Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
~25~887~
P ESS FOR TREATING PLANTS
Backqround of the Invention
The present inventlon relales to a process for sti-
mulating plant growth and, more particularly, to stimulating
plant growth by subjecting the plant to sound waves, with or
without the application of growth stimulating solutions
thereby opening the cell walls to assist the assimilation of
the solution. The present invention urther includes use of
sound waves to assist in the assimilation of other solutions
by plants. For example, one may decrease the level of her-
bicide to provide an effective killing dosage, thus mini-
mizing pollution.
History reveals that many efforts have been made to
increase growth rates in plants. This effort has generally
been made to increase the food production from plants. For
example, hybridizing has increased in a major way the yield
obtained from such crops as corn, wheat, tomatoes, carrots
and the like. Other efforts have been made in the develop-
ment and use of plant foods and fertilizers. In some instan-
ces, fertilizer has been injected into the soil along withseed at the time of planting. It has also been known to
spray fertilizer onto growing plants to feed systemically
through the leaves.
~!
, .
`\
12g~87~
More recently, effort has been directed toward hor-
mone treatment of plants using gibberellin or gibberellic
acid. It is recognized that gibberellin produces increased
growth rates and increased plant sizes. There are nine types
of gibberellin identified to date. Five of the gibberellins
have been isolated from fungi such as Phaseolus Multiflorus.
Three of the gibberellins have been isolated from higher
plants, and one of the gibberellins has been isolated from
both fungi and higher plants. The nine gibberellins have
been designated types A-l through A-9. The gibberellins are
native plant growth hormones.
Sound waves have previously been used on plants to
promote the growth and health of plants. A description of
such use is found in the book entitled, "The Secret Life of
Plants," written by Peter Thompkins and Christopher Bird and
published by Harper and Row in 1973. The chapter entitled
"The ~armonic Life of Plants" is of particular interest.
Summary of the Present Invention
The present invention is a process for treating
plants with sound of a particular frequency to stimulate
growth. Further the present invention is a process of
treating plants with sound to force osmosis of growth pro-
moting or growth inhibiting compositions. The process may
include the steps of applying the growth affecting com-
position to the plant and subjecting the plant to sound waves
while the growth affecting composition is disposed on said
plant.
The growth promoting composition preferably inclu-
des gibberellin. The gibberellin may be of the type A-3.
Various other growth promoting materials may be provided to
the plant using the present process, for example, minerals,
amino acids and the like. The growth promoting composition
desirably is in the form of an aq~eous solution. The water
.
:
.
`
,
lZ913879
used in preparing the growth promoting solu~ion desirably is
free of materials that are detrimental to the plant, e.g.
chlorine and fluorine. Detergent may be included in the
solution to facilitate uniform distribution of the aqueous
solution on the foliage of the plant. Growth inhibiting com-
positions may be similarly applied. A suitable inhibitory
composition may be an aqueous solution of what is commonly
referred to as 2,4D.
The sound used in the present invention may be pro-
duced using any of a variety of mechanisms. One techniquethat has proven suitable is the use of a recording, e.g. disc
recordings and cassette recordings. Alternatively, electro-
nic sound producing devices may be used.
Detaile_ Description of the Present Invention
In one embodiment of the present invention, plants
are treated with sound waves desirably in the range of about
4 to 6 kilohertz. In another embodiment of the present
invention the plants are treated with the combination of
sound and growth promoting/inhibiting chemicals. The growth
promoting chemicals, for example, are applied to plan-ts in an
effective amount to stimulate growth upon application of
sound energy to the plant. Any technique may be used to
apply the chemicals to the plants. In the case of applying
chemicals as an aqueous solution to the foliage of plants,
conventional spraying techniques may be used. In the case of
applying the chemicals to seeds, the seeds may be wetted with
an aqueous solution.
