Abstract
Abstract Research was conducted at five locations in 1998 and three locations in 1999 to evaluate the effects of labeled and below-label rates of sulfentrazone on weed control and phytotoxicity in flue-cured tobacco. Rates ranged from 0.14 to 0.42 kg ai ha −1 . Labeled rates varied based upon soil texture and percent organic matter at each location. All rates were applied preplant incorporated (PPI) and pre-transplant to the soil surface (PRE-T). Additionally, at two locations in 1998 and 1999, all rates of sulfentrazone were tank-mixed with clomazone at 0.84 kg ai ha −1 and applied PPI and PRE-T. Tobacco stunting was observed at four of eight locations. No significant differences in stunting or control of Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, redroot pigweed, and yellow nutsedge were observed between the 0.5X and 1X rates. Large crabgrass control was similar with 0.75X and 1X rates. Stunting from PPI applications of sulfentrazone was significantly greater than PRE-T applications at three of the four locations where stunting was observed. At two of the four locations where stunting was observed, stunting was significantly reduced by the use of a tank-mix of clomazone and sulfentrazone. PRE-T applications were less effective than PPI applications at only one location for each weed species rated probably as a result of below normal rainfall during the test. Rates of sulfentrazone can be reduced to 0.50 – 0.75X without reducing weed control. However, rate reduction did not reduce the phytotoxicity of sulfentrazone when applied PPI. Based on our results, PRE-T applications offer the greatest opportunity to reduce tobacco stunting due to applications of sulfentrazone.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Tobacco stunting occurred at four of eight sites.
- Taxon
- Tobacco
Nicotiana tabacume0 - Outcome
- stuntinge0
- Value
- four of eight locationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tobacco stunting was observed at four of eight locations.”
Claim · model-written summary
Half and full sulfentrazone rates did not differ significantly in tobacco stunting.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- 0.5Xe0
- Outcome
- stuntinge0
- Direction
- No significant differencese0
- Comparator
- 1Xe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences in stunting or control of Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, redroot pigweed, and yellow nutsedge were observed between the 0.5X and 1X rates.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Half and full rates did not differ significantly in control of the four listed weeds.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- 0.5Xe0
- Outcome
- control of Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, redroot pigweed, and yellow nutsedgee0
- Direction
- No significant differencese0
- Comparator
- 1Xe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences in stunting or control of Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, redroot pigweed, and yellow nutsedge were observed between the 0.5X and 1X rates.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Large crabgrass control was similar at three-quarter and full rates.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- 0.75Xe0
- Outcome
- Large crabgrass controle0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- 1Xe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Large crabgrass control was similar with 0.75X and 1X rates.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Preplant incorporated sulfentrazone caused greater stunting than surface pretransplant application at three affected sites.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- PPI applications of sulfentrazonee0
- Outcome
- Stuntinge0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- three of the four locationse0
- Comparator
- PRE-T applicationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stunting from PPI applications of sulfentrazone was significantly greater than PRE-T applications at three of the four locations where stunting was observed.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding clomazone reduced tobacco stunting at two affected sites.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- tank-mix of clomazone and sulfentrazonee0
- Outcome
- stuntinge0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- two of the four locationse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At two of the four locations where stunting was observed, stunting was significantly reduced by the use of a tank-mix of clomazone and sulfentrazone.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Surface pretransplant application was less effective than incorporation at one site for each rated weed.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- PRE-T applicationse0
- Outcome
- less effectivee0
- Direction
- less effectivee0
- Qualifier
- below normal rainfalle0
- Comparator
- PPI applicationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PRE-T applications were less effective than PPI applications at only one location for each weed species rated probably as a result of below normal rainfall during the test.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Reducing sulfentrazone to half to three-quarter rate was judged possible without reducing weed control.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Outcome
- reduced to 0.50 – 0.75X without reducing weed controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rates of sulfentrazone can be reduced to 0.50 – 0.75X without reducing weed control.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
Reducing the incorporated sulfentrazone rate did not reduce phytotoxicity.
- Taxon
- TOBACCONicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- rate reductione0
- Outcome
- phytotoxicitye0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
- Qualifier
- when applied PPIe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, rate reduction did not reduce the phytotoxicity of sulfentrazone when applied PPI.”
t0“TOBACCO”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors favored surface pretransplant applications to reduce tobacco stunting.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume0
- Treatment
- PRE-T applicationse0
- Outcome
- reduce tobacco stuntinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Based on our results, PRE-T applications offer the greatest opportunity to reduce tobacco stunting due to applications of sulfentrazone.”
The same questions in other papers
clomazone · crop injury · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →sulfentrazone · crop injury · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.