Abstract
A 2-years field study was conducted during the rainy seasons of 1999 and 2000 at Houfa in northern Jordan, to know the performance of two sorghum genotypes (Izra3 and Razini) and their response to monthly hand weeding and 2,4-D application at different growth stages. Izra3 gave significantly higher grain yield of 2800 and 3150-kg ha-1 during 1999 and 2000, respectively. Differences in weed number and fresh weight were significant among various treatments in both seasons. In both growing seasons, yield reductions occurred when 2,4-D was applied to sorghum at stage 21 (beginning of tillering, first tiller detectable) and stage 30 (beginning of stem elongation). Hand weeding was more effective than 2,4-D in suppressing weed growth.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Izra3 sorghum yielded 2800 kg ha-1 in 1999 and significantly exceeded Razini.
SorghumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sorghum genotypes (Izra3 and Razini)”
e1“Izra3 gave significantly higher grain yield of 2800 and 3150-kg ha-1 during 1999 and 2000, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Izra3 sorghum yielded 3150-kg ha-1 in 2000 and significantly exceeded Razini.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sorghum genotypes (Izra3 and Razini)”
e1“Izra3 gave significantly higher grain yield of 2800 and 3150-kg ha-1 during 1999 and 2000, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed number differed significantly among weed management treatments.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Sorghum”
e0“Differences in weed number and fresh weight were significant among various treatments in both seasons.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed fresh weight differed significantly among treatments.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Sorghum”
e0“Differences in weed number and fresh weight were significant among various treatments in both seasons.”
Claim · model-written summary
Applying 2,4-D at stage 21 reduced sorghum yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“2,4-D was applied to sorghum at stage 21 (beginning of tillering, first tiller detectable) and stage 30 (beginning of stem elongation).”
e1“yield reductions occurred when 2,4-D was applied to sorghum at stage 21”
Claim · model-written summary
Applying 2,4-D at stage 30 reduced sorghum yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield reductions occurred when 2,4-D was applied to sorghum at stage 21 (beginning of tillering, first tiller detectable) and stage 30 (beginning of stem elongation).”
Claim · model-written summary
Hand weeding suppressed weed growth more effectively than 2,4-D.
- Treatment
- Hand weedinge0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed growthe0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Comparator
- 2,4-De0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Sorghum”
e0“Hand weeding was more effective than 2,4-D in suppressing weed growth.”
The same questions in other papers
2,4-D · yield · SorghumResults differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →herbicide · weed · SorghumPositive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 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.