The growth promoting chemicals used in the present
invention may include gibberellin, preferably of the type
A-3. The chemicals may be dissolved in water which pre-
ferably is free of detrimental chemicals such as cholorine
and fluorine. The gibberellin may be present in the solution
in an amount of between 0.1 to 200 parts per million by
129887~
weight. The preferred level is 0.5 to 100 parts per million~
The solution may include other materials which are
beneficial to the plants. For example, derived proteinaceous
materials such as amino acid chelated materials may be fed to
the plants using the present process. Illustrative of such
amino acid chelated materials are the Metalosates~ trace
minerals from Albion Laboratories. These chelated proteina-
ceous materials are growth promoting. The proteinaceous
materials may be used at a level of 1 teaspoon to 2
tablespoons per quart, preferably 1 troy ounce per gallon.
The growth promoting chemicals in the present
invention may include seaweed extract. Illustrative of the
sources of extract are seaweed of the types AscoPhyllum nodo-
sum, Fucus vesiculosus and Fucus serratus. A detailed
discussion of production and conventional use of such seaweed
extract is found in "Seaweed in Agriculture and
Horticulture," by W. A. Stephenson. Seaweed extract is com-
mercially available under the designation Maxicrop'n seaweed
extract. The seaweed extract may be used as an aqueous solu-
tion including ~ teaspoon to 4 tablespoons per gallon, pre-
ferably 1 tablespoon per gallon.
The growth stimulating solution may include a
- detergent to facilitate uniform spreading of the solution on
the plant, e.g. foliage. The detergent desirably is
biodegradable. A commercially available suitable detergent
is Basic H~. The detergent may be used at a level of ~ ounce
per gallon.
The process may include use of lignite water
(LA-Water XXX Normalizer'n from CAW Industries of Rapid City,
South Dakota). The lignite water may be present in an amount
of at least three ounces by volume per 100 gallons of solu-
tion, preferably four ounces to 100 ounces per 100 gallons of
solution.
While the growth promoting material is present on
. .
., ' .'
:. .
.
129~3879
the plant, the plant is subjected to sound waves of high fre-
quency. The sound waves may be produced in any manner, for
example, sound recordings or sound generating devices. The
sound may be of a frequency of 4 to 6 kiloher~z, perferably
4.7 to 5.3 kilohertz. The sound waves may be of a constant
fre~uency; however, use of a variable frequency is preferred.
For example, the plants may be subjected to sound waves which
vary in frequency from 4.7 to 5.3 kilohertz. The period of
one rise and fall in frequency may be from 0.1 to 0.5
seconds~ To obtain the greatest benefit, it is essential
that the plants be subjected to the sound waves while the
growth promoting chemical or chemicals are present on the
plant. It has been found that if the plants are first sub~
jected to the sound waves, and then the sound waves are
stopped and later the chemicals are applied, one does not
obtain the present results. For e~ample, it has been found
that plants first treated with sound and later gibberellin
type A-3 result in about 4 percent of the plants achieving
exceptional growth, while if the gibber~llin is present on
the plant at the time of applying the sound, about 98 percent
of the plants achieve exceptional growth. It is believed the
sound waves serve to open the individual plant cells to
increase the osmotic movement of the chemicals into the plant
cells. The volume of the sound waves in the present inven-
tion may be at least 115 decibels, preferably 115 to 120decibels. The duration of sound treatment is at least 15
seconds, preferably about 30 seconds to 30 minutes.
The present process increases both the rate of
growth and the ex-tent of growth of plants. In one experiment
using the present invention, a cherry tomato plant was raised
which was twenty feet in width and fifteen feet in height.
The tomato plant yielded more than six hundred tomatoes. In
another experiment, roses were treated and, rather than each
side branch having single blooms, each side branch divided
lZg~87~
--6--
into additional side branches which resulted in multiple
blooms. In a further experiment, a purple passion plant
which usually grows to t~o feet in length actually grew to
over five hundred times that length.
The p.resent process for growth promotion has been
found suitable for use on ornamentals, vegetables, fruits and
the like.
