC alone does not control any of the weeds except toothgrass. Mesotrione was safe in both corn species, while it is safe in sorghum at 25 or 50 g. Mesotrione alone gave control of abutilone and jimsonweed at medium or higher rates, while it controlled burdock and acetyl at higher rates only. 177 The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic results ZARfrnn / ZZnZ / E / YIAI observed in the tested combination. 2,4-DC + mesotrione- abutilon-28 DAT Tmt 13 87 88.69 99 Y 10 6 13 100 100 100 N 7 38 73 83.26 78 N 8 38 87 91.94 98 Y 9 38 100 100 100 N 15 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO Index β and p - g IA / Ha 2,4- dc + Mesotriona- Stramonium- 28 Dat Tmt X and Expected Synergy 0 2.4-DC3 Mesotrionap 20 1 33 68 78.56 87 and 2 33 90 93.3 82 N 3 33 93 95.31 100 and 4 35 68 79.2 77 N 5 35 90 93.5 99 Y 178 Tmt ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + mesotrione- common burdock- 28 DAT 10 Tmt 5 28 0 28 31 Y 100 50 6 28 90 92.8 66 N 100 100 7 63 60 85.2 63 N 200 25 8 63 0 63 100 Y 200 50 9 63 90 96.3 100 Y 200 100 20 NO Index β and p - g ia / ha 2,4- DC + mesotrione - acetyl- 28 DAT Tmt 179 Tmt 0 7 51 51 75.99 45 N 200 25 8 51 53 76.97 88 AND 200 50 9 51 88 94.12 97 AND 200 100 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 32. Weed control with tank mix combinations of 2,4-DC and pyroxasulfone plus sulfentrazone. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weeding effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with pyroxasulfone plus sulfentrazone preemergence (PRE) treatment. against the following weeds: Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne, multiflorum, LOLMU), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis, CONAR), horseweed (Setaria viridis, SETVI), reed (Elymus repens, AGGRE, chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME), oats wild (Avena fatua, AVEFA), wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), white clover (Trifolium repens, TRFRE), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, TAROF), yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus, CYPES) ​​and sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE). 180 Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 0, 50, 100 or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with pyroxasulfone (WG 85%) at 30, 60 or 90 g ai / ha and sulfentrazone at 105 or 210 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Other treatments include single application of 2,4-DC at 400 g and three-way tank mix application of clomazone (Command 3ME 31.4%) at 200 g with pyroxasulfone at 90 g, plus sulfentrazone at either 105 or 210 g. The treatments were applied at the time of sowing Italian ryegrass, almorejo, wild canary grass, wild oats, reed, dandelion, chickweed, white clover, yellow nutsedge, sorrel, field bindweed, canola and wheat. Plant species were planted in fiber trays containing Pennington soil and the trays were well watered before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using the compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 800IE nozzle at 40 PSI. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (entire plant death). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 181 All eighteen three-way combinations gave control (>85%) of Italian ryegrass, chickweed, field bindweed, horseweed, white clover, wild oats, wild canary grass, sorrel, and dandelion at 28 DAT. Reed control was achieved with 13 combinations while yellow nutsedge was controlled with 10 combinations. All combinations were unsafe (>10% damage) on wheat at 21 DAT and canola at 28 DAT. 2,4-DC alone controls Italian ryegrass and wild oats at 400 g; chickweed was controlled at all indices; almorejo was controlled at 100 g; wild canary grass and sorrel were controlled at 200 g. Control of reed, field bindweed, white clover and yellow nutsedge did not reach 85% with any index. 2,4-DC is safe in wheat at <100 g. All two-way tank mix combinations of pyroxasulfone plus sulfentrazone control Italian ryegrass, chickweed, field bindweed, horseweed, white clover, wild grassgrass, sorrel, and dandelion. The reed was controlled with three combinations. The wild oat control was observed when pyroxasulfone was added either at 60 or 90 g with either sulfentrazone index. The yellow nutsedge control was seen with sulfentrazone at 210 g regardless of the pyroxasulfone rates. All combinations were unsafe on wheat at 21 DAT and canola at 28 DAT. In summary, all combinations of 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone plus sulfentrazone and all combinations of 182 pyroxasulfone plus sulfentrazone provide control of Italian ryegrass, chickweed, field bindweed, field bindweed, white clover, wild canary grass, sorrel, and dandelion. 2,4-DC is safe on wheat at 100 g ai / ha and controls Italian ryegrass (400 g), chickweed (all Indices), wild almorejo (>100 g), wild oats (400 g), wild canary grass (> 200 g), sorrel (>200 g) and dandelion (all indexes). The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4- DC + pyroxasulfone + sulfentrazone - carrizo-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 10 Pyroxasulfone + Tmt 0 80 N 50 30 + 210 5 0 82 82 90 Y 50 60 + 210 6 0 96 96 94 N 50 90 + 210 7 7 78 79.54 83 Y 100 30 + 105 8 7 90 90.7 85 N 100 60 +105 9 7 93 93.49 95 Y 100 90 +105 20 10 7 80 81.4 79 N 100 30 + 210 11 7 82 83.26 78 N 100 60 + 210 12 7 96 96.28 88 N 100 90 + 210 13 10 78 80.2 83 AND 200 30+105 14 10 90 91 92 Y 200 60+105 25 15 10 93 93.7 88 N 200 90+105 183 Tmt 16 17 18 α - behavioral measurement synergistic as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4 -DC + pyroxasulfone + sulfentrazone - wild oats-28 Pyroxasulfone + 10 Tmt Y 50 30+105 2 28 95 96.4 97 Y 50 60+105 3 28 95 96.4 100 Y 50 90+105 4 28 72 79.84 99 Y 50 30 + 210 15 5 28 90 92.8 100 Y 50 60 + 210 6 28 97 97.84 100 Y 50 90 + 210 7 28 72 79.84 94 Y 100 30+105 8 28 95 96.4 100 Y 100 60+105 9 28 95 96.4 97 Y 100 90+105 10 28 72 79.84 94 Y 100 30 + 210 20 11 28 90 92.8 100 Y 100 60 + 210 12 28 97 97.84 97 N 100 90 + 210 13 67 72 90.76 96 Y 200 30+105 14 67 95 98.35 98 N 200 60+105 15 67 95 98.35 100 AND 200 90+105 25 16 67 72 90.76 100 AND 200 30 + 210 184 Pyroxasulfone + Tmt β index 2,4-DC η y p - g ia / ha - pyroxasulfone + sulfentrazone na - yellow nutsedge -28 DAT Tmt 0 83 83 88 Y 50 60+105 3 0 80 80 78 N 50 90 +105 4 0 92 92 90 N 50 30 + 210 5 0 85 85 87 Y 50 60 + 210 6 0 100 100 91 N 50 90 + 21 0 7 0 73 73 73 N 100 30+ 105 8 0 83 83 80 N 100 60 +105 9 0 80 80 76 N 100 90+ 105 10 0 92 92 91 N 100 30 + 210 11 0 85 85 91 Y 100 60 + 210 12 0 100 100 90 N 100 90 + 210 13 17 73 77.59 83 Y 200 30+ 105 14 17 83 85.89 65 N 200 60+ 105 15 17 80 83.4 95 Y 200 90+ 105 16 17 92 93.36 92 N 200 30 + 210 17 17 85 87.55 80 N 200 60 + 210 18 17 100 100 95 N 200 90 + 210 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 185 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 33. Weed control with 2,4-DC and fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone tank mix combinations. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfonal as a pre-emergence treatment against the following weeds: Quintonil tropical (Amaranthus palmeri, AMAPA); Persicaria pensylvanica (Polygonum pensylvanicum, POLPY); abutilon (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH); almorejo (Setaria viridis, SETVI); bellflower spp. (Ipomoea spp.); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. ssp. multiflorum, LOLMU); huinar (Sida spinosa, SIDSP); yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus, CYPES). Methods: 2,4-DC (46.2%) was applied at 31, 63, 125, 350 or 375 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with fluthiacet-methyl (Cadet®, 10.3%) at 4.9 g ai / ha and Pyroxasulfone (85 WG, 85%) at 30, 60 or 90 g ai / ha was applied in combination alone or with 2,4-DC at the aforementioned rates. ANTHEM® (fluthiacet-methyl, 0.69% plus pyroxasulfone, 22.61%) was included as a standard at labeled rate, fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g ai / ha and pyroxasulfone at 165 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. The following species were selected: tropical quintanil, persicaria pensylvanica, abutilón, almorejo, campanilla, Italian ryegrass, huinar and yellow nutsedge. The ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 