Paper · 2001 · Peanut Science

Timing of Aldicarb Applications to Control Meloidogyne arenaria in Peanut1

J. R. Rich; D. W. Gorbet

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Abstract Four fieldtrialswere conductedin northwest Florida to determine the efficacyofaldicarb appliedat varyingtime intervals after planting on peanut (Arachis hypogaea) to manage the peanut root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne arenaria. Initial treatments with aldicarb (Temik 15G), fenamiphos (Nemacur 15G), and phorate (Thimet 15G) were made at planting of peanut cv. Southern Runner. The chemicals were applied as 20-cm-wide bands over the open seed furrow using a tractor-mounted Gandy applicator. Post-plant treatments were made with a Gandy applicator at time intervals from 28 to 104 dafter planting as 36-cm-wide bands over the row centers. Post-harvest M. arenaria population densities were affected little by any chemical treatment compared to the control. The efficacy of the chemical treatments was variable and averaged onlya 295-kglha yield increase for the single at-plant applications of aldicarb compared to the control. Allat-plant + post-plant aldicarb treatments increased yield over the control by an average of712 kg¡ ha. Results from these trials did not establish a single optimal time for post-plant application of aldicarb on peanut. Data from these tests, however, indicated that a post-plant aldicarb treatment can be applied latter than previously recommended in Florida.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chemical treatments had little effect on post-harvest M. arenaria density relative to control.

Treatment
any chemical treatmente0
Interactor
M. arenariaMeloidogyne arenariae0pest
Outcome
M. arenaria population densitiese0
Direction
affected littlee0
Comparator
the controle0

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗
Meloidogyne arenaria
Meloidogyne arenaria · InteractorElizabeth Bush, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Bugwood.org · CC BY 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Post-harvest M. arenaria population densities were affected little by any chemical treatment compared to the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 647–763 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peanut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Single at-plant aldicarb applications averaged a 295-kglha yield increase relative to control.

Treatment
single at-plant applications of aldicarbe0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasee0
Value
295-kglhae0
Comparator
the controle0

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“averaged onlya 295-kglha yield increase for the single at-plant applications of aldicarb compared to the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 822–934 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peanut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–73 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All at-plant plus post-plant aldicarb treatments increased yield by an average 712 kg¡ ha over control.

Treatment
Allat-plant + post-plant aldicarb treatmentse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
712 kg¡ hae0
Comparator
the controle0

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Allat-plant + post-plant aldicarb treatments increased yield over the control by an average of712 kg¡ ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 936–1040 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peanut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–73 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The trials established no single optimal time for post-plant aldicarb application.

Outcome
single optimal time for post-plant application of aldicarbe0
Direction
did not establishe0

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Results from these trials did not establish a single optimal time for post-plant application of aldicarb on peanut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1042–1156 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peanut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–73 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Post-plant aldicarb may be applied later than previously recommended in Florida.

Outcome
post-plant aldicarb treatment can be applied latter than previously recommendede0
Setting
Floridae0

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a post-plant aldicarb treatment can be applied latter than previously recommended in Florida”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1205–1297 · show in text ↑
t0

“Peanut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–73 · show in text ↑

aldicarb · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ

23 papers: 19 positive, 4 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 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.