The following are illustrative of various plants
suitable for treatment under the present process:
Farm crops including soybeans, corn, sun~lowers,
dry edible beans and alfalfa;
Vegetables such as tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers,
15 lettuce, zucchini, carrots, squash and other minor vege-
tables;
Flowers and ornamentals such as Roses, African
Violets, Orchids, and Moss Roses;
Vines including Purple Passion, Boston Ivy, English
Ivy and other leafy vines, such as the Hawaiian Mylee;
Trees and shrubs such as flowering shrubs, snowball
bushes, fruit trees, weeping willows, silver maples and other
shade trees of the broad leaf nature;
Fruits such as apples, bananas, and oranges;
Specialty crops including Aloe Vera, Jojoba,
Guayule, Jerusalem Artichokes, Macadamia Nut Trees and other
spe~ial purpose medicinal crops and/or oil crops;
House plants including any and all leafy vines,
flowers or plants normally grown indoors in pots;
,
,
. '
. :. .
1.7:9~87g
Landscape plants including shrubs, bushes, flowers
and ornamentals;
Tropical plants including orchids, lilies, and
other tropical ornamental and vegetable or farm crops.
The present process for growth promotion in mosk
instances produces an increase in growth rate of at least
15 percent and in some instances has resulted in a plant size
increase of over five hundred fold. Seed production has been
increased by two to three hundred percent and more. The
seeds are larger than normal and carry forward the increased
production and growth rates. The treated plants have a
greater resistance to drought and frost.
The particular method of application o~ chemicals
may vary. In some instances, the plant foliage may be
treatedt in other instances, the roots; and in still others,
the seeds are treated prior to germination. Cuttings may be
rooted in a solution according to the present invention while
sound is applied.
The present process for growth inhibition has been
found suitable for any undesirable plant growth such as
grasses, rag weed, button weed and the like. The present
process for plant life inhibition may be carried out using
any growth inhibitor together with the sound treatment. For
example, a conventional weed spray such as 2,4D may be used.
The inhibitor may be used at a lower level of application and
acts more rapidly than conventional use. For example, the
herbicide concentration and thus application may be reduced
by 5 to 75 percent.
Example I
(Purple Passion Plant)
The present invention was carried out by treating a
; . .:.. ;. .
l2sa~s
purple passion plant with sound and a gibberellin solution.
Potting soil was prepared by mixing 45 percent commercially
available African Violet potting soil, 45 percent general
potting soil ~Woolworth's ~lack Magic~), 4 percent sheep
manure and 1 percent lime. This mixture was placed in a
flower pot which had the lower portion filled with charcoal
pieces. A small purple passion plant was purchased at a
variety store and planted in the potting soil mixture. A
gibberellin solution was prepared including ten parts gib-
berellin type A-3 and one million parts water. The water was
free of chlorine and flourine. The gibberellin was applied
by spraying to wet the leaves once each month. The gib-
berellin solution was applied while playing a recording to
produce high frequency sound in the range of between 4 and 6
kilohertz. The sound was at a volume of about 115 decibels
and was applied for over 30 seconds while the solution was
present on the leaves. The plant grew to a length of over
1000 feet during an experimental period of two years. The
high frequency sound is believed to open the stomata of the
plant to enable forced osmosis of the gibberellin solution
into the cells.
Example II
(Edible Yellow #2 Beans)
A fifty acre field of wind damaged edeble yellow #2
beans located in Northern Minnesota was treated according to
the present invention by mixing by volume 150 ounces of
Maxicrop~, 300 ounces of amino acid, 6 ounces of Basic H~
surfactant, 12~ ounces of lignite water, and 120 ounces of
gibberellin A-3 in 300 gallons of water. Fifty acres of
beans were sprayed using a tractor equipped with a crop
sprayer. The mixture was applied at a rate of six gallons
per acre. The tractor carried a speaker which emitted a
sound at 4.82 kilohertz per second at a volume of 115 deci-
,: ~
12~887~
bels. Sound was applied to the plant for over 15 secondswhile the plant was being sprayed and sound continued to
affect plant as tractor and sprayer moved through the field
for approximately 3~ hours. The average growth of the plants
was two inches in seven hours whereas nontreated control
plants showed no noticeable growth over this period. The
treated plants produced one metric ton of 5 beans per acre
and the untreated control plants produced 1400 pounds per
acre.
