Claim · model-written summary
The stem density decline cannot be attributed to the treatments and may be due to self-limitation or soil pathogens.
- Taxon
- Leafy Spurge
Euphorbia esulat0 - Interactor
- soil pathogense7pathogen
- Outcome
- declinee7
- Qualifier
- may be due to self-limitation or soil pathogense7
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula)”
e7“The decline could not be attributed to specific treatments applied in this study and may be due to self-limitation or soil pathogens”
Title
Laurie A. Richardson; Chelsea J. Juricek; Rodney G. Lym; et al. Invasive Plant Science and Management 2008. doi:10.1614/ipsm-07-060.1
Other claims from this paper (7)
- Intervention effect Imazapic reduced leafy spurge stem density, canopy cover and yield for 1 to 2 years in all treatments that included it.
- Intervention effect Single and combination treatments gave no difference in leafy spurge control.
- Intervention effect Aphthona spp. and interseeded native grasses, alone or combined, did not reduce leafy spurge density or cover.
- Observation Aphthona spp. population remained low throughout the study at both locations.
- Observation Forb yield increased during the study at the SNG but not at the Walcott location.
- Observation Warm-season grass yield increased at Walcott but not at the SNG.
- Observation Leafy spurge stem density declined from 92 to 50 stems/m2 in 5 years at the SNG site.