What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

Googling reveals one is marketed by Monsanto and the other by Scott.

Presumably the original patent on glyphosate has expired
and they all make their own formulations with extra "magic
ingredients". So as to make you choose theirs over the
competition.

Scott's Website is pretty uninformative but from a quick look at
the Monsanto website Biactive has better sufacents, which at a
guess means it adheres to the plant better. Which it does using
two different chemicals.

Or to quote the website

quote

- "two adjuvants. Alone they offer excellent benefits, but in
combination the synergistic effect of these two adjuvant partners
ensures an outstanding perfomance.

quote

Which makes it worth at least £20 a bottle, if not more IMO.

quote

" Novel technology
Roundup Pro Biactive was developed following many years of
exhaustive field and laboratory testing of a new surfactant
system known as Biactivator adjuvant technology.

Unique Biactive formulation gets more glyphosate into the plant"

quote

http://www.monsanto-ag.co.uk/layout/...glyphosate.asp


The standard formulation probably has a greater tendency to run off the
leaf surface, stems and plant tissue generally.

Maybe its thicker as well, although not using cornflour
presumably.


michael adams

....

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

Googling reveals one is marketed by Monsanto and the other by Scott.

Presumably the original patent on glyphosate has expired
and they all make their own formulations with extra "magic
ingredients". So as to make you choose theirs over the
competition.

Stop press: apparently they're both pro-biactive.

quote

Roundup Ultra 3000 1ltr
Weedkiller. Unique biactive formulation quickly penetrates
the waxy surface of the weed's leaves enabling rapid absorption
of the active ingredients, thereby giving improved rainfastness
and reliability. Apply by spray or watering can. 1ltr covers up
to 3000 square mtrs. Contains concentrated Glyphosphate.
http://www.interiorlandscaping.co.uk/pest.htm

quote

Maybe "Roundup" like "Growmore" is a generic name whose
right awere allowed to lapse.

...
michael adams

....

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

3rd time lucky?

Ultra is definitely more concentrated compared with bio
at least. And works out cheaper as well.

quote


Roundup Ultra 3000 1ltr

1ltr covers up to 3000 square mtrs.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Contains concentrated Glyphosphate. £40.62 ex VAT £47.73 inc VAT
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Bio Glyphosate Concentrate 1ltr
Tough, systemic weedkiller for the control of docks,nettles, plantains,
thistles, willowherbs, speedwells, grasses and many more.

1ltr treats 400 sq mtrs.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Contains glyphosate. MAPP 09242 £11.65 ex VAT
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

/ quote

http://www.interiorlandscaping.co.uk/pest.htm




I'll get me coat

michael adams

michael adams wrote:
"Chris Bacon" wrote...
What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

3rd time lucky?

Ultra is definitely more concentrated compared with bio
at least. And works out cheaper as well.

I actually meant "Roundup Biactive" rather than "Bio", although
the information on "Bio Glyphosate" is useful - thank you. I
don't think they're the same animal.

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:
"Chris Bacon" wrote...
What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

3rd time lucky?

Ultra is definitely more concentrated compared with bio
at least. And works out cheaper as well.

I actually meant "Roundup Biactive" rather than "Bio",

That was inncluded in the first post -


"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
What's the difference between "Roundup Pro Biactive" and
"Roundup Ultra 3000"?

Googling reveals one is marketed by Monsanto and the other by Scott.

Presumably the original patent on glyphosate has expired
and they all make their own formulations with extra "magic
ingredients". So as to make you choose theirs over the
competition.

Scott's Website is pretty uninformative but from a quick look at
the Monsanto website Biactive has better sufacents, which at a
guess means it adheres to the plant better. Which it does using
two different chemicals.

Or to quote the website

quote

- "two adjuvants. Alone they offer excellent benefits, but in
combination the synergistic effect of these two adjuvant partners
ensures an outstanding perfomance.

quote

Which makes it worth at least £20 a bottle, if not more IMO.

quote

" Novel technology
Roundup Pro Biactive was developed following many years of
exhaustive field and laboratory testing of a new surfactant
system known as Biactivator adjuvant technology.

Unique Biactive formulation gets more glyphosate into the plant"

quote

http://www.monsanto-ag.co.uk/layout/...glyphosate.asp


The standard formulation probably has a greater tendency to run off the
leaf surface, stems and plant tissue generally.

Maybe its thicker as well, although not using cornflour
presumably.


michael adams

....















although
the information on "Bio Glyphosate" is useful - thank you. I
don't think they're the same animal.

michael adams wrote:
"Chris Bacon" wrote
I actually meant "Roundup Biactive" rather than "Bio",

That was inncluded in the first post -

I did not see the that, but I've googleded - thanks.

Glyphosphate ...

A YEAR ago, Colonia Loma Senes was just another rural backwater in the
north of Argentina. But that was before the toxic cloud arrived. "The
poison got blown onto our plots and into our houses," recalls local
farmer Sandoval Filemon. "Straight away our eyes started smarting. The
children's bare legs came out in rashes." The following morning the
village awoke to a scene of desolation. "Almost all of our crops were
badly damaged. I couldn't believe my eyes," says Sandoval's wife,
Eugenia. Over the next few days and weeks chickens and pigs died, and
sows and nanny goats gave birth to dead or deformed young. Months later
banana trees were deformed and stunted and were still not bearing
edible fruit.

The villagers quickly pointed the finger at a neighbouring farm whose
tenants were growing genetically modified soya, engineered to be
resistant to the herbicide glyphosate. A month later, agronomists from
the nearby National University of Formosa visited the scene and
confirmed the villagers' suspicions. The researchers concluded that the
neighbouring farmers, like thousands of others growing GM soya in
Argentina, had been forced to take drastic action against resistant
weeds and had carelessly drenched the land - and nearby Colonia Loma
Senes - with a mixture of powerful herbicides.

To read further ...

http://www1.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004...ml?c=on#c91824