Example III
(Weeping Willow Tree)
A weeping willow tree was treated according to the
present invention. The tree was five feet tall and had a
trunk diameter of ~ inch at the time of planting and commen-
cement of treatment. The tree was treated monthly for a
period of seven years. One gallon of the treating solution
contained by weight 0.5 ounces Maxicrop~, 0.26 ounces lignite
water, 1.0 ounce amino acid, and 30 parts per million gib-
berellin in water. The leaves of the tree were wetted onceeach month with the solution and sound of about 5 kilohertz
per second was applied for about 20 minutes. The sound volume
was about 115 decibels. Over a seven-year period, the tree
grew to a height of over 36 feet and a trunk girth of 47
inches.
Example IV
(Weeping Willow Seedlings)
The process of the present invention was carried
out on weeping willow seedlings. The seedlings were obtained
as bare-rooted seedlings. All seedlings were planted in com-
parable soil and grown for one year without special treat-
ment. The seedlings were equal in size after the year's
growth. The seedlings were identified into four test groups,
e.g. Groups A, B, C and D. Group A was rekained as a control
~2~8~7g
--10--
and did not receive special treatment during the second year.
Group B was grown under conditions identical to Group A
except Group B received treatment in accordance with the pre-
sent invention. More specifically, the seedlings of Group B
were treated with sound at a frequency of about 5 kilohertz
at a volume of 115 decibels. While receiving the sound
treatment, the seedlings of Group B were spra~ed with a che-
mical solution made up from a concentrate. The concentrate
included by weight 7.78 percent gibberellin A-3, 7.7~ percent
surfactant (Basic H~), 7.78 percent Willard Water, 26.67 per-
cent amino acid and 50 percent seaweed extract. The con-
centrate was diluted by mixing one fluid ounce of concentrate
in one gallon of water. The solution was applied to Group B
by wetting the leaves with solution and applying the sound
treatment. The sound treatment continued for 30 minutes
after the solution was applied to each seedling. The
seedlings oE Group B 15 were treated in the following manner
(how often, e.g. every 30 days for 3 months?) The seedlings
of Group C were grown in a manner identical to Group B except
those seedlings only received the sound treatment and did not
receive the chemical application. Group D was grown in a
manner identical to 20 Group B except the seedlings of Group
D received only the chemical treatment and did not receive
the sound treatment. The new growth, over the summer, was
measured with random selection of ten branches from each
group. The average growth of the branches in each group was
as follows: Group A 25 was 41 inches; Group B was 80 inches;
Group C was 45 inches; and Group D was 69 inches per branch.
Example V
(Tomato Seedlings)
The present process was applied to tomato seedlings
of the type Burpee sig soy~. Treated plant growth and pro-
duction was compared with a control that received no special
treatment. A sufficient number oE plants were included in
: ~'
, .
,
lZ~3879
each group to provide reliable results. Both the treated and
control groups were planted on May 1st. The beginning plant
sizes were equal in the two groups and the growing conditions
were the same for both groups. The treated group was sub-
5 jected to sound treatment and chemical spray after 41 days,51 days, 65 days, 81 days, 97 days, and 129 days following
planting. The plants in the treated group received applica-
tion of 5 gallons solution per acre. Sound was applied for
five minutes before chemical application, during application
and for five minutes following application. The sound was at
a frequency of 4 to 6 kilohertz and at a volume of 115 deci-
bels. The chemical solution composition was as set forth in
Example IV. At 41 days the plants in both groups had an
average heighth of 10 inches. At 51 days the treated plants
had an average heighth of 18 inches and the control plants 14
inches. At 81 days the treated plants had an average heighth
of 51 inches and the control plants 48 inches. At this point
the treated plants had an average of 6 tomatoes per plant
whereas the control plants had an average of 2 tomatoes and
the latter tomatoes were about one-half the diameter of the
former. At 129 days following planting, the treated plants
were 77 inches in heighth and the control 50 inches. The
treated plants had an average of 7 tomatoes and the control
had an average of 3. The treated tomato fruit was twice the
size of the fruit from the untreated. The growth was
observed as follows:
Table
Percent
GrowthControl PlantTreated Plant Increase
Period Height Height Over
Ela~sed_tInches) _ (Inches) ___ Control
41 days 10 10
35 51 14 18 28
'~
,
87~
-12-
24 33 37.5%
81 44 51 15.9%
97 48 69 43.75
129 50 77 54~
Example VI
(Boston Ivy)
The present process was applied to a Boston Ivy
plant and the growth was compared with a control which only
received sound treatment. Both plants were 2 feet in length
at commencement of the test. The treated plant was sprayed
with the present chemical on the following dates, June 10 and
20, July 4 and 16, August l and September 2. The plants both
received the same sound application of 10 minutes following
the application of chemical to sprayed plant. On October 22
the plant 15 treated with sound only was 12 feet 10 inches
and the plant treated with the combination of sound and che-
mical was 19 feet 9 inches in length.
