Intervention effectmodel-written summary

GTA matched recommended fungicides against Cercospora arachidicola.

A claim from Antifeeding Effects of the Fungicide Guazatine Triacetate on Insect Defoliators of Soybeans and Peanuts1 · 1977

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GTA matched recommended fungicides against Cercospora arachidicola.

Taxon
PeanutsArachis hypogaeat0
Treatment
fungicidee0
Interactor
Cercospora arachidicola HoriMycosphaerella arachidise0pathogen
Outcome
leafspot organismse0
Direction
as effectivee0
Comparator
currently recommended fungicidese0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peanuts”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–103
e0

“The fungicide was as effective against the 2 leafspot organisms, Cercospora arachidicola Hori and Cercosporidium personatum (Berk. & Curt.) Deighton, as currently recommended fungicides.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 495–681

Title

Antifeeding Effects of the Fungicide Guazatine Triacetate on Insect Defoliators of Soybeans and Peanuts1

Paul A. Backman; James D. Harper; John M. Hammond; et al. Journal of Economic Entomology 1977. doi:10.1093/jee/70.3.374

Other claims from this paper (5)

Record rev-8fe90142e24ba0be229f024d3ba68a5ef57b7cd742801057e1f9126043df37e5 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

fungicide · Mycosphaerella arachidis · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 3 positive, 5 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this claim · 3 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Day and night applications of both fungicides controlled early leaf spot similarly.

    Night Spraying Peanut Fungicides I. Extended Fungicide Residual and Integrated Disease Management · 2010

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    In 2008, disease control was similar regardless of application timing or fungicide across post-spray irrigation treatments.

    Implications of fungicide application timing and post-spray irrigation on disease control and peanut yield · 2011

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    No significant difference in inhibition was found among cupric, Aike and tebuconazole, the other three fungicides.

    Indoor toxicity and field control effects of several fungicides against Cercospora arachidicola · 2012

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Strip tillage with reduced fungicide gave leaf spot control comparable to the standard regime.

    Use of Resistant Peanut Cultivars and Reduced Fungicide Inputs for Disease Management in Strip-Tillage and Conventional Tillage Systems · 2007 · compared with standard 14-day fungicide regimes

    No difference from an alternative

  5. no effect
    With fungicide, early leaf spot control and disease defoliation did not differ across irrigation or application approaches.

    Disease Management in Overhead Sprinkler and Subsurface Drip Irrigation Systems for Peanut · 2004 · compared with irrigation system or fungicide application approach

    No difference from an alternative

  6. positive
    Fungicide controlled leaf spots.

    Assessment of yield losses due to early and late leaf spots of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) · 2008

    Same direction

  7. positive
    Twice-applied bixafen plus flutriafol with chlorothalonil controlled early leaf spot as well as or better than chlorothalonil alone.

    Control of Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Foliar and Soil-Borne Diseases Using Bixafen Plus Flutriafol · 2023 · compared with chlorothalonil alone

    Same direction

See all 8 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.