Panicum miliaceum 3,670 claims

species · family Poaceae · green plant · NCBI Taxonomy ↗

Common name: proso millet — Also written in claims: proso millet · broomcorn millet · common millet · prosomillet · SUMMER PROSO MILLET · proso millets — NCBI synonyms: Panicum spontaneum

Listed here with its subspecies, varieties and cultivar groups: Panicum miliaceum subsp. miliaceum (14 claims)

67 spellings

Questions studied on this organism60 questions1 with results that differ107 papers

Panicum miliaceumKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

3,670 claims

Open in search (filters, sorting) →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The dimethylamine salt of 2,4-D at 0.56 kg/ha gave significantly higher proso millet grain yields than the weedy check.

Taxon: proso milletPanicum miliaceume0
Treatment: The dimethylamine salt of (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4-D) at 0.56 kg/hae1
Outcome: grain yieldse1
Direction: highere1
Comparator: weedy checke1

Verbatim

e0
“Eight herbicide postemergence treatments were applied to proso millet ( Panicum milaceum L.) at three growth stages”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–115

e1
“The dimethylamine salt of (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4-D) at 0.56 kg/ha had significantly higher grain yields than the weedy check”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 117–256

Title

Selective Control of Weeds in Proso Millet with Herbicides

P. H. Grabouski Weed Science 1971. doi:10.1017/s0043174500048724

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Most herbicide treatments appeared to injure proso millet plants to varying degrees.
Intervention effect Herbicide treatments did not greatly affect proso millet yields.
Intervention effect All herbicides gave excellent control of redroot pigweed when applied to proso millet at the 4 to 6-leaf stage.
Intervention effect Weed control was poorer when spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stages.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Most herbicide treatments appeared to injure proso millet plants to varying degrees.

Taxon: proso milletPanicum miliaceume0
Treatment: All herbicides except the amine of 2,4-D at 0.28 kg/hae2
Outcome: injure proso millet plantse2
Qualifier: by varying degreese2

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0
“Eight herbicide postemergence treatments were applied to proso millet ( Panicum milaceum L.) at three growth stages”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–115

e2
“All herbicides except the amine of 2,4-D at 0.28 kg/ha appeared to injure proso millet plants by varying degrees; however, yields were not greatly affected”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 258–413

Title

Selective Control of Weeds in Proso Millet with Herbicides

P. H. Grabouski Weed Science 1971. doi:10.1017/s0043174500048724

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect The dimethylamine salt of 2,4-D at 0.56 kg/ha gave significantly higher proso millet grain yields than the weedy check.
Intervention effect Herbicide treatments did not greatly affect proso millet yields.
Intervention effect All herbicides gave excellent control of redroot pigweed when applied to proso millet at the 4 to 6-leaf stage.
Intervention effect Weed control was poorer when spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stages.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide treatments did not greatly affect proso millet yields.

Taxon: proso milletPanicum miliaceume0
Treatment: All herbicidese2
Outcome: yieldse2
Direction: not greatly affectede2

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Eight herbicide postemergence treatments were applied to proso millet ( Panicum milaceum L.) at three growth stages”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–115

e2
“All herbicides except the amine of 2,4-D at 0.28 kg/ha appeared to injure proso millet plants by varying degrees; however, yields were not greatly affected”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 258–413

Title

Selective Control of Weeds in Proso Millet with Herbicides

P. H. Grabouski Weed Science 1971. doi:10.1017/s0043174500048724

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect The dimethylamine salt of 2,4-D at 0.56 kg/ha gave significantly higher proso millet grain yields than the weedy check.
Intervention effect Most herbicide treatments appeared to injure proso millet plants to varying degrees.
Intervention effect All herbicides gave excellent control of redroot pigweed when applied to proso millet at the 4 to 6-leaf stage.
Intervention effect Weed control was poorer when spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stages.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All herbicides gave excellent control of redroot pigweed when applied to proso millet at the 4 to 6-leaf stage.

Taxon: proso milletPanicum miliaceume3
Organ / stage: 4 to 6-leaf stagee3
Treatment: All herbicidese3
Interactor: redroot pigweede3weed
Outcome: excellent control of redroot pigweede3

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0
“Eight herbicide postemergence treatments were applied to proso millet ( Panicum milaceum L.) at three growth stages”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–115

e3
“All herbicides gave excellent control of redroot pigweed ( Amaranthus retroflexus L.) when applied to proso millet in the 4 to 6-leaf stage”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 415–554

Title

Selective Control of Weeds in Proso Millet with Herbicides

P. H. Grabouski Weed Science 1971. doi:10.1017/s0043174500048724

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect The dimethylamine salt of 2,4-D at 0.56 kg/ha gave significantly higher proso millet grain yields than the weedy check.
Intervention effect Most herbicide treatments appeared to injure proso millet plants to varying degrees.
Intervention effect Herbicide treatments did not greatly affect proso millet yields.
Intervention effect Weed control was poorer when spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stages.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weed control was poorer when spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stages.

Taxon: proso milletPanicum miliaceume4
Organ / stage: pre-boot and post-flower stagese4
Treatment: spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stagese4
Outcome: Weed controle4
Direction: poorere4

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Eight herbicide postemergence treatments were applied to proso millet ( Panicum milaceum L.) at three growth stages”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–115

e4
“Weed control was poorer when spraying was delayed until proso millet was in pre-boot and post-flower stages”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 556–663

Title

Selective Control of Weeds in Proso Millet with Herbicides

P. H. Grabouski Weed Science 1971. doi:10.1017/s0043174500048724

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect The dimethylamine salt of 2,4-D at 0.56 kg/ha gave significantly higher proso millet grain yields than the weedy check.
Intervention effect Most herbicide treatments appeared to injure proso millet plants to varying degrees.
Intervention effect Herbicide treatments did not greatly affect proso millet yields.
Intervention effect All herbicides gave excellent control of redroot pigweed when applied to proso millet at the 4 to 6-leaf stage.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Panicum miliaceum straw had low zinc content, 7.88 ppm.