Example VII
(Jerusalem Artichokes)
Jerusalem artichokes of the variety Mammouth French
Whites~ were treated according to the present invention and
compared with a nontreated control group. All specimens were
planted on the first day of May. The treated group was
treated by application of sound at a frequency of between 4
and 6 kilohertz for five minutes and while the sound con-
tinued the plants were wetted with the solution described in
Example 1. The sound treatment was continued for five minu-
tes following application of chemical. A control group wasgrown under identical conditions except it received no chemi-
cal or sound treatment. On the dates shown in the following
table six random plants were measured in each group and the
six were averaged to provide the results shown. A second
control group was also grown but treated only with the chemi-
: :,
; ~
....
.~:
,
~;~988~
-13-
cal. The second control group was not measured but the
tubers weighed for comparison. On each of th~ listed dates,
six random samples of each group were sacrificed and the
tubers weighed. The results were as follows:
~o Spray Spray
Spray Plus Sound _ No Sound No Sound
HeightTuber Tuber
10 Date (In.) Wt. Height Tuber Wt.Weight
06/10 20" -- 21" -- --
06/20 34" -- 30
07/04 47" -- 42" -- __
07/16 62" -- ~5" -- --
08/01 84" 3 lbs. 61" ~ lb. 1 lb.
09/02 108" 7 lbs. 72" 1 lb. 4 lbs.
10/22 16 lbs. 6 lbs. 11 lbs.
The plants sacrificed on October 22 had 9 to 11
tubers on the plants treated with the combination of sound
and chemical whereas, the plants which received no spray and
no sound had either 3 or 4 tubers per plant.
Example VIII
(Cherry Tomatoes)
The effect of the use of sound in the present
invention was tested by selecting nine uniform cherry tomato
plants. The plants were each six inches in height. The
plants were divided into three groups of three plants. Group
1 was treated with the solution described in Example I by
spotting 50 microliters of solution over an area of 2.0
square centimeters on the second leaf from the top of the
plant. The solution had been labeled with Fe~59 isotope.
The plants were subjected to 20 mv energy of sound for 15
..
.
~2~1379
-14-
minutes prior to application of the solution and for 15 minu-
tes following such application. The sound was at between 4
and 6 kilohertz. Group 2 was treated in an identical manner
except the sound treatment was omitted~ The plants were held
for 24 hours. Then a portion of the stem immediately above
the treated leaf was removed from each plant in Group 1. The
corrected counts per minute per milligram was 2.47 + 0.4.
The stem portion immediately beneath the leaf was taken. The
corrected counts per minute per milligram was 2.5 + 0.17.
Group 2 plants were similarly analyzed. The corresponding
values were 0.4 + 0.1 and 1.13 + 0.42 respectively. This
shows a substantial effect in chemical uptake by the plants
treated with sound over those not treated with sound.
ExamPle IX
The present invention was carried out to compare
the effect of the chemical application together with and
without sound application. A control without either chemical
or sound was also carried out. Such testing was carried out
by applying the composition described in Example II~ The
plants in each instance were grown from the Punch N' Grows~
product of Northrup King obtained from a commercial source.
All plants emerged after one week. The various plants and
groups were treated identically except for the fact that
Group 1 was a control and did not receive either sound or
chemical application. Group 2 received both sound and spray
as described in Example II. The sound, however, was applied
by a cassette recording played by a cassette player. The
spray was applied by a hand-held spray gun. The sound was
applied to the emerged plants for ~ hour three times a week.
