I looked up more on Roundup Plus - I didn't realixe there are so many different formulations. Maybe what jBaker used was "Roundup Concentrate Plus" which adds 0.73% diquat dibromide to cause faster burn down or the weed. Based on the following, I personally wouldn't worry about it. It bonds so strongly to soil that plants don't absorb it and it will not wash away or breakdown. Those passionate about organics will read this differently, but you wouldn't have bought the product if you were passionately organic. I expect those who view all non-organics as poisons would want to scrape off the top inch of soil that might be contaminated and throw it away, as it will never go away otherwise. Here's some info on diquat dibromide: ENVIRONMENTAL FATE Breakdown of Chemical in Soil and Groundwater When diquat dibromide comes in contact with soil, it becomes strongly adsorbed to clay particles or organic matter in the soil for long periods of time (Koc - 100,000 g/ml). The strong chemical bonds formed by diquat adsorption to soil particles make the herbicide biologically and chemically inactive. That is, in certain soils it is unlikely to be: carried away, or leached, by water seeping through the soil; taken up by plants; broken down by microbes in the soil in a process called microbial degradation; or broken down by sunlight (photochemical degradation). Traces, or residues, of diquat have been found to persist in soil for many years with very little degradation (8, 21, 32, 36, 40). Soil capacity for adsorption of diquat is so high in comparison to the rates at which it is applied that there is little possibility that leaching or groundwater contamination will occur. Field and laboratory tests show that diquat usually remains in the top inch of soil for long periods of time after it is applied (31, 32). However, there is also evidence that diquat has the ability to eventually use up, or saturate, all the available adsorption sites on soil clay particles. Groundwater quality can be affected if soil adsorption sites become totally saturated because water moving down through the soil can carry any non adsorbed herbicide into the groundwater. More research is needed for a better understanding of the potential effects on groundwater of long- term, repeated use of diquat. Studies on the erosion of diquat-treated soils near bodies of water indicate that diquat stays bonded to soil particles, remaining biologically inactive in surface waters, such as lakes, rivers and ponds Here is a link that might be useful: Cornell - Extension Toxicology Network

"wait, wait...are you saying I can put six HUNDRED plants in a 10x10 plot???" Those yields are based upon a degree of soil conditioning that is very labor-intensive... and while I have read of such recommendations, I have yet to see photos, or hear first-hand observations, proving that they would work for most gardeners. All of the digging aside, in my area, I'd be flirting with disaster if I crowded my beans that closely. Personally, I wouldn't recommend it. Most bush beans - when healthy & mature - have a footprint of 1/2 - 1 sq. ft. or larger. 100 plants (1 per sq. ft.) should be a safe bet; I've successfully used 6" between plants w/ 2-foot spacing between rows, which is close to the same thing. You might be able to get away with 2-3 plants per sq. ft. for the more compact varieties. Crowding more closely than that may work in the warm dry climate of California; but in the cooler, wetter Northern climes, it could lead to severe disease problems. I'm not saying that it wouldn't work... just that I wouldn't put all my eggs in that one basket, unless/until small-scale trials proved it to be successful. In a post above, I had mentioned "seed efficiency". To put that in perspective, large kidney beans are somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-60 seeds per ounce. If planted at the recommended bio-intensive density of 600+ for a 10' X 10' plot, you would need between 10-16 ounces of seed to plant... so you would need to buy (or save from the previous season) a pound of seed. Assuming you harvest 24 pounds of dry seed (which is, keep in mind, the best case scenario), it would represent a return of between 24/1 & 38/1, depending upon seed size. Most gardeners would get much less than that, since the maximum is for experienced gardeners, on well amended soil. In contrast, my observations are that large-seeded bush beans, given the 6" plant/2' row spacing I mentioned above, are easily capable of a seed increase of between 50/1 - 100/1. Small-seeded types will tend to yield about the same weight/plant, but at an even higher ratio of increase, well over 100/1... so in terms of cost effectiveness (if purchasing seed) small is often better. Pole beans can do better still; the "Striped Cornfield" I grew this year (@45 seeds/oz.) produced a return of over 500/1! My results were obtained by mechanical tilling, with leaves & mulch turned under each season. Using these numbers, the same kidney beans - if grown in 5 rows in the same 10' X 10' plot - would be 100 plants. This would produce between 5 & 10 pounds of seed minimum... with only 2 ounces of seed required for planting, the average in a packet of beans. Also, at this spacing, the plants have sufficient air flow through the foliage to minimize the chances of disease during prolonged periods of rainfall. Having tested that theory in some very bad years recently (such as in 2008) I consider these yields to be realistically attainable, year after year. I don't doubt that my spacings could be improved upon; it is something that I often experiment with. Most likely, there is a happy medium somewhere between row spacing & high-density plantings which will produce the best yield, for a given area, with the littlest possible seed. That "happy medium" should take into account the expected annual variations in climate, since what works well one year, might not work the next. With soybeans, I have had some success with closely-spaced double rows, with standard row spacing between the pairs... so that may work for bush beans as well. Given the observations I have made on over 100 bean varieties over the years, I expect the optimal spacing will vary widely, depending upon variety, climate, and soil fertility. So there is really no "one correct answer" for bean spacing... just starting points for personal experimentation. Keep in mind, John Jeavons' bio-intensive recommendations mentioned above pertain to bush beans only. Pole beans are not suitable for wide bed planting, due to shading. However, you can have the best of both worlds using pole beans. Planted in a single row on the North side of the bed (where they would not shade shorter crops), they take up a relatively small footprint. A high-yielding pole variety could give you 3-4 pounds of dry seed from one row in that same 10' X 10' bed. You could use the majority of the bed(s) for other things, and still get a good crop of beans. My apologies for all of the long (and probably dry) posts, but as an amateur researcher, I just wanted to share some "bean science". Just wish this was on the Bean Forum.