186 crops evaluated were cotton, lentils, mung beans, dwarf beans and cowpeas. All plants were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied using compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 800IE nozzle at 40 PSL. Visual percent weed control and visual percent crop damage data were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment. treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (death of entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: All eighteen three-way combinations gave control (>85%) of Italian ryegrass, chickweed, field bindweed, horseweed, white clover, wild oats, wild canary grass, sorrel, and dandelion at 28 DAT. Reed control was achieved with 13 combinations while yellow nutsedge was controlled with 10 combinations. All combinations were unsafe (>10% damage) on wheat at 21 DAT and canola at 28 DAT. The combinations of 2,4-DC plus fluthiacet-methyl and pyroxasulfone apply PRE, controls huinar, quintanil tropical, 187 almorejo and Italian ryegrass with all tank mix combinations. Persicaria pensylvanica was controlled with 14 of 15 combinations, abutilon with 11 combinations, morning glory with 1 yellow nutsedge combination, and not any combination. When applied alone at 31 g ai / ha, 2,4-DC controls huinar, at 125 g it controls almorejo. Persicaria pensylvanica and Italian ryegrass were controlled at 250 g; tropical quintanil and abutilon at 375 g of 2,4-DC. Fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g, plus pyroxasulfone at 30 g control huinar, quintanil tropical, almorejo and Italian ryegrass, fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g, plus pyroxasulfone at 60 g control persicaria pensylvanica and abutilon, fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g, plus pyroxasulfone at 90 g controls the bell. ANTHEM® controls all weeds in the trial. 2,4- DC, plus fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone is generally safe in cotton when pyroxasulfone was applied at rates less than 90 g. Mung bean is safe with 5 of 15 combinations of 2,4-DC plus fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone, cowpea is safe with 4 combinations, baby bean is safe with 3 combinations, and lentils were harmed with all combinations. 2.4DC applied alone PRE is safe on cotton, mung bean, baby bean and cowpea at all rates, lentils were not safe at any rate. Fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g, plus pyroxasulfone at 30 g were safe in mung bean and cowpea, fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g, plus pyroxasulfone up to 60 g were safe in cotton. The baby beans and lentils were damaged by all the treatments. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 188 fluthiacet-methyl and pyroxasulfone. Custom is not safe on any crop in the trial. In summary, 2,4-DC alone controls huinar at 31 g ai / ha, almorejo at 125 g, persicaria pensylvanica and Italian ryegrass at 250 g and tropical quintanil and abutilon at 375 g. 2,4-DC plus fluthiacet-methyl at 4.9 g and pyroxasulfone at 30, 60 or 90 g, controls huinar, tropical quintanil, almorejo and Italian ryegrass with all combinations (Anthem, included as standard at labeled doses at 9 fl oz / A ), controls all species in the assay. 2.4- DC applied alone is safe on cotton, mung beans, chickpeas and baby beans at all rates, although it is not safe on lentils at any rate. Fluthiacet-methyl plus pyroxasulfone damages mung beans and cowpeas with pyroxasulfone at 60 g, damages cotton with pyroxasulfone at 90 g, and damages lentils and baby beans at all indices. Anthem at labeled index damages all crops. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4- DC + fluthiacet-methyl + pyroxasulfone - Persicaria pensylvanica-28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ fluthiacet-methyl + Tmt 23 43 56.11 94 Y 63 4.9 + 30 5 23 100 100 97 N 63 4.9 + 60 189 Tmt 0 9 57 100 100 100 N 125 4.9 + 90 10 100 43 100 100 N 250 4.9 + 30 11 100 100 100 100 N 250 4.9 + 60 12 100 100 100 100 N 250 4.9 + 90 13 99 43 99.43 100 AND 375 4.9 + 30 14 99 100 100 100 N 375 4.9 + 60 15 99 100 100 100 N 375 4.9 + 90 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO index β and ρ - g ia / ha 2,4- DC + f I u ti acet -r netyl + pyroxasulfone - abutilon- 28 DAT Tmt 98.14 95 N 31 4.9 + 90 4 23 62 70.74 65 N 63 4.9 + 30 5 23 98 98.46 100 Y 63 4.9 + 60 6 23 98 98.46 99 Y 63 4.9 + 90 7 27 62 72.2 6 97 AND 125 4.9 + 30 8 27 98 98.54 78 N 125 4.9 + 60 9 27 98 98.54 99 Y 125 4.9 + 90 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 190 fluthiacet-methyl + Tmt 90 13 89 62 95.82 99 Y 375 4.9 + 30 14 89 98 99.78 100 Y 375 4.9 + 60 15 89 98 99.78 99 N 375 4.9 + 90 ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 34. Weed control with 2,4-DC and napropamide tank mix combinations. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with napropamidal as a pre-emergence (PRE) treatment against the following weeds: wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI); common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL); field alopecurus (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY); guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO); wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA); annual winter grass (Poa annua, POANN); chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. ssp. multiflorum, LOLMU); wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAPv). Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 31.2, 62.5, 125, 250 or 375 g 191 ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with napropamide (Devrinol®50DF) at 315, 630 or 1260 g ai / ah. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Clomazone (Command 3ME®, 31.4%), plus napropamide at 1260 g ai / ha were added as standard. Wild canary grass, common quelite, wild alopecia, guinagua, wild oats, annual winter grass, chickweed, Italian ryegrass, wild mustard and canola were sown directly into fiber trays (6 x 10” (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm). ) filled with Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied using compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 800IE nozzle at 40 PSL Visual percentage weed control / crop damage was recorded at 14, 21 and 27 days after treatment (DAT, for its acronym in English), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (complete death of the plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at a 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4- DC plus napropamide provided chickweed control with all tank mix combinations. Annual winter grass is controlled with 11 of 15 tank mixes, wild grassgrass and common quelite were controlled by 12, ryegrass 192 Italian for 10, alopecuro of the fields for 9 and guinagua and wild oats for 1 combination. The gun was safe with 3 tank mixes of 2,4-DC plus napropamide. 2,4-DC applied alone at 31.2 g ai / ha controls chickweed, at 125 g it controls common quelite and damages canola, at 250 g it controls field alopecurus and Italian ryegrass. Applying 2,4-DC alone fails to control wild canary grass, guinagua, wild oats, annual winter grass and wild mustard. Napropamide alone at 630 g controls wild grassgrass, at 1260 g it controls common quelite, annual Italian winter grass and ryegrass and is safe in canola at all indices. Clomazone at 375 g, plus napropamide at 1260 g controls all weeds except wild mustard and damages rapeseed. In summary, 2,4-DC + napropamide controls chickweed at all indices, wild canary grass, common quelite and annual winter grass with most indices, and field alopecuro and Italian ryegrass with all tank mix combinations. with 2,4-DC applied at > 125 g. 2,4-DC alone controls chickweed at all indices, common quelite at 125 g and field alopecuro and Italian ryegrass at 250 g. Napropamide alone controls wild grassgrass at 630 g, and common quelite, annual winter grass and Italian ryegrass at 1260 g. The gun was not damaged by 3 tank mix combinations, when 2,4-DC was applied alone at <62.5 g, or by napropamide alone at all rates. Clomazone plus napropamide included as a standard for comparison controls all weeds except wild mustard and is not safe in ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 193 cannon. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + napropamide + wild canary grass-28 DAT Tmt 88.56 96 AND 63 630 6 12 100 100 100 N 63 1260 7 18 50 59 77 Y 125 315 8 18 87 89.34 98 Y 125 630 9 18 100 100 98 N 125 1260 10 27 50 63.5 88 Y 250 315 11 27 87 90.51 95 Y 250 630 12 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = SI β index and p - g ai / ha 2 ,4-DC + napropamide + common quelite-28 DAT y N = NO Tmt 194 Tmt 260 7 85 50 92.5 83 N 125 315 8 85 73 95.95 94 N 125 630 9 85 91 98.65 94 N 125 1260 10 91 50 95.5 92 N 250 315 11 91 73 97.57 94 N 250 630 12 91 9 1 99.19 97 N 250 1260 13 93 50 96.5 96 N 375 315 14 93 73 98.11 97 N 375 630 15 93 91 99.37 98 N 375 1260 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β and ρ index - g ia / ha 2,4- DC + napropam ¡da + alopecuro of fields -28 DAT Tmt 315 5 18 7 23.74 72 Y 63 630 6 18 15 30.3 83 Y 63 1260 ΖΛβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 195 Tmt 0 315 11 93 7 93.49 96 Y 250 630 12 93 15 94.05 95 Y 250 1260 13 97 5 97.15 97 N 375 315 14 97 7 97.21 97 N 375 630 10 15 97 15 97.45 97 N 375 126 0 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = SI index β and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + napropamide + guinagua-28 DAT y N = NO 15 Tmt 630 3 10 38 44.2 27 N 31 1260 4 8 23 29.16 37 Y 63 315 20 5 8 23 29.16 42 Y 63 630 6 8 38 42.96 43 Y 63 1260 7 8 23 29.16 73 Y 125 315 8 8 23 29.16 80 AND 125 630 9 8 38 42.96 73 Y 125 1260 10 23 23 40.71 75 Y 250 315 ΖΑβ^ηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 196 Tmt 2 AND 375 630 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES and N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + napropamide + annual winter grass-28 DAT Tmt 82 Y 63 630 6 2 92 92.16 93 Y 63 1260 15 7 12 1 12.88 83 Y 125 315 8 12 77 79.76 89 Y 125 630 9 12 92 92.96 100 Y 125 1260 10 40 1 40.6 87 AND 250 315 11 40 77 86.2 90 AND 250 a - measurement of behavior without ergic as Y = YES and N = NO 25 index β and p - g ia / ha 197 Example 35. Weed control with 2,4-DC, and also combinations of the Dimetachlor Napropamide tank mix. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with dimethachlor plus napropamide as the pre-emergence (PRE) treatment. in English) against the following weeds: common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL); sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE); smoked hay (Apera spica-venti, APESV); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. ssp multiflorum, LOLMU.); wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PARPH); wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI); Poa annua (Pea annua, POAAN); shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris, CAPBP); field alopecurus (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY); guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO); wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA); wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR); common chickweed (Stellaria media, Sterne). The crops examined were wheat and canola. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with dimethachlor (48%) and napropamide (DF 50). Dimethachlor rates for application alone or in tank mix were 500 or 1,000 g ai / ha and napropamide rates were 630 or 1,260 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. An application of clomazone (COMMAND® 3ME, 31.4%) at 100 g ai / ha, plus dimetachlor at 1,000 g, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 198 plus napropamide at 1,260 g was applied as a standard for comparison. The treatments were applied PRE to the following species, common quelite, sorrel, smoked hay, Italian ryegrass, wild poppy, wild canary grass, annual winter grass, shepherd's purse, almorejo, guinagua, wild oats, wild mustard, chickweed, wheat, and canola. All plants were direct sown into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied using compressed air at 40 psi in a duct spray chamber and at a spray volume of 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle. Visual percent weed control and rapeseed damage were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT). Results: 2,4-DC applied alone at 50 g ai / ha controls (>85% damage) chickweed in 100 g of alopecuro from the fields and controlled buckwheat. Common quelite, sorrel, Italian ryegrass, and wild poppy were controlled at 200 g; wild birdseed, annual winter grass, and shepherd's purse were controlled at 400 g. 2,4-DC applied alone was safe on wheat and canola (<10% damage) when applied at 50 and 100 g. 2,4-DC plus dimethachlor and napropamide 199 controlled all weeds in all indices, except wild mustard. Wild mustard was controlled using combinations of 4 of 12. The canola was safe with a combination of 2,4-DC plus dimethachlor and napropamide, the wheat was damaged by all combinations. Clomazone plus dimethachlor and napropamide controlled all weeds and damaged both crops. In summary, 2,4-DC when applied alone at <200 g ai / ha controls quelite, sorrel, Italian ryegrass, wild poppy, wild oat, and common chickweed. 2,4-DC plus dimethachlor and napropamide controlled all weeds with all combinations except wild mustard. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC n+ dimethachlor + nopropamide 28-DAT(PRE) wild mustard- 28 DAT Dimethachlor+ Tmt 12 94 94.72 92 N 50 1000 + 1260 5 37 0 37 80 Y 100 500 + 630 6 37 77 85.51 78 N 100 1000 + 630 7 37 68 79.84 87 Y 100 500 + 1260 8 37 94 96.22 82 N 1 00 1800 + 1260 9 47 0 47 67 AND 200 500 + 630 200 Dimethachlor+ TMT X Y EXPECTED SYNERGY0 2.4-DCP NAPROPAMIDAP 10 47 77 87.81 87 N 200 1000 + 630 11 47 68 83.04 75 N 200 500 + 1260 12 47 94 96.82 83 N 200 1000 + 1260 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 36 Weed control with 2,4-DC and metsulfuron methyl tank mix combinations. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with methsulfuron-methyl (AlluXP 60%) as a pre-emergent treatment against the following weeds: Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. ssp multiflorum, LOLMU).; wild oats (Avena fautua, AVEFA); common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL); field alopecuros (Alopecuros myosuroides, ALOMY); wild canary grass (Phalarís minor, PHAMI); annual winter grass (Poa annua, POAAN); wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PARPH); chickweed (Stellaria media, Sterne); sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE); wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR); guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO). The crops examined were wheat and barley. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, alone or 201 as a tank mix with metsulfuron-methyl (60%) at 6, 9, or 12 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. One application of pyrasulfotol + bromoxynil (HUSKIE™, 26.3%) at 271 g ai / ha and one application of thifensulfuron (HARMONY® SG, 75%) at 17.4 g ai / ha were included as comparison standards. The treatments were applied POST for the following species at the levels mentioned in parentheses, Italian ryegrass (2-4), wild oat (3-4), common quelite (1), field alopecuro (2-3), wild alpistillo (1-2), annual winter bluegrass (0.5), wild poppy (1), common morgalia (0.5), sorrel (1), wild mustard (1), guinagua (1), wheat (3-4), and barley (2.4). All plants were direct sown into 3” (7.62 cm) plastic containers using Pennington soil. After application the plants were placed in the greenhouse and the foliage was allowed to dry for 24 hours. After the above, the plants were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied using compressed air at 40 psi in a duct spray chamber and at a spray volume of 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle. Visual percent weed control and rapeseed damage were recorded at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (complete death of the entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at a 95% confidence interval. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 202 Results: 2,4-DC alone was applied to barley that was safe at 50 g ai / ha and wheat to wheat at <100 g. 2,4-DC + metsulfuron-methyl controlled (>85% damage) common quelite, wild canary grass, wild poppy, chickweed, sorrel, and wild mustard with all combinations, guinagua, and Italian ryegrass were controlled with two combinations. Wild oats, field alopecur, and annual winter bluegrass were not controlled by any combination of tank mix. Wheat was not harmed by all three combinations while barley was safe with a tank mix combination. HUSKIE™ controlled common quelite, wild poppy, sorrel, wild mustard, and guinagua and was safe for barley; HARMONY® controls common quelite, chickweed, sorrel, and guinagua and was safe on wheat and barley. In conclusion, when 2,4-DC POST was applied alone to all indices, the control of any weed failed and was safe in barley at 50 g ai / ha and in wheat at <100 g. 2,4-DC, plus metsulfuronmethyl controlled common quelite, wild canary grass, wild poppy, chickweed, sorrel, and wild mustard with all tank mix combinations and was safe on wheat with three combinations and barley with one. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + metsulfuron-methyl - Italian ryegrass - 28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 203 Dimethachlor+ Napropamide Tmt 8 32.76 68 Y 100 9 6 18 16 31.12 86 Y 100 12 7 29 6 33.26 68 Y 200 6 10 8 29 18 41.78 85 Y 200 9 9 29 16 40.36 83 Y 200 12 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO 15 β index and p - g ia / ha Example 37. Weed control with 2,4-DC and atrazine tank mix combinations. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weeding effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with atrazine as a pre-emergent (PRE): cadillo (Xanthium strumarium, XANST); abutilon (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH); Stramonium (Datura stramonium, DATST); toothed grass (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCG); sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE). Methods: 204 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with atrazine (4L, 42.6%) at 140, 280, or 560 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. S-metolachlor (DUAL II MAGNUM®, 82.4%) at 525 g ai / h plus atrazine at 560 g ai / h was included as a standard for comparison. Cadillo, abutilon, jimsonweed, toothgrass, sorrel, corn, sweet corn, and sorghum were direct seeded into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSL Visual percentage weed control and rapeseed damage were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (entire plant death). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4-DC alone was applied to >50 g ai / ha of controlled dentate grass 28 DAT. 2,4-DC was applied alone to >200 g of controlled abutilon and sorrel, it was applied alone to 400 g of controlled jimson 2,4-CC. Cadillo was not controlled by any rate of 2,4-DC applied alone. 2,4-DC plus atrazine controlled abutilon, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 205 jimsonweed, toothed grass and sorrel with all combinations. Cadillo was controlled with 6 tank mix combinations of 2.4DC plus atrazine. 2,4-DC applied alone was safe on <200 g of corn, sweet corn or sorghum were not damaged (>10%) by 2,4DC <100 g. 2,4-DC plus atrazine as a tank mix generally well tolerated in corn, sweet corn and sorghum. In summary, 2.4 DC alone controlled toothed grass in all indices, abutilon and sorrel at 200 g ai / ha, and jimsonweed at 400 g. 2,4-DC, plus atrazine controlled cadillo with 6 of 9 combinations and controlled abutilone, jimsonweed, toothgrass, and sorrel with all combinations. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + Atrazine - Cadillo - 28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 2.56 100 AND 100 280 6 7 97 97.21 100 Y 100 560 7 60 57 82.8 75 N 200 140 8 60 92 96.8 82 N 200 280 9 60 97 98.8 100 Y 200 560 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO 206 β and p index - g ia / ha 2,4-DC + atrazine - abutilon - 28 DAT ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Tmt 40 5 19 63 70.03 97 AND 100 280 6 19 96 96.76 100 Y 100 560 7 90 53 95.3 100 Y 200 140 8 90 63 96.3 100 Y 200 280 9 90 96 99.6 100 Y 200 560 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 38. Weed control with 2,4-DC and combinations with pyroxasulfone tank mix. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with pyroxasulfone as a pre-emergent treatment (PRE) against weeds. following weeds: yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus, CYPES); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne spp multiflorum, LOLMU); bellflower spp (Ipomea spp), sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE); abutilon (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH); coquia (Coquia scoparia, KCHSC); bindweed 207 (Convolvulus arvensis, CONAR). Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied alone at 0, 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, or as a tank mix with pyroxasulfone (85%) at 30, 60, or 90 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Pyroxasulfone plus fluthiacet-methyl (ANTHEM™, 23.3%) applied at 165 g ai / ha was included as a standard for comparison. Yellow nutsedge, Italian ryegrass, bluebell, sorrel, abutilon, coquia, bindweed, wheat and corn were direct sown into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 40 psi and a spray volume of 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle. Visual percent weed control and rapeseed damage were recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (entire plant death). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4- DC was applied alone to >50 g ai / ha of controlled cochia (>85%), in >200 g of controlled Italian ryegrass or controlled sorrel, and zARfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi 208 controlled abutilon in 400 g. 2,4-DC was selective for (<10% damage) wheat when applied at <100 g, and selective for corn when applied at <200 g. 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone controlled Italian ryegrass, sorrel, and coquia with all combinations. Abutilone was controlled with all combinations except when 2,4-DC was applied at 50 g ai / ha and pyroxasulfone was applied at 30 g ai / ha. Yellow nutsedge, snowdrops, or bindweed were not controlled by any combination of 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone. Wheat was damaged by 8 of 9 combinations, while corn was damaged by 6 of 9 combinations of 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone. ANTHEM™ applied at 165 g ai / ha controlled all weeds except morning glory and bindweed. In conclusion, 2,4-DC applied alone controlled cochia in all indices, Italian ryegrass and sorrel at 200 g ai / ha, and abutilone at 400 g ai / ha. Wheat was not injured at 50 or 100 g of 2,4-DC alone, while maize was safe at rates up to and including 200 g ai / ha. The tank mixture of 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone controlled Italian ryegrass, sorrel, and coquia with all combinations, abutilon with certain combinations, and failed to control yellow nutsedge, bluebell, or bindweed with any combination. The wheat was not damaged by any combination. Safety results were favorable for corn with the combinations tested. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 209 2,4- DC + pyrox :asulfone - Morningglory sp.-28 DAT Tmt 50 90 4 2 9 10.82 0 N 100 30 5 2 60 60.8 12 N 100 60 6 2 65 65.7 87 Y 100 90 7 2 9 10.82 12 Y 200 30 8 2 60 60.8 67 Y 200 60 9 2 65 65.7 50 N 200 90 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Example 39. Weed control with 2,4-DC, and pyroxasulfone mpas carfentrazone tank mix combinations. In this example a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with pyroxasulfone plus carfentrazone as a pre-emergence (PRE) treatment. against the following weeds: sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE); wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI); thistle thistle (Cirsium arvense, SPIN); dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, TAROF); almorejo (Setaria viridis, SETVI); wild oats (Avena fautua, 210 AVEFA); white clover (Trifolium repens, TRFRE); yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus, CYPES); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne spp multiflorum, LOLMU); chickweed (Stellaria media, Sterne); reed (Efytrigia repens, AGRRE); field creeper (Convolvulus arvensis, CONAR). Methods: 2,4- DC (SC 36%) was applied alone at 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, or as a tank mix with pyroxasulfone (KIH485 WG 85%) and ethylcarfentrazone (AimEC® 22.3%). The pyroxasulfone rates for application alone or in tank mix were 