Abstract
A preliminary study conducted in the central USA near Colby and Hays, Kansas (KS) in 2010 indicated a premix of S-metolachlor & sulfentrazone codenamed F7583 (Broadaxe?) had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Additional studies were conducted in 2011 at Colby, Hays, Manhattan, KS to refine rate and application timing of F7583 for weed control and crop safety. Four rates of F7583 (860, 1100, 1350 and 1840 g·ha-1) were compared to single rates of S-metolachlor and pendimethalin, and applied 21 days preplant versus preemergence (PRE). F7583 at ≥1100 g·ha-1 applied preplant or PRE controlled Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) and kochia [Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad.] ≥95% and 100%, respectively in neutral pH soils. In slightly acidic soils, PRE application of F7583 was more effective against Palmer amaranth and grass weeds compared to preplant application. No benefit was gained by increasing the rate of F7583 from 1100 to 1350 g·ha-1 at either application timing. Puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris L.) control was not commercially satisfactory with F7583 at any rate or time of application. Both S-metolachlor at 1070 g·ha-1 and pendimethalin at 1600 g·ha-1 applied either preplant or PRE were considerably less effective on all three broadleaf weeds compared to F7583 treatments. Individually, S-metolachlor and pendimethalin were more effective when applied PRE compared to preplant application. F7583 did not reduce sunflower plant population or visibly injure sunflower anytime during the season.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Claim · model-written summary
F7583 at 1100 g·ha-1 or more controlled Palmer amaranth by at least 95% in neutral pH soils.
- Taxon
- sunflower
Helianthus annuuse0 - Treatment
- F7583 at ≥1100 g·ha-1 applied preplant or PREe1
- Interactor
- Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.
Amaranthus palmerie1weed - Outcome
- Palmer amaranthe1
- Direction
- controllede1
- Value
- ≥95%e1
- Setting
- neutral pH soilse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e1“F7583 at ≥1100 g·ha-1 applied preplant or PRE controlled Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) and kochia [Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad.] ≥95% and 100%, respectively in neutral pH soils”
Claim · model-written summary
F7583 at 1100 g·ha-1 or more controlled kochia by 100% in neutral pH soils.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- F7583 at ≥1100 g·ha-1 applied preplant or PREe1
- Interactor
- Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad.
Bassia scopariae1weed - Outcome
- kochiae1
- Direction
- controllede1
- Value
- 100%e1
- Setting
- neutral pH soilse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e1“F7583 at ≥1100 g·ha-1 applied preplant or PRE controlled Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) and kochia [Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad.] ≥95% and 100%, respectively in neutral pH soils”
Claim · model-written summary
In slightly acidic soils, PRE application of F7583 was more effective than preplant application against Palmer amaranth and grass weeds.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- PRE application of F7583e3
- Interactor
- Palmer amaranthe3weed
- Outcome
- Palmer amaranth and grass weedse3
- Direction
- more effectivee3
- Comparator
- preplant applicatione3
- Setting
- slightly acidic soilse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e3“In slightly acidic soils, PRE application of F7583 was more effective against Palmer amaranth and grass weeds compared to preplant application”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing the F7583 rate from 1100 to 1350 g·ha-1 gave no weed control benefit at either application timing.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- increasing the rate of F7583 from 1100 to 1350 g·ha-1e4
- Outcome
- benefite4
- Direction
- No benefite4
- Comparator
- 1100 g·ha-1e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e4“No benefit was gained by increasing the rate of F7583 from 1100 to 1350 g·ha-1 at either application timing”
e1“F7583 at ≥1100 g·ha-1 applied preplant or PRE controlled Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) and kochia [Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad.] ≥95% and 100%, respectively in neutral pH soils”
Claim · model-written summary
F7583 did not control puncturevine satisfactorily at any rate or application time.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- F7583 at any rate or time of applicatione5
- Interactor
- Tribulus terrestris L.
Tribulus terrestrise5weed - Outcome
- Puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris L.) controle5
- Direction
- not commercially satisfactorye5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e5“Puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris L.) control was not commercially satisfactory with F7583 at any rate or time of application”
Claim · model-written summary
S-metolachlor at 1070 g·ha-1 was considerably less effective than F7583 on all three broadleaf weeds.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- S-metolachlor at 1070 g·ha-1e6
- Interactor
- broadleaf weedse6weed
- Outcome
- all three broadleaf weedse6
- Direction
- less effectivee6
- Comparator
- F7583 treatmentse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e6“Both S-metolachlor at 1070 g·ha-1 and pendimethalin at 1600 g·ha-1 applied either preplant or PRE were considerably less effective on all three broadleaf weeds compared to F7583 treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Pendimethalin at 1600 g·ha-1 was considerably less effective than F7583 on all three broadleaf weeds.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- pendimethalin at 1600 g·ha-1e6
- Interactor
- broadleaf weedse6weed
- Outcome
- all three broadleaf weedse6
- Direction
- less effectivee6
- Comparator
- F7583 treatmentse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e6“Both S-metolachlor at 1070 g·ha-1 and pendimethalin at 1600 g·ha-1 applied either preplant or PRE were considerably less effective on all three broadleaf weeds compared to F7583 treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
S-metolachlor and pendimethalin were more effective when applied PRE than preplant.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Treatment
- applied PREe7
- Outcome
- effectivee7
- Direction
- more effectivee7
- Comparator
- preplant applicatione7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
e7“Individually, S-metolachlor and pendimethalin were more effective when applied PRE compared to preplant application”
Claim · model-written summary
F7583 did not reduce sunflower plant population.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse2
- Treatment
- F7583e2
- Outcome
- sunflower plant populatione2
- Direction
- did not reducee2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“F7583 did not reduce sunflower plant population or visibly injure sunflower anytime during the season”
Claim · model-written summary
F7583 did not visibly injure sunflower during the season.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse2
- Treatment
- F7583e2
- Outcome
- visibly injure sunflowere2
- Direction
- did note2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“F7583 did not reduce sunflower plant population or visibly injure sunflower anytime during the season”
Claim · model-written summary
F7583 had good potential for use in sunflower.
- Taxon
- sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
- Outcome
- good potential for usee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had good potential for use in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)”
The same questions in other papers
pendimethalin · weed · Helianthus annuus (common sunflower)Positive and negative results
14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →herbicide · weed · Helianthus annuus (common sunflower)Positive and negative results
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
41 papers more in this group
See all 45 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.