Paper · 2007 · Weed Technology

Herbicide Programs for Managing Creeping Rivergrass (Echinochloa Polystachya) in Rice

Eric P. Webster; R. Matthew Griffin; David C. Blouin

4
claims
9
verbatim quotes
9
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A study was established to evaluate herbicides registered for barnyardgrass control in rice for activity on creeping rivergrass. Treatments included 208 g ai/ha cyhalofop early POST (EPOST) followed by (fb) 315 g/ha cyhalofop late POST (LPOST), 22 g ai/ha bispyribac EPOST fb 22 g/ha bispyribac LPOST, 66 g ai/ha fenoxaprop EPOST fb 86 g/ha fenoxaprop LPOST, 70 g ai/ha imazethapyr EPOST fb 70 g/ha imazethapyr LPOST and 50 g ai/ha penoxsulam mid-POST (MPOST). Each POST program was evaluated with and without 448 g ai/ha clomazone PRE. Barnyardgrass control, averaged over days after treatment (DAT), was 88 to 92% with the addition of clomazone PRE. Clomazone applied PRE followed by two applications of cyhalofop controlled creeping rivergrass at 91%. Creeping rivergrass control was less than 75% at 35 to 49 DAT. This response indicates only suppression of creeping rivergrass is achieved with the herbicide programs evaluated in this study.Nomenclature: Bispyribac, clomazone, cyhalofop, fenoxaprop, imazethapyr, penoxsulam, barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv, creeping rivergrass, Echinochloa polystachya (Kunth) A.S. Hitchc, rice, Oryza sativa L

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adding clomazone PRE gave 88 to 92% barnyardgrass control averaged over days after treatment in rice.

Treatment
clomazone PREe1
Interactor
barnyardgrassEchinochloa crus-gallie1weed
Outcome
Barnyardgrass controle1
Value
88 to 92%e1
Comparator
without 448 g ai/ha clomazone PREe2

Not reportedDirection

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Echinochloa crus-galli
Echinochloa crus-galli · InteractorMichael Becker · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Barnyardgrass control, averaged over days after treatment (DAT), was 88 to 92% with the addition of clomazone PRE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 537–650 · show in text ↑
e2

“Each POST program was evaluated with and without 448 g ai/ha clomazone PRE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 461–535 · show in text ↑
t0

“in Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clomazone PRE followed by two cyhalofop applications controlled creeping rivergrass 91% in rice.

Treatment
Clomazone applied PRE followed by two applications of cyhalofope3
Interactor
creeping rivergrasse3weed
Outcome
controllede3
Value
91%e3

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e3

“Clomazone applied PRE followed by two applications of cyhalofop controlled creeping rivergrass at 91%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 652–753 · show in text ↑
t0

“in Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Creeping rivergrass control stayed below 75% at 35 to 49 days after treatment in rice.

Interactor
Creeping rivergrasse4weed
Outcome
Creeping rivergrass controle4
Direction
less thane4
Value
less than 75%e4
Qualifier
35 to 49 DATe4

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“Creeping rivergrass control was less than 75% at 35 to 49 DAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 755–816 · show in text ↑
t0

“in Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–85 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The herbicide programs evaluated gave only suppression, not control, of creeping rivergrass in rice.

Interactor
creeping rivergrasse5weed
Outcome
suppression of creeping rivergrasse5
Qualifier
only suppression of creeping rivergrasse5

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e5

“This response indicates only suppression of creeping rivergrass is achieved with the herbicide programs evaluated in this study”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 818–945 · show in text ↑
t0

“in Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–85 · show in text ↑

clomazone · control · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

clomazone · Echinochloa crus-galli · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 8 positive, 4 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.