30, 60, or 90 g ai / ha and the ethylcarfentrazone rate was 25 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Clomazone (COMMAND® 3ME) at 200 g plus pyroxasulfone at 90 g and ethylcarfentrazone at 25 g was included as a standard for comparison. Sorrel, wild canary grass, thistle, dandelion, wild oat, wild oat, white clover, nutsedge, Italian ryegrass, chickweed, reed, bindweed, canola and wheat were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) trays. of fiber that use Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 psi. Visual percent control of weeds and rapeseed damage is ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 211 recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (death of entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4- DC alone at 50 g ai / ha controls (>85%) thistle, dandelion, or chickweed. Applied in 100 g, 2,4-DC controls sorrel and Italian ryegrass; wild canary grass and wild oats were controlled at 200 g. 2,4-DC combined as a tank mix with pyroxasulfone plus ethylcarfentrazone controls sorrel, wild canary grass, thistle thistle, dandelion, horsetail, wild oats, white clover, Italian ryegrass, and chickweed with all combinations. Reed and field bindweed is controlled with 8 of 9 tank mix combinations; Yellow nutsedge is controlled with 1 combination. Clomazone plus pyroxasulfone and ethylcarfentrazone was applied as a standard for controlled comparison of all weeds except yellow nutsedge. 2.4- DC applied only controlled thistle, dandelion, wild alopecia, and chickweed at all indices, sorrel, Italian ryegrass, wild canary seed, and wild oats were controlled at certain indices. 2,4-DC was safe in wheat at lower rates and in canola at higher rates. 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone ethylcarfentrazone controlled all weeds with all combinations except reed and bindweed zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi 212 field which were controlled with most of the combinations while yellow nutsedge was controlled with 1 combination. The cannon was not safe with any combination. The following table emphasizes the unexpected synergistic effects of the tested combinations. 2,4-DC + pyroxasulfone + carfentrazone + yellow nutsedge Pyroxasulfone + Tmt 00 30 + 25 5 3 17 19.49 53 Y 100 60 + 25 6 3 80 80.6 91 Y 100 90 + 25 15 7 3 2 4.94 23 Y 200 30 + 25 8 3 17 19.49 73 Y 200 60 + 25 9 3 80 80.6 79 N 200 90 + 25 a - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Unexpected crop failure has been observed for at least 7 crops: barley, canola, corn, beans, sorghum, sweet corn, and wheat. These unexpected culture safety results were observed in the following PRE / POST studies. 213 Example 40. Safety culture with 2,4-DC and metsulfuron-methyl tank mix combinations. In this example, a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the crop safety and weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with metsulfuron-methyl as a postemergence treatment (POST). with the following weeds: wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO), chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), Italian ryegrass ( Lolium perenne L. ssp. multiflorum, LOLMU). The treatments were applied to barley and wheat crops. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied alone at 125, 170, 210, or 250 g ai / ha, or as a tank mix with metsulfuron-methyl (AllyXP 60%) at 2, 3, or 4 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl + metsulfuron-methyl (ACCURATE EXTRA®, 37.5% + 18.75% + 15%) at 31.48 g ¡A / ha or thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl (HARMONY EXTRA®SG, 33.33% + 16.67 %) at 19.95 g ¡a / ha were applied as commercial standards. Nonionic surfactant (NIS) was added for all treatments at 0.5% v / v. All plant species were sown directly into 3 (7.62 cm) plastic containers using meter mix as growth medium. In the common quelite treatment it was 1.75 (4.44 ΖΛβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 214 cm), chickweed was 2 (5.08 cm), wild mustard was 2.25 (5.71 cm), wild oats was 5.5 (13.97 cm), guinagua was 2.5 (6.35 cm), Italian ryegrass was 2-3 ( 5.84 cm), wheat was 5.5 (13.97 cm) and barley was 4.5 (11.43 cm) tall. Plants were watered well before application and were not wet for 24 h after application. Plants were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was replicated four times. The treated trays were placed in a random block arrangement in the greenhouse. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 PSL Visual percentage of wheat and barley damage and weed control were recorded at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage to the crop) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: All applications of the tank mix of 2,4-DC plus metsulfuron-methyl gave >85% control of chickweed, wild mustard, and common quelite, 10 combinations controlled guinagua. Wild oats and Italian ryegrass were not controlled by any tank mix combination. The wheat was not harmed by any combination; barley was moderately damaged by 2 combinations and safe with all ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 215 other tank mix combination. Metsulfuron-methium only controlled guinagua, chickweed, wild mustard, and common quelite in all indices and was safe in both crops in all indices. Thifensulfuron-methyl plus tribenuron-methyl plus metsulfuron-methyl or thifensulfuron-methyl plus tribenuron-methyl both controlled guinagua, wild mustard, chickweed, and common quelite and were safe in barley and wheat; no standard controlled wild oats or Italian ryegrass. The 7 days of safety resulted in a favorable harm profile for the combination treatments compared to the individual ingredients applied alone. 2,4-DC applied alone was safe at all indices in both wheat and barley. Plant damage was greater than 10% with 2,4-DC alone at 170 g ai / ha compared to when 2,4-DC was applied at the same rates with metsulfuron-methyl. As such, overall, the combination showed a better safety profile compared to the application of 2,4-DC at 170 g ai / ha and metsulfuron-methyl at 3 g ai / ha. Damage to the crop 2,4-DC + metsulfuron-methyl-barley-7DAT Metsulfuron- Tmt X Y Expected observede 2,4-DC^ methyl? 1 4 5 8.8 4 125 2 2 4 7 10.72 8 125 3 3 4 9 12.64 6 125 4 4 6 5 10.7 5 170 2 5 6 7 12.58 6 170 3 216 MetsulfuronZARfrnn / ZZnZ / E / YIAI Tmt 11 14 7 20.02 8 250 12 14 9 21.74 8 250 4 α - measurement of synergistic behavior as Y = YES; N = NO β index and p - g ia / ha Crop damage 2,4-DC + metsulfuron-methyl-wheat-7DAt 15 Metsulfuron- Tmt 3 6 14 2 15.72 3 170 4 7 17 1 17.83 5 210 2 8 17 0 17 4 210 3 217 Metsulfuron- Tmt - measurement of % damage to the crop: safety (0-10%); moderate (11-20%), damaged (>20) β and p - g ia / ha index Example 41. Safety of cultivation with 2,4-DC and thifensulfuron-methyl tank mix combination. In this example, a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the crop selectivity and weeding effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with thifensulfuronmethyl as a post-emergence treatment (POST): Wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), guinagua (Polygonum convolvulus, POLCO), chickweed (Stellaria media, Sterne), common quelite (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SI AR). The treatments were applied to wheat and barley crops. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 0, 125, 170, 210, or 250 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with metsulfuron-methyl (AllyXP 60%) at 50, 75, or 100 g ia / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl + 218 metsulfuron-methyl (ACCURATE EXTRA®, 37.5% + 18.75% + 15%) at 49 g ai / ha or thifensulfuron-methyl + tribenuron-methyl (HARMONY EXTRA® SG, 33.33% + 16.67%) at 21 g ai / ha were applied as commercial standards. The nonionic surfactant was added at 0.5% v / v in all treatments. The treatments were applied to wheat 5.5” (13.97 cm), barley 5 (12.7 cm), wild oats 5.5 (13.97 cm), chickweed 2 (5.08 cm), guinagua 3 (7.62 cm), and common quelite 2 (5.08 cm). . All plant species were sown directly into 3 plastic containers using meter-mix as growth medium and the containers were watered well before application and watered 24 h after application. Plants were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Each treatment was repeated four times. Treatments were applied with compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 psi. Percent visual weed control and damage of barley and wheat will be recorded at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), using a scale of 0 (no control / no crop damage). ) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: All tank mix applications of 2,4-DC plus thifensulfuron-methyl gave >85% control of guinagua, chickweed, wild mustard, and common quelite. Wild oats were not controlled ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 219 for no combination. Wheat was safe with all 6 combinations when 2,4-DC was applied at 170 g ai / ha or at lower rates with thifensulfuron-methyl and safe with two combinations when applied at 210 g 2,4-DC. Seven combinations of the 2,4-DC + thifensulfuron-methyl tank mix were safe in barley. Wheat was safe with 2,4-DC alone up to 170 g ai / ha, barley was not safe at any rate of 2,4-DC alone. Thifensulfuron-methyl alone controlled all weeds except wild oats, and was safe in both crops. The data suggest that thifensulfuron-methyl has a protective effect, since it decreased 2,4-DC damage in wheat and barley. Both barley and wheat damage decreased when 2,4-DC was applied with thifensulfuron-methyl, compared to the same rate of 2,4-DC alone. Application of 2,4-DC alone at 125 g ai / ha and above or thifensulfuron-methyl alone at 50 g ai / ha caused damage to barley and wheat, but co-application of herbicides reduced damage compared to 2,4-DC alone by >10% when applied together with the same indices. Therefore, the combination provides a better safety profile than 2,4-DC alone. Damage to the crop 2,4-DC + thifensulfuron-methyl- Barley-14 DAT Tmt 220 5 Tmt 0 10 11 23 2 19 250 75 11 12 23 2 0 250 100 12 10 Ω, φ- measurement of % damage to the crop for safety reasons only (0-10%); moderate (11-20%); damage (>20) £ - measurement of % damage to the crop with combination of the tested ¡a β and p - index - g ia / ha Crop damage 2,4-DC + thifensulfuron-methyl - wheat-14DAT 15 Tmt 2.44- DC0 Tifensulfuron-Μφ observed8 2,,4-DC·3 Tifensulfuron-MP 1 26 0 2 125 50 2 26 0 5 125 75 3 30 1 6 125 100 4 30 0 8 170 75 5 30 0 10 170 75 20 6 30 1 10 170 100 7 31 0 13 210 50 8 31 0 11 210 75 9 31 1 9 210 100 10 32 0 12 250 50 11 32 0 13 250 75 25 12 32 1 15 250 100 ΖΑβΙτηη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 221 Ω, φ- measurement of % damage to the crop for only: safety (0-10%); moderate (11-20%); damage (>20) £ - measurement of % damage to the crop with combination of the tested ¡a β and p - index - g ia / ha Example 42. Culture safety with 2,4-DC and sulfentrazone tank mix combination. In this example, a greenhouse study was conducted to determine the crop selectivity and weed effectiveness of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with sulfentrazone as a pre-emergent treat (PRE). acronym in English) against the following weeds: amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri, AMAPA); ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia, AMBEL); persicaria pensylvanica (Polygonum pensylvanicum, POLPY); abutilon (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH); wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA); clam (Setaria viridis, SETVI); bellflower spp. (Ipomoea spp); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. ssp. multiflorum, LOLMU). Crops tested included corn, wheat, cotton, beans, and bush beans. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 42%) was applied at 0, 31.2, 62.5, 125, 250 or 375 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with sulfentrazone (SPARTAN® 4F, 39.6%) at 105, 210, or 315 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Amaranth, common ragweed, persicaria pensylvanica, abutilon, wild oats, almorejo, bellflower, and Italian ryegrass were selected. Corn, wheat, cotton zARfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi 222 (cotton was not evaluated due to aphid infestation), cowpea and bush bean (var. Supremo) were also included in the study. All plants were sown directly into 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays using Pennington soil. The trays were watered after sowing but before treatment. After application the trays were placed in the greenhouse and lightly watered. After the above, the trays were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied using compressed air in a duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 psi. Visual percentage weed control was recorded at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment (DAT), crop damage was recorded at 7, 14, 21, and 28 DAT, using a scale from 0 (no control / damage) to 100 (death of entire plant). Data (not included) were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4- DC applied alone was safe in all indices of all cultures at 14 DAT. Sulfentrazone was only safe in corn and bean bush only at 105 g, wheat and beans at 105 or 210 g 14 DAT. With 15 combinations of 2,4-DC + sulfentrazone, 6 were safe in wheat, 8 were safe in cowpea, and 11 were safe in corn. All tank mix combinations damaged the bean bush at 14 DAT. 2,4-DC alone was safe in cowpea at all indices (data not included). 223 Sulfentrazone alone at 28 DAT damaged both crops at all indices. 2,4-DC plus sulfentrazone tank mixes were safe from cowpea with 6 combinations, while all combinations harmed bean bush. The following table emphasizes the unexpected protective effects of the tested combinations. Tmt 2,44-DC0 SulfentrazoneP observede 2,,4-DO SulfentrazoneP 4 2 3 7 63 105 5 2 10 12 63 210 10 6 2 38 17 63 315 7 0 3 6 125 105 8 0 10 7 125 210 9 0 38 15 125 315 10 1 3 6 250 105 15 11 1 10 17 250 210 12 1 38 25 250 315 13 3 3 5 375 105 14 3 10 15 375 210 15 3 38 22 375 315 - measurement of % damage to the crop: safety (0-10%); moderate (11-20%), damaged (>20) β and p - g ia / ha index Example 43. Culture safety with 2,4-DC, and pyroxasulfone plus carfentrazone tank mix combinations. 224 In this example, the safety analysis of the cultivation of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with pyroxasulfone plus carfentrazone as a pre-emergent treatment against the following weeds: sorrel (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE); wild canary grass (Phalaris minor, PHAMI); thistle thistle (Cirsium arvense, CIRAR); dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, TAROF); almorejo (Setaria viridis, SETVI); wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA); white clover (Trifolium repens, TRFRE); yellow nutsedge (Cyperus escuientus, CYPES); Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne spp multiflorum, LOLMU); chickweed (Stellaria media, STEME); reed (Elytrigia repens, AGRRE); field creeper (Convolvulus arvensis, CONAR). The treatments were applied to canola and wheat. Results: 2,4- DC alone was safe (<10% damage) in canola at <200 g ai / ha and safe in wheat at <100 g. 2,4-DC plus pyroxasulfone plus carfentrazone-ethyl was not safe in wheat with any tank mix combination and was safe in wheat with 1 tank mix combination. Clomazone plus pyroxasulfone plus ethylcarfentrazone damaged both crops. 2,4-DC alone provided more safe alternative compared to the combinations tested. Example 44. Safety culture with 2,4-DC, and metazachlor plus napropamide tank mix Combinations. In this example, a greenhouse study was carried out 225 to determine the crop selectivity and weed efficacy of 2,4-DC, with 2,4-DC alone or in combination with metazachlor plus napropamide as a pre-emergent treatment against the following weeds: sorrel (Amaranth retroflexus, AMARE), Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne, multiflorum, LOLMU), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis, SINAR), annual winter grass (Poa annua POAAN), wild oats (Avena fatua, AVEFA), field alopecurus (Alopecurus myosuroides, ALOMY), common white quinoa (Chenopodium album, CHEAL), wild birdseed (Phalaris minor, PHAMI), chickweed (Stellaria media, Sterne), wild poppy (Papaver rhoeas, PAPRH) and smoked hay (Apera spica-venti, APESV). Crops tested included wheat and canola. