I. hederifolia 7 claims

Interactor role: weed

Literal values, not normalised. 183,098 distinct spellings cover 1,706,259 claims; only letter case and spacing are merged, so “maize”, “corn” and “Zea mays L.” are three separate entries here. The By interacting organism view merges spellings of one organism through NCBI Taxonomy.

7 claims

Open in search (filters, sorting) →

Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

I. hederifolia coexistence caused 2.12 yield loss.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxt0
Interactor: I. hederifoliae0weed
Outcome: yield losse0
Direction: losse0
Value: 2.12e0

Verbatim

e0
“The yield loss of 0.85, 2.12, 5.71 and 34.24% were found for each weed of E. heterophylla, I. hederifolia, R. brasiliensis and Conyza spp., coexisting with soybean.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1446–1610

t0
“soybean”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 92–99

Title

Control period and economic threshold level of glyphosate tolerant weeds in 2.4-D resistant soybean

Eduardo Roncatto; Arthur Arrobas Martins Barroso; Juliana Calegarim; et al. Australian Journal of Crop Science 2021. doi:10.21475/ajcs.21.15.02.p3085

Other claims from this paper (11)

Intervention effect Glufosinate gave greater weed control than glyphosate alone.
Intervention effect Glyphosate plus 2.4-D gave greater weed control than glyphosate alone.
Association E. heterophylla coexistence caused 0.85 yield loss.
Association R. brasiliensis coexistence caused 5.71 yield loss.
Association Conyza spp. coexistence caused 34.24% yield loss.
Intervention effect The weedy treatment caused 50% soybean grain yield loss.
Recommendation Weed management should occur between days 18 and 48 after soybean emergence.
Recommendation The economic threshold is below one Conyza plant per square metre.
Recommendation The economic threshold is below one R. brasiliensis plant per square metre.
Recommendation Glufosinate offers farmers greater herbicide flexibility.
Recommendation Glyphosate plus 2,4-D offers farmers greater herbicide flexibility.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sweet sorghum hybrids did not suffer developmental interference from I. hederifolia.

Taxon: sweet sorghume1
Treatment: I. hederifoliae1
Interactor: I. hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliae1weed
Outcome: developmental interferencee1
Direction: did not suffere1
Comparator: weed-free controle0

Verbatim

e0
“weed-free control”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 902–919

e1
“The hybrids of sweet sorghum did not suffer developmental interference from C. rotundus, I. hederifolia or D. nuda”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1016–1130

Title

Interspecific Competition Between Sweet Sorghum and Weeds

P.R.F. GIANCOTTI; M.P. NEPOMUCENO; T.S. OLIVEIRA; et al. Planta Daninha 2019. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582019370100094

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect M. aterrima was the only weed whose dry mass was not reduced by the presence of sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum hybrids did not suffer developmental interference from C. rotundus.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum hybrids did not suffer developmental interference from D. nuda.
Intervention effect The dry mass of C. rotundus was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect The dry mass of I. hederifolia was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect The dry mass of D. nuda was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum cohabiting with B. decumbens had reduced aboveground and leaf dry mass.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum cohabiting with M. aterrima had reduced aboveground and leaf dry mass.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The dry mass of I. hederifolia was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum.

Taxon: sweet sorghume1
Treatment: competition with sweet sorghume1
Interactor: I. hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliae2weed
Outcome: dry masse1
Direction: reducede1
Comparator: sorghum-free controle0

Verbatim

e0
“a sorghum-free control”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 566–588

e1
“these weeds dry mass was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1151–1222

e2
“C. rotundus, I. hederifolia or D. nuda”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1092–1130

Title

Interspecific Competition Between Sweet Sorghum and Weeds

P.R.F. GIANCOTTI; M.P. NEPOMUCENO; T.S. OLIVEIRA; et al. Planta Daninha 2019. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582019370100094

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect M. aterrima was the only weed whose dry mass was not reduced by the presence of sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum hybrids did not suffer developmental interference from C. rotundus.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum hybrids did not suffer developmental interference from I. hederifolia.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum hybrids did not suffer developmental interference from D. nuda.
Intervention effect The dry mass of C. rotundus was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect The dry mass of D. nuda was reduced through competition with sweet sorghum.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum cohabiting with B. decumbens had reduced aboveground and leaf dry mass.
Intervention effect Sweet sorghum cohabiting with M. aterrima had reduced aboveground and leaf dry mass.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

I. hederifolia was less competitive.

Taxon: Sugarcanet0
Interactor: I. hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliae0weed
Outcome: competitivee0
Direction: lesse0

Verbatim

e0
“B. pilosa, I. quamoclit, I. hederifolia, and A. viridis are less competitive.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1283–1360

t0
“Sugarcane”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–54

Title

Interference Relationships Between Weeds and Sugarcane in the ‘Plene’ System

C.B. MOSSIN; N. HIJANO; M.P. NEPOMUCENO; et al. Planta Daninha 2019. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582019370100116