Taxon: Panicum miliaceumPanicum miliaceume0
Organ / stage: strawe0
Outcome: Zn contente0
Direction: loweste0
Value: 7.88 ppme0

Verbatim

e0
“The lowest Zn content was in pasture grass hay (5.88 ppm) and straw of Panicum miliaceum (7.88 ppm).”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–622

Title

Molybdenum and zinc contents of some common fodders and concentrates.

B. M. Patel; V.R. Thakore; C. A. Patel; et al. 1971

Other claims from this paper (9)

Observation Fresh lucerne had the highest molybdenum among fresh fodders, 2.55 ppm.
Observation Sorghum had the lowest molybdenum among fresh fodders, 1.06 ppm.
Observation Maize stover had the highest molybdenum among dry fodders, 0.88 ppm.
Observation Paspalum scrobiculatum straw had the lowest molybdenum among dry fodders, 0.19 ppm.
Observation Pennisetum purpureum × P. americanum fresh herbage had the highest zinc, 37.19 ppm.
Observation Lucerne had the lowest zinc among fresh herbage, 19.91 ppm.
Observation Sorghum straw contained 37.03 ppm zinc.
Observation P. scrobiculatum straw contained 36.99 ppm zinc.
Observation Pasture grass hay had the lowest zinc content, 5.88 ppm.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Proso millet supported the least greenbugs in seedling trials.

Taxon: proso milletPanicum miliaceumt0
Organ / stage: seedlinge0
Interactor: greenbugsSchizaphis graminume0pest
Outcome: greenbugse0
Direction: leaste0

Verbatim

t0
“proso millet, Panicum miliaceum L.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 115–149

e0
“Pearl millet supported the most greenbugs and proso the least in seedling trials”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 650–730

Title

Resistance to Greenbug in Three Millet Species¹

H. L. Hackerott; T. L. Harvey Agronomy Journal 1970. doi:10.2134/agronj1970.00021962006200050006x

Other claims from this paper (5)

Observation Greenbug survival and reproduction were greater on sorghum than on the millets.
Observation Millets had greater resistance than sorghum by plant injury scores.
Observation Pearl millet seedlings were slightly more resistant than mature plants.
Observation Pearl millet supported the most greenbugs in seedling trials.
Recommendation The authors suggest resistant millets as temporary substitute crops for sorghum.

Observationobservedreview summarynegativebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Sphacelotheca destruens occurs on Panicum miliaceum and other Panicum species.

Taxon: Panicum miliaceumPanicum miliaceume0
Interactor: Sphacelotheca destruensSphacelotheca destruenst0pathogen
Outcome: On Panicum miliaceum (common millet) and other Panicum spp.e0

Verbatim

e0
“HOSTS: On Panicum miliaceum (common millet) and other Panicum spp. and the weed Echinochloa crus-galli .”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 184–288

t0
“Sphacelotheca destruens”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–23

Title

Sphacelotheca destruens . [Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria].

UK, CAB International; G. C. Ainsworth Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria 1965. doi:10.1079/dfb/20056400072

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observation Echinochloa crus-galli is a host of Sphacelotheca destruens.
Observation Hybrid maize has been experimentally infected.
Observation Sphacelotheca destruens causes head smut of common millet.
Observation The disease is transmitted by seed contaminated with spores.
Observation Spores remained viable for eight years.
Observation The fungus is distributed across Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and the Americas.

Observationobservedreview summarynegativebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Sphacelotheca destruens causes head smut of common millet.

Taxon: common milletPanicum miliaceume0
Interactor: Sphacelotheca destruensSphacelotheca destruenst0pathogen
Outcome: Head smute0

Verbatim

e0
“DISEASE: Head smut of common millet.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 360–396

t0
“Sphacelotheca destruens”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–23

Title

Sphacelotheca destruens . [Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria].

UK, CAB International; G. C. Ainsworth Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria 1965. doi:10.1079/dfb/20056400072

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observation Sphacelotheca destruens occurs on Panicum miliaceum and other Panicum species.
Observation Echinochloa crus-galli is a host of Sphacelotheca destruens.
Observation Hybrid maize has been experimentally infected.
Observation The disease is transmitted by seed contaminated with spores.
Observation Spores remained viable for eight years.
Observation The fungus is distributed across Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and the Americas.

Observationobservedcited backgroundnegativebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The disease is transmitted by seed contaminated with spores.

Taxon: common milletPanicum miliaceume1
Interactor: Sphacelotheca destruensSphacelotheca destruenst0pathogen
Outcome: transmitted by seede0

Verbatim

e0
“The disease is transmitted by seed (Noble et al., An annotated list of seed-borne diseases , p. 49, 1958) contaminated with spores.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 513–644

e1
“DISEASE: Head smut of common millet.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 360–396

t0
“Sphacelotheca destruens”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–23

Title

Sphacelotheca destruens . [Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria].

UK, CAB International; G. C. Ainsworth Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria 1965. doi:10.1079/dfb/20056400072

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observation Sphacelotheca destruens occurs on Panicum miliaceum and other Panicum species.
Observation Echinochloa crus-galli is a host of Sphacelotheca destruens.
Observation Hybrid maize has been experimentally infected.
Observation Sphacelotheca destruens causes head smut of common millet.
Observation Spores remained viable for eight years.
Observation The fungus is distributed across Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and the Americas.