Intervention effectmodel-written summary

dicamba applied PRE provided 60–80% control of giant ragweed in corn.

A claim from Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifidaL.) control in corn · 2011

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

dicamba applied PRE provided 60–80% control of giant ragweed in corn.

Treatment
dicambae1
Interactor
giant ragweedAmbrosia trifidat0weed
Outcome
control of giant ragweede1
Direction
increaseinferrede1
Value
60–80e1
Qualifier
applied PREe1
Setting
various Ontario farmse0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparator

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

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Ambrosia trifida
Ambrosia trifida · InteractorLe.Loup.Gris · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifidaL.) control in corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–50
e0

“Twelve field trials (five with PRE and seven with POST herbicides) were conducted over a 4-yr period (2006–2009) on various Ontario farms with heavy giant ragweed infestations (22 plants m–2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–328
e1

“Atrazine, dicamba, dicamba/atrazine, isoxaflutole plus atrazine, mesotrione plus atrazine, saflufenacil, and saflufenacil/dimethenamid applied PRE provided 9–52, 60–80, 64–83, 44–77, 33–80, 36–80, and 43–63% control of giant ragweed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 460–692

Title

Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifidaL.) control in corn

Nader Soltani; Christy Shropshire; Peter Sikkema Canadian Journal of Plant Science 2011. doi:10.4141/cjps2010-004

Other claims from this paper (18)

Record rev-add4a29f9a030d73d6f1311c8d1e246bce7cea38d9c1793419d463677a06e362 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

dicamba · Ambrosia trifida · Zea mays (maize)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.