Other claims from this paper (10)

Association Weed dry matter depended on weed species and sugarcane variety.
Association Sugarcane height, green leaves and leaf area depended on variety and weed species.
Association Sugarcane stem, root and leaf dry masses depended on variety and weed species.
Observation U. plantaginea had the greatest interference potential.
Observation Panicum maximum was a potential competitor.
Observation D. horizontalis was a potential competitor.
Observation B. pilosa was less competitive.
Observation I. quamoclit was less competitive.
Observation A. viridis was less competitive.
Observation RB92579 was less susceptible to weed interference than SP80-1842.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

After 90 days of water restriction, diuron plus hexazinone plus sulfometuron-methyl controlled I. hederifolia more effectively than amicarbazone plus isoxaflutole.

Taxon: sugarcanee1
Treatment: diuron + hexazinone + sulfometuron-methyle0
Interactor: I. hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliae0weed
Outcome: control I. hederifoliae0
Direction: more effectivee0
Qualifier: 90 days of water restrictione0
Comparator: amicarbazone + isoxaflutolee0

Verbatim

e0
“At 90 days of water restriction, diuron + hexazinone + sulfometuron-methyl was more effective to control I. hederifolia than the amicarbazone + isoxaflutole tank mixture”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1309–1478

e1
“sugarcane fields”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 315–331

Title

Chemical control of morning glory as a function of water restriction levels

P.R.F. Giancotti; R.E.B. Toledo; P.L.C.A. Alves; et al. Planta Daninha 2014. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582014000200012

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulfentrazone at 0.6 kg ha-1 efficiently controlled I. hederifolia in dry greenhouse conditions for up to 90 days before rain.

Taxon: Ipomoea hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliat0
Treatment: sulfentrazone application at 0.6 kg ha-1e0
Interactor: I. hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliae0weed
Outcome: control of I. hederifoliae0
Direction: efficiente0
Qualifier: up to 90 days between herbicide application and rain simulatione0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“sulfentrazone application at 0.6 kg ha-1 was found to provide for the efficient control of I. hederifolia and I. quamoclit in a dry environment, with up to 90 days between herbicide application and rain simulation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1235

t0
“Ipomoea hederifolia”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–47

Title

Sulfentrazone efficiency on Ipomoea hederifolia and Ipomoea quamoclit as influenced by rain and sugarcane straw

N.M Correia; E.H Camilo; E.A Santos Planta Daninha 2012. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582013000100018

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Sulfentrazone at 0.6 kg ha-1 efficiently controlled I. quamoclit in dry greenhouse conditions for up to 90 days before rain.
Intervention effect Twenty millimeters of simulated rain leached sulfentrazone from straw to soil without changing effects on the weeds.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone alone controlled I. hederifolia similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone alone controlled I. quamoclit similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone with hexazinone controlled I. hederifolia similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone with hexazinone controlled I. quamoclit similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field sulfentrazone alone controlled I. hederifolia similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.

Taxon: Ipomoea hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliat0
Treatment: sulfentrazone alone (0.6 or 0.9 kg ha-1)e0
Interactor: I. hederifoliaIpomoea hederifoliae0weed
Outcome: control of I. hederifoliae0
Direction: similar or bettere0
Comparator: amicarbazone (1.4 kg ha-1) and imazapic (0.147 kg ha-1)e0

Verbatim

e0
“sulfentrazone alone (0.6 or 0.9 kg ha-1) or sulfentrazone combined with hexazinone (0.6 + 0.25 kg ha-1) was effective in the control of I. hederifolia and I. quamoclit, exhibiting similar or better control than amicarbazone (1.4 kg ha-1) and imazapic (0.147 kg ha-1)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1524–1790

t0
“Ipomoea hederifolia”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 28–47

Title

Sulfentrazone efficiency on Ipomoea hederifolia and Ipomoea quamoclit as influenced by rain and sugarcane straw

N.M Correia; E.H Camilo; E.A Santos Planta Daninha 2012. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582013000100018

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Sulfentrazone at 0.6 kg ha-1 efficiently controlled I. hederifolia in dry greenhouse conditions for up to 90 days before rain.
Intervention effect Sulfentrazone at 0.6 kg ha-1 efficiently controlled I. quamoclit in dry greenhouse conditions for up to 90 days before rain.
Intervention effect Twenty millimeters of simulated rain leached sulfentrazone from straw to soil without changing effects on the weeds.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone alone controlled I. quamoclit similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone with hexazinone controlled I. hederifolia similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.
Intervention effect Field sulfentrazone with hexazinone controlled I. quamoclit similarly or better than amicarbazone and imazapic.