The chemical spray was applied once a week during one of the
sound applications. Group 3 received the spray but no sound
and Group 4 received sound but no spray. In all instances
Groups 2-4 provided more rapid growth than did Group 1. The
31.Z9~3'79
combination of sound and spray provided greater growth than
did either the spray alone or the sound alone. A11 Groups
were started on February 26 and completed on March 19 for a
total growth period of 21 days.
Example X
A comparative test was carried out as described in
Example IX except that started plants of Nephthytie and Oak
~eaf Ivy were treated. The results of the 21 days growing
period were as follows:
NephthytisOak Leaf Ivy
Height (cm)Height (cm)
Group Start FinalStart Final
1 22.0 24.5 13.5 16,0
2 18.5 20.0 15.0 19.0
3 15.0 17.5 13.0 15.0
4 18.0 19.75 15.0 18.0
The plants were again measured after 93 days. The
results were as follows:
Nephthytis Oak Leaf Ivy
Group Start Final Start Final
1 22.0 26.5 13.5 28.0
2 18.5 24.0 15.0 35.0
3 15.0 24.5 13.0 ~6.5
4 18.0 22.0 15.0 30.0
Group 1 -- no sound & no spray
2 -- sound & spray
3 -- spray no sound
4 -- sound no spray
- - '
.. ; ' :,
~Z98879
-16-
Example XI
The present invention was carried out on the
followin~ plants substantially as ~escribed in E~ample II
comparing the present test specimen wikh controls which did
not receive either sound or chemical. The sound was applied
for at least 30 minutes.
Dates
PlantingPlant Sizes Final
10 Plant 11/1711/24 12/112/8 12/15 Weights
Soybeans (seeds)
** a. 1.6* 4.0 5.7 6.0 1.7 oz.
***b. 1.9 3.6 4.5 4.7 1.0 oz.
% increase
15 over control-16% +11%+27% +28% +70%
Radish (seeds)
a. .7 1.0 2.4 5.3 .8 oz.
b. 1.0 1.0 1.7 3.7 .3 oz.
% -30% 0%+41% +43% +166%
Pole Bean (seeds)
a. 3.0 6.0 19.6 38.4 3.3 oz.
b. 3.0 3.3 6.6 9.6 2.4 oz.
% 0% +82%+197% +300% +38%
Onions (seeds)
a. 1.0 8.4 12.5 15.0 1.4 oz.
b. 1.0 8.6 10.3 12.8 .7 oz.
% 0% -2.4%+21% +17~ +100%
Peppers (plants)
a. 6.8 7.2 8.0 9.4 9.4 2.8 lbs.
b. 7.4 7.7 8.5 9.9 10.1 2.2 lbs.
% -8.1 -6.5 -5.9 -5.0 -6.9 +27%
Tomatoes (plants)
a. 1.5 2.6 5.0 9.1 14.4 2~3 lbs.
b. 1.5 2.9 4.6 7.2 11.8 2.2 lbs.
35 % 0% -10% +8.7%+26% +22% ~4.5%
~298879
-17-
* Plant measurements are in inches.
** a. Treated according to present invention
***b. Is the control plants without sound or spray.
Example XII
Tests were conducted using radio active isotope
Fe59 to compare the takeup rate of the growth stimulating
solution of Example II with and without sound treatment.
Nine 6~inch cherry tomato plants were selected as uniform as
possible. Each member of Group 1 was spotted over a 2 square
cantimeter area of the second leaf from the top of the plant.
Fifty microliters of solution was applied. The 2 square cen-
timeters had ~4,000 corrected counts per minute, or in other
words 5 microcurries of Fe59 isotope. Twenty microvolts
energy sound at a frequepcy of between 4.7 and 6 kilohertz
was applied for lS minutes following the spotting. Group 2
was treated identical to Group 1 except the sound was not
applied. Group 3 was treated the same as Group 1 except they
did not receive either chemicals or sound treatment. The
terminal leaf, opposite leaf~ stem above point of application
and stem below point of application was collected on all
plants 24 hours post application. Corrected counts per
minute per mg. were as follows:
GrouP 1 GrouP 2 GrouP 3
Terminal Leaf0.3 + 0.2.67 ~ .29 0.2 + .16
Opposite Leaf.17 + .12.47 + .46 .23 + .06
Stem Above2.47 + 0.4 .40 + 0.1 0.~ + .18
Stem Below2.5 + .17 1.13 ~ .42 3.5 + .22
Example XIII
The present invention was carried out using a post
emergent herbicide in combination with the application of
sound on grassy weeds. The herbicide was Hoe-grasssn produced
:, .
