Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Fomesafen preplant did not injure cotton

A claim from Weed Control, Crop Response, and Profitability When Intercropping Cantaloupe and Cotton · 2015

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fomesafen preplant did not injure cotton

Treatment
The addition of fomesafen preplante2
Outcome
injuring cottone2

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingDirectionValueQualifier

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“The addition of fomesafen preplant improved Palmer amaranth control to at least 92% without injuring cotton, but cantaloupe necrosis and chlorosis of up to 20% was recorded”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 613–785

Title

Weed Control, Crop Response, and Profitability When Intercropping Cantaloupe and Cotton

Peter M. Eure; A. Stanley Culpepper; Rand M. Merchant; et al. Weed Technology 2015. doi:10.1614/wt-d-14-00023.1

Other claims from this paper (10)

Record rev-e1e96e2aeffc6b4ebfaccec951992729c20c24cd6c93ee4327a567a15ff94948 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

fomesafen · organism · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative
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.