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with metazachlor (Butisan® 43.1%) and napropamide (Devrinol® 50DF). Metazachlor rates for application alone or with the tank mix were 250, 500, and 750 g ai / ha and the napropamide rate was 1,260 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Other treatments include application of clomazone tank mix (COMMAND® 3ME 31.4%) plus metazachlor plus napropamide at 100 + 750 + 1260 g ai / ha and an application of clomazone (2.13%) plus metazachlor (13%) plus napropamide (13.6%) premix at 1572 g ai / ha. The treatments were applied before the emergence of sorrel, Italian ryegrass, wild oats, ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 226 field alopecia, wild canary grass, chickweed, common quelite, wild poppy, wild mustard, annual winter grass, smoked hay, canola and wheat. Plant species were planted in 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001E nozzle at 40 psi. Data on visual percentage of crop damage and visual percentage of molasses control were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (plant death). complete). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. All combinations of 2,4-DC + metazachlor + napropamide caused 100% mortality of amaranth, wild poppy, Italian ryegrass, annual winter grass, common white quinoa, canary seed, chickweed, and smoked hay. Alopecuro of the fields was controlled with the nine combinations. No combination was safe in wheat, while three combinations were safe in canola. For example, when 2,4-DC was co-applied with metazachlor + napropamide at the same rates, canola damage was reduced to 3%. 2,4-DC alone provided control of wild poppy at >100 g, Italian ryegrass at >200 g, white quinoa, 227 400 g, field hay at >200 g, smoked hay at >100 g, and chickweed at all indices. In conclusion, 2,4-DC caused damage greater than 10% to the gun in all indices. 2,4-DC was safe in wheat up to 200 g ai / ha. When 2,4-DC was co-applied with metazachlor + napropamide at the same rates, canola damage was dramatically reduced. All combinations of metazachlor + napropamide provided control of almost all species at all indices and showed no selectivity for rapeseed and wheat. The following table emphasizes the unexpected protective effects of the tested combinations. Example 45 - Culture Safety with 2,4-DC and Mesotrione Tank Mix Combinations. In this example, the safety of growing 2,4-DC, with 2,4DC alone or in combination with mesotrione as a pre-emergent treatment was tested against the following weeds: jimsonweed (Datura stramonium, DATST), abutilon (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) , acetillo (Asteraceae bidens, BIDPA), cadillo (Xanthium strumarium, XANST), toothed grass (Echinochloa crus-galli, ECHCG). Treatments were also applied to sweet corn, yellow corn and sorghum. Methods: 2,4-DC (SC 36%) was applied at 50, 100, or 200 g ai / ha, alone or as a tank mix with mesotrione (40%) at 25, 50, or 100 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. zRRfrnn / zznz / E / YiAi 228 Other treatments included an application of the tank mix of mesotrione plus S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum 82.4%) at 100 + 525 g, and an application of 2,4-DC at 400 g applied alone. The treatments were applied before the appearance of jimsonweed, abutilon, acetillo, cadillo, toothed grass, sweet corn, yellow corn and sorghum. Plant species were planted in 6 x 10 (15.24 cm x 25.4 cm) fiber trays containing Pennington soil and the trays were watered well before application and lightly watered after application. The trays were routinely watered and fertilized after treatment application. Treatments were applied using compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 psi. Visual percentage of crop damage and visual percentage of molasses control data were collected at 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no control / no damage) to 100 (crop death). complete plant). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Results: 2,4- DC alone was safe in sweet corn and sorghum at the lowest rate, while yellow corn was safe at 50 or 100 g ai / ha. Mesotrione was only safe in sweet corn and yellow corn in all three indices; safe in sorghum at 25 and 50 g. Of the nine combinations of 2,4-DC + mesotrione, two combinations were safe (<10%) in sweet corn, five ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ 229 combinations were safe in sorghum and seven combinations were safe in yellow corn. Example 46 - 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC safety in sorghum. To compare the tolerance of pre-emergent sorge (PRE), 2,4-DC (42% SC), 2,5-DC (47.5%), COMMAND® 4EC (clomazone, 46.7%), and COMMAND® 3ME (clomazone) were applied. , 31.4%) at 31, 63, 125, 250, and 375 g ai / ha. An untreated check was included as a reference standard. Treatments were applied to sorghum at the time of planting using Pennington soil. Each treatment was repeated four times. The land was irrigated before and after the application of herbicides for activation. Plants were routinely watered and fertilized. Treatments were applied using compressed air duct spray chamber at 30 GPA using a TeeJet 8001 E nozzle at 40 psi. The visual percentage of crop damage was recorded at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after treatment using a scale from 0 (no damage) to 100 (death of the entire plant). Data were analyzed using Minitab statistical software at the 95% confidence interval. Board. Percentage of sorghum damage at different intervals with 2,4-DC, 2-5-DC, COMMAND® 4EC OR 3ME when pre-emergent is applied. Formulation g ia / ha Days after application 7 14 21 28 Untreated check -- 0 0 0 0 2,4-DC 31 0 0 0 0 2,4-DC 63 2 0 0 0 2,4-DC 1 25 9 7 5 5 2.4-DC 250 25 1 7 1 2 12 2.4-DC 375 38 28 20 13 2.5-DC 31 0 0 1 1 2.5-DC 63 2 0 0 0 2.5- DC 125 6 6 6 5 2.5-DC 250 21 21 1 9 1 6 230 Board. Percentage of sorghum damage in different 2-5-DC, COMMAND® 4EC OR 3ME when used at different intervals with 2,4-DC, pre-emergent application. Formulation g ia / ha Days after application 2.5-DC 375 35 28 1 6 1 1 COMMAND®4EC 31 8 6 5 SF COMMAND®4EC 63 6 8 8 6 COMMAND®4EC 125 16 15 1 2 12 COMMAND®4EC 250 35 43 35 25 COMMAND®4EC 375 48 68 71 71 COMMAND®3EC 31 5 7 5 5 COMMAND®3EC 63 4 1 1 1 COMMAND®3EC 125 10 10 9 9 COMMAND®3EC 250 33 31 39 39 COMMAND®3EC 3 75 38 58 58 58 ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ In this study 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC were safe from sorghum at rates of 31 to 125 g ai / ha, regardless of application times (table given above). The damage of sorghum with 2,4-DC and 2,5-DC was greater than 11% at 250 and 375 g. Both clomazone formulations (COMMAND® 4EC & 3ME) were safe up to 63 g; however, 3ME showed safety at 125g at 21 and 28 DAT (table provided above). Example 47 - Volatility of formulations The column method was used to determine the volatility of clomazone from wet double-sieved Pennington soil. Clomazone or clomazone compounds (2,4-DC or 2,5-DC) were applied to soil at 1000 g ai / ha. The amount of clomazone taken up from the column during the 18-hour collection, as an average of four replicates, was determined in units of micrograms. The relative amount of volatilization compared to the 4EC formulation was determined (average value, shown as a percentage). The analysis of extracted methanol samples was carried out 231 carried out using HPLC. The average of these values, over 4 replicates, was then converted to obtain the total ugs per treatment. ΖΑβΙτΠη / ΖΖηΖ / Ε / ΥΙΛΙ Example Formulation Type % Volatility Control vs. COMMAND®4EC COMMAND®3ME standard CS 84.9 COMMAND®3EC reference EC 0.0 2.4-dc, Example 9A CS 85.1 2.4-DC, Example 9C CS 52.7 2.4-DC , Example 9D CS 31.1* 2,4-DC, Example 9E CS 53.5 2,4-DC, Example 9F CS 1 00 2,4-DC, Example 9G CS 100 2,4-DC, Example 1 - SC 64 * In this case, microencapsulation provided less volatility control for the SC formulation All references cited are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. Although this invention has been disclosed with an emphasis on preferred embodiments, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that variations in compositions and methods 232 preferred can be used and it is intended that the invention can be practiced in another manner as specifically described herein. Accordingly, this invention includes all modifications within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the claims below.

