Claim · model-written summary
Adding phorate in furrow with inoculants had no negative effect on grade.
- Taxon
- Peanut
Arachis hypogaeat0 - Treatment
- phoratee0
- Interactor
- inoculantse0symbiont
- Outcome
- gradee0
- Direction
- no negative effectse0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Peanut”
e0“There were no negative effects on peanut yield or grade, or other measured parameters when phorate was included in-furrow with inoculants.”
Title
Effect of Bradyrhizobia Inoculant Formulation with Phorate in New Peanut Fields
R. Scott Tubbs; Robert C. Kemerait; Blake Williams; et al. Peanut Science 2016. doi:10.3146/ps15-12.1
Other claims from this paper (7)
- Intervention effect Adding phorate in furrow with inoculants had no negative effect on peanut yield.
- Intervention effect Adding phorate in furrow with inoculants had no negative effect on other measured parameters.
- Intervention effect Inoculants produced peanut yields equal to or up to 32% greater than non-inoculated peanut.
- Intervention effect Liquid inoculant improved peanut grade by 1.2 to 1.4% versus sterile peat or no inoculant.
- Intervention effect Inoculants improved abundance relative to non-inoculated plants.
- Intervention effect Inoculants improved activity of nodules on the roots relative to non-inoculated plants.
- Intervention effect Inoculants improved time to row closure relative to non-inoculated plants.