Biological performance of a formulation containing water-dispersible copper naphthenate and sodium fluoride against decay fungi

ABSTRACT

Two formulations of wood preservative one containing water-dispersible copper naphthenate (CuN) alone and in combination with sodium fluoride (NaF) were used to treat southern pine sapwood blocks to determine the effect of the addition of sodium fluoride in the QNS on the protection against wood decay fungi using laboratory soil block tests following AWPA (American Wood protection Association) standard E10-16 [American Wood Protection Association AWPA-E10. (2016 American Wood Protection Association. (2016) Standard E10-16 Laboratory Method for Evaluating the Decay Resistance of Wood-Based Materials Against Pure Basidiomycete Cultures: Soil/Block Test. [Google Scholar]) Laboratory Method for Evaluating the Decay Resistance of Wood-based Materials Against Pure Basidiomycete Cultures: Soil/Block Test]. The standard consists in exposing treated blocks to pure monoculture of white rot (Irpex lacteus (FP-105915) and Trametes versicolor (R-105)) and brown rot fungi (Gloeophyllum trabeum (Madison 617) and Postia placenta (Madison 698) during a specific period. The weight loss (WL) in percentage of treated blocks was used as an indicator of the biological performance of treated blocks against basidiomycetes at specific retentions. Minimum WL was obtained with blocks treated with the formulation containing mixture of QNS and sodium fluoride with the retention of 0.29?kg/m³ Cu and 0.51?kg/m³ of fluorine in treated blocks. A copper retention of 1.65?kg/m³ from blocks treated with formulations containing only QNS was needed to obtain similar WL to blocks containing blocks Cu++ and F? (fluorine). The lower Cu retention is attributed to a combination of the presence of the fluorine with some toxic activities against bacteria and decay and the interaction of anions fluorine and ionic Cu (II) in the aqueous treating solutions to form more soluble biological toxic hydrate of copper fluoride ((H₂O Cu (II) F2) in treated blocks compared to copper complexes less biological available in water-dispersible CuN-treated bocks.