,'; :
;
,
,,:
9~3~379
-18-
by Hertz Chemical, Ltd. The active ingredient was DiClofop
Methyl. Twenty liters o~ concentrate containing 190 gram~
per liter active ingredient was diluted to 530 gallons by the
addition of water. This dilution contained only 25 percent
of the usual recommended active ingredient. The diluted
solution was applied by a drawn boom-type sprayer at a rate
of 10 gallons per acre while sound was applied at a frequency
of between 4 and 6 kilohertz and at a transmitted volume of
115 decibels. Although the herbicide, together with sound,
was applied at a level of only 25 percent of normal recom-
mended application, the ef~ect on inhibiting the grassy
weeds, primarily wild oats, was essentially the same as full
application using no sound.
ExamPle XIV
The present invention was carried out using a post
emergent herbicide (Hoe-grass 2~ by Hertz Chemical, Ltd.) in
combination with sound on broad leaf weeds and grassy weeds.
This herbicide included Diclofop Methyl and Bromoxynil having
active ingredients of 310 grams per liter. Twenty liters of
the herbicide concentrate were diluted with water to 540
gallons which is 25 percent of the usual recommended applica-
tion concentration. The herbicide was applied at a rate of
10 gallons per acre while applying sound at 4 to 6 kilohertz
and at a volume of about 115 decibels for at least 15 minu-
tes. Satisfactory results were obtained on a cultivated
field having substantially broad leaf and grassy weed
infestation.
Example XV
The present invention was carried out using Saber
herbicide. Saber is a 1:1 mixture of Bromoxynil and META.
The concentrate had 720 grams active ingredient per liter.
Twenty gallons of Saber were diluted with water to 540
'"'
,~ .
~Z~8879
--19--
gallons and applied at the rate of 10 gallons per liter.
This application is 25 percent of the recommended dosage.
The application was accompanied with sound as described in
Example XIV. The application satisfactorily inhibited the
growth of weeds in a cultivated field having a mixture of
common weeds.
Example XVI
The present invention was carried out as described
in Example XIV, however using META Extamene. The active
ingredient is META amine. The concentrate had 500 grams
active ingredient per liter. Similar results were obtained.
ExamPle XVII
15 The present invention was carried out using
Target~. The active ingredient was a mixture of decamba,
mecoprat and MCTA. The concentrate had 400 grams active
ingredient per liter. Dilution and application was as
described in Example XV. Similar results were obtained.
Example XVIII
The present invention may be carried out using
Ortho~ Crab Grass killer. A concentrate having by weight 8
percent Octyl ammonium methane arsonate and 8 percent dodecyl
ammonium methanearsonate. One tablespoon may be diluted with
water to one gallon and applied to 200 square feet of lawn to
effectively kill crab grass. Sound is applied at a frequency
of between 4 and 6 kilohertz for at least 30 seconds
following application of the solution.
Example XIX
The present invention may be carried out using
Ortho Weed-B-Gon~ lawn weed killer. The active ingredients
are 21.4 percent Butoxy propyl esters of 2.4-Dichlorophen-
~zg8a79
-20-
oxyacetic acid and 10 percent 2(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy) pro-
panoic acid by weight in the concentrate. One teaspoon of
the concentrate may be diluted to one gallon with water. The
solution may be applied by spraying on 167 square feet of
lawn infested with such weeds as suckhorn Plantain, Canada
Thistle, Common Burdock, Common Plantain, Curly Dock,
Dandelion, Dichondra, Ground Hog, Lawn Pennywort, Lippia,
Morningglory, Wild Garlic and Wild Onions. Sound is applied
as described in Example XVIII. Satisfactory results are
obtained.
. . .
.
.
.