Thought I'd report back on germinating beans with a nitrate solution. (Only a third [8/24] of my beans planted in ground earlier in May had germinated). In the cell pack with Miracle Grow I planted 72 beans. Thirty one germinated, so 43%. The cells were too small, so that a couple of beans got their roots growing over the stem, so that they could not get up out of the soil. Pretty weird to see a bean with true leaves trapped in the pro-mix, coiled twice,yet not able to escape the roots. Those roots were partly above the soil. Also, some beans came up with oddly thin stems. (That was the case in the garden as well.) Quite a few had trouble completely splitting their seed coats even after their were well above the soil, so I gave them a little help with that. Tonight I planted out as many as I could. Will be interesting to see how many survive transplant. I left the weaklings in the cell packs to see if they will develop any more. I still need to plant out a lot more but I'm going to move on to my seed purchased for 2018. Got to get them in pronto.

No leaf development sounds like the stumps that slugs and snails leave behind, once they have feasted on just sprouted beans. Mice and pigeons also do great damage to seedling beans and probably other creatures in your area as well. Your temperatures are warm enough for beans to sprout, if it wasn't we would not be able to sprout beans here in Britain at all. I think you have two unknown quantities. Firstly, is the seed viable? Secondly, what is reducing my beans to stumps and how can I overcome that? I have never heard of a disease problem preventing leaf development. What works for me is sowing beans indoors, preferably in small individual pots, cell trays or newspaper pots. They can go in anyway, eyes up or down makes no difference. Starting your seeds under controlled conditions should determine whether your seeds germinate or not. When you have grown your plants to the two real leaves stage, transplant them and protect them. In areas that are not too hot you can protect each individual plant with a plastic cola bottle with bottom cut off, pushed into the ground and the cap taken off. If you don't want to start the seedlings indoors, you can do a germination test. Take 10 beans, place them onto a wetted sheet of kitchen towel, fold over and place inside a ziplock bag in a warm place, but not in direct sun heat. From day 3 onwards check every day to see how many have germinated. Some people deliberately pre-sprout seeds as you do for a germination test, then very carefully transplant the seeds when the root is showing, and cover with only a thin layer of fine soil. Wish you better luck with your next batch