Paper · 1970 · Bulletin of University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca Agriculture

Integrated Weed Management for Maize Crop in Croatia

Zlatko SVEČNJAK; Klara BARIĆ; Dubravko MAĆEŠIĆ; et al.

11
claims
11
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Concern about the effects of herbicides on the environment is the main stimulus to reduce their use in maize (Zea mays L.). Field research was conducted over two years to evaluate the efficacy of integrated weed management combining two seedbed practices at planting (no-till vs. tilled seedbeds), mechanical (0-3 inter-row cultivations) and chemical (none, band- and broadcast applied herbicide) methods on maize grain yield. Although seedbed practice had no effect on crop emergence, tilled seedbeds tended to produce larger grain yield than no-till seedbeds because of better control of early germinating weeds. Consequently, grain yield in no-till seedbeds consistently increased with each cultivation up to three passes because of improved weed control. However, the largest yield in tilled seedbeds occurred with two cultivations and then slightly decreased following third cultivation pass. Band herbicide application (50 % reduction in herbicide use compared to broadcast application) resulted in higher yield than one cultivation alone, whereas opposite responses occurred after multiple cultivation passes. Grain yield responded positively to one and two cultivation passes even when weeds were controlled by pre-emergence chemical method. Our findings indicated that banded herbicide application provided effective weed control in maize crop when complemented with two inter-row cultivations regardless of the method of seedbed preparation; thus making a viable option for Croatian farmers to lower herbicide load on the environment.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seedbed practice had no effect on maize emergence.

Treatment
seedbed practicee0
Outcome
crop emergencee0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“seedbed practice had no effect on crop emergence”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 436–484 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tilled seedbeds tended to yield more grain than no-till seedbeds through better early weed control.

Treatment
tilled seedbedse0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
largere0
Qualifier
tendede0
Comparator
no-till seedbedse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“tilled seedbeds tended to produce larger grain yield than no-till seedbeds because of better control of early germinating weeds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 486–613 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under no-till, maize grain yield increased with each cultivation up to three passes.

Treatment
each cultivation up to three passese0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Setting
no-till seedbedse0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“grain yield in no-till seedbeds consistently increased with each cultivation up to three passes because of improved weed control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 629–757 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In tilled seedbeds, the largest yield occurred with two cultivations.

Treatment
two cultivationse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
largeste0
Setting
tilled seedbedse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“the largest yield in tilled seedbeds occurred with two cultivations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 768–835 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In tilled seedbeds, yield slightly decreased after a third cultivation.

Treatment
third cultivation passe0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparatorOutcome

Verbatim

e0

“then slightly decreased following third cultivation pass”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–896 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Band herbicide application used 50 % less herbicide than broadcast application.

Treatment
Band herbicide applicatione0
Outcome
herbicide usee0
Direction
reductione0
Value
50 %e0
Comparator
broadcast applicatione0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Band herbicide application (50 % reduction in herbicide use compared to broadcast application)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 898–992 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Band herbicide application yielded more than one cultivation alone.

Treatment
Band herbicide applicatione0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
one cultivation alonee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Band herbicide application (50 % reduction in herbicide use compared to broadcast application) resulted in higher yield than one cultivation alone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 898–1044 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The yield response to band herbicide reversed after multiple cultivation passes.

Treatment
multiple cultivation passese0
Outcome
opposite responsese0
Direction
oppositee0

Not reportedTaxonSetting

Verbatim

e0

“whereas opposite responses occurred after multiple cultivation passes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1046–1115 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield responded positively to one and two cultivation passes despite pre-emergence chemical weed control.

Treatment
one and two cultivation passese0
Outcome
Grain yielde0
Direction
positivelye0
Qualifier
pre-emergence chemical methode0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Grain yield responded positively to one and two cultivation passes even when weeds were controlled by pre-emergence chemical method”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1117–1248 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Banded herbicide complemented by two inter-row cultivations gave effective weed control regardless of seedbed preparation.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
banded herbicide applicatione0
Outcome
weed controle0
Direction
effectivee0
Qualifier
two inter-row cultivationse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“banded herbicide application provided effective weed control in maize crop when complemented with two inter-row cultivations regardless of the method of seedbed preparation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1278–1450 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors present banded herbicide with two cultivations as a way for Croatian farmers to lower environmental herbicide load.

Outcome
lower herbicide load on the environmente0
Setting
Croatiane0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“thus making a viable option for Croatian farmers to lower herbicide load on the environment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1452–1543 · show in text ↑

herbicide · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

406 papers: 360 positive, 46 negative or no effect

359 papers in the same direction as this paper · 36 in the opposite direction · 10 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

402 papers more in this group

See all 406 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.