Claims

1. A method for controlling unwanted vegetation in a wheat crop comprising applying to the locus of such vegetation a herbicidally effective amount of a composition comprising a first herbicide selected from the group consisting of 2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidineone (“2,4-DC”) and 2(2,5-dichlorophenyl)methyl-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidineone (“2,5-DC”); and optionally a second herbicide, provided that the first herbicide and the second herbicide are not the same.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein said unwanted vegetation is selected from the group consisting of grassy weeds and broadleaf weeds.

3. The method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein said unwanted vegetation is selected from the group consisting of annual winter grass, commelina, field grass, black nightshade, flag grass, creeping thistle, darnel, common burdock (Xanthium pensylvanicum), ragweed, wild poppies, field violet, giant mulberry, broomweed, guinea grass, chamomile, herbicide-resistant field grass, erigeron, Italian ryegrass, jimsonweed, Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense), white grass, canary grass, morning glory, Pennsylvania bluebell, pitted morning glory, fennel, common reed, sorrel, shepherd's purse, smoke hay, sunflower, convolvulus (Polygonum convolvulus), wild mustard (Brassica kaber), oats 234 wild oats (Avena fatua), casalina, hopillo, and yellow coquillo (Cyperus esculentus).

4. The method of conformity with which of the recommendations 1 to 3, whereby the second herbicide is included and is selected from the group that consists of dimethenamida-P, difenamida, napropamida, napropamida-M, naptalam, petoxamida, propanylo, acetochloro, alachloro, metolachloro, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, pretilachlor, benzofluoro, cambendichlor, chloramben, dicamba, bispiribac, piritiobac, mesotriona, sulcotriona, tefuryltriona, tembotriona, benfuresate, asulam, barbán, aloxidim isoxaflutol, dinitramine, dipropalin, etalfluralin, pendimethalin, trif I u ral ina, acifluorfeno, aclonifen, etnipromid, fluoronitrofeno, fomesafeno, imazametabenz, bromobonilo, bromoxinilo, metiozolin, monisourón, piroxasulfona, topramezona, bromofenoxim, clomeprop, 2,4-DEB, clacifós, 4-CPA, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 3,4-DB, cloprop, 4-CPP, dichlorprop, chlorazifop, clodinafop, clofop, cihalofop, kuicaoxi, metamifop, propaquizafop, quizalofop, difenzoquat, halosulfuron, metazachloro, fluazolate, brompirazon,clopyralid, diflufenican, atrazine, chloroazine, cyanazine, ciprazine, trietazine, indaziflam, ametryn, metoprotrine, symmetryn, terbutryn, etiozine, hexazinone, metribuzine, amicarbazone, bencarbazone, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, sulfentrazone, thiencarbazone, chloransulam, isoproturon, linuron, methioron, methobromuron, methoxuron, tetraflurone, thidiazuron, amidosulfuron, cyclosulfamuron, ethoxysulfuron, flucetosulfuron, metsulfuron, prosulfuron, tifensulfuron, tebutiuron, acrolein, 235 flurtamone, flutiacet-methyl, funaihecaoling, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more of the same; provided that when the first herbicide is 2,4-DC or 2,5DC, the second herbicide is not 2,5-DC or 2,4-DC respectively.

5. The method according to any of claims 1 to 3, wherein said composition further comprises: at least one inactive component selected from the group consisting of at least one antimicrobial agent, at least one surfactant, at least one thickener, at least one antifoaming agent, at least one antifreeze, at least one solvent, and at least one cosolvent.

6. The method according to claim 5, wherein said composition further comprises at least one surfactant wherein said surfactant is selected from the group consisting of cationic surfactants, anionic surfactants, non-ionic surfactants, ionic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants and a combination thereof.

7. The method according to claim 6, wherein the surfactant comprises an anionic phosphoric acid ester surfactant, a cationic ethoxylated tallow amine surfactant, or a nonionic surfactant selected from the group consisting of linear ethoxylated alcohol, ethoxylated alkylphenol, alkyl-EO / PO copolymer, polyalkylene glycol monobutyl ether, ethoxylated fatty acids / oils, sorbitan laurate, polysorbate, sorbitan oleate, ethoxylated fatty acid alcohols, and alkylphenols.

8. The method according to claim 5, wherein said composition further comprises a thickener selected from the group consisting of rice, starch, gum arabic, tragacanth gum, guar flour, bristlecone gum, starch ethers and starch esters, gum resins, galactomannans, magnesium aluminum silicate, xanthan gum, carrageenan, cellulose derivatives, methylcellulose, alginates and combinations thereof.

9. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein said second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of acetochlor, aclonifen, ametryn, amicarbazone, atrazine, bispiribac, bromoxynil, carfentrazone, carfentrazone-ethyl, clomazone, cyhalofop, 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2,4-DEB, dicamba, diflufenican, dimetachlor, dimethenamid-P, ethoxysulfuron, fluketosulfuron, flutiacet-methyl, fomesafene, hexazinone, isoxaflutol, linuron, mesotrione, metamifop, metazachlor, methobromuron, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, metsulfuron, metsulfuron-methyl, napropamide, pendimethalin, petoxamide, pretylachlor, propanyl, pyroxasulfone, quizalofop, tebutyuron, typensulfuron, typensulfuron-methyl, sulfentrazone, trif I ural ina, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof and mixtures of two or more thereof. 237 10. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 9, wherein said second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of napropamide, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, mesotrione, metsulfuron-methyl, and, thifensulfuron-methyl, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, and mixtures of two or more thereof.

11. The method according to any of claims 1 to 10, wherein said first herbicide is 2,4 DC.

12. The method according to any of claims 1 to 10, wherein said first herbicide is 2.5 DC.

13. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 10, wherein said second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of dimethenamide-P, napropamide, dimetachlor, S-metolachlor, aclonifen, pyroxasulfone, metazachlor, diflufenican, sulfentrazone, methobromuron, metsulfuron, tyfensulfuron, agriculturally acceptable salts thereof, esters thereof, and mixtures of two or more thereof.

14. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 10, wherein said second herbicide is selected from the group consisting of metazachlor and napropamide or dimetachlor; pyroxasulfone and carfentrazone, sulfentrazone or fluriacetmethyl; and dimetachlor and napropamide.

15. The method according to claim 5, wherein said composition further comprises an antifreeze agent selected from the group consisting of ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, urea, calcium chloride, sodium nitrate, magnesium chloride and ammonium sulfate.