Paper · 1985 · Agronomy Journal

Tillage for Control of Volunteer Proso Millet and for Production of Sorghum1

Robert G. Robinson

11
claims
22
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year. This research was conducted to determine if primary tillage influences the population density of volunteer proso and the persistence of the volunteer problem in five subsequent crops of sorghum [ Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. Following proso harvest, eight tillage treatments were repeated on the same plots for 5 years on Typic Hapludoll soil at Rosemount, MN. Treatments included moldboard or chisel plowing in the fall or spring, rototilling in the spring, moldboard or chisel plowing in the fall followed by rototilling in the spring, and zero tillage. Seed production of proso and other weeds was prevented for 5 and 3 years, respectively. Proso and annual weed numbers ha −1 were determined from repeated counts made shortly after emergence in permanent 1‐m 2 quadrats. Most (80%) of the total proso emergence occurred the 1st year after proso harvest, but 17, 2, and 1% occurred in the next 3 years, respectively. Although moldboard plowing gave the most 1st year control, proso was a potential major weed for 4 years following annual moldboard plowing in the fall and for only 3 years following the other tillage treatments. Most proso plants emerged in May, 10% emerged in June, and only 3% later. Moldboard plowing gave the most control of annual weeds other than proso. Highest grain sorghum yields followed moldboard plowing or rototilling in March or April or moldboard plowing in the fall followed by rototilling in April or May.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moldboard plowing gave the most first-year control of volunteer proso millet.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Treatment
moldboard plowinge2
Outcome
1st year controle2
Direction
moste2

Not reportedComparator

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“Although moldboard plowing gave the most 1st year control, proso was a potential major weed for 4 years following annual moldboard plowing in the fall and for only 3 years following the other tillage treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1239 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Proso remained a potential major weed for 4 years after annual moldboard plowing in the fall.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Treatment
annual moldboard plowing in the falle2
Outcome
potential major weede2
Qualifier
for 4 yearse2

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“Although moldboard plowing gave the most 1st year control, proso was a potential major weed for 4 years following annual moldboard plowing in the fall and for only 3 years following the other tillage treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1239 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Proso remained a potential major weed for only 3 years after the other tillage treatments.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Treatment
other tillage treatmentse2
Outcome
potential major weede2
Qualifier
for only 3 yearse2

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“Although moldboard plowing gave the most 1st year control, proso was a potential major weed for 4 years following annual moldboard plowing in the fall and for only 3 years following the other tillage treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1239 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Most (80%) of the total proso emergence occurred in the first year after proso harvest.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Outcome
total proso emergencee3
Value
80%e3
Qualifier
the 1st year after proso harveste3

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e3

“Most (80%) of the total proso emergence occurred the 1st year after proso harvest, but 17, 2, and 1% occurred in the next 3 years, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 884–1027 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Proso emergence was 17, 2 and 1% in the next three years, respectively.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Outcome
proso emergencee3
Value
17, 2, and 1%e3
Qualifier
in the next 3 yearse3

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e3

“Most (80%) of the total proso emergence occurred the 1st year after proso harvest, but 17, 2, and 1% occurred in the next 3 years, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 884–1027 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Most proso plants emerged in May.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Outcome
Most proso plants emergede4
Qualifier
in Maye4

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e4

“Most proso plants emerged in May, 10% emerged in June, and only 3% later”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1241–1313 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

10% of proso plants emerged in June.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Outcome
proso plants emergede4
Value
10%e4
Qualifier
in Junee4

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e4

“Most proso plants emerged in May, 10% emerged in June, and only 3% later”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1241–1313 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Only 3% of proso plants emerged later.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Outcome
proso plants emergede4
Value
3%e4
Qualifier
latere4

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e4

“Most proso plants emerged in May, 10% emerged in June, and only 3% later”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1241–1313 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain sorghum yields were highest after moldboard plowing or rototilling in March or April.

Taxon
SorghumSorghumt0
Treatment
moldboard plowing or rototilling in March or Aprile5
Outcome
grain sorghum yieldse5
Direction
Higheste5

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Production of Sorghum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–75 · show in text ↑
e5

“Highest grain sorghum yields followed moldboard plowing or rototilling in March or April or moldboard plowing in the fall followed by rototilling in April or May”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1389–1550 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain sorghum yields were highest after moldboard plowing in the fall followed by rototilling in April or May.

Taxon
SorghumSorghumt0
Treatment
moldboard plowing in the fall followed by rototilling in April or Maye5
Outcome
grain sorghum yieldse5
Direction
Higheste5

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Production of Sorghum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–75 · show in text ↑
e5

“Highest grain sorghum yields followed moldboard plowing or rototilling in March or April or moldboard plowing in the fall followed by rototilling in April or May”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1389–1550 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moldboard plowing gave the most control of annual weeds other than proso.

Taxon
proso milletPanicum miliaceume1
Treatment
Moldboard plowinge6
Outcome
control of annual weeds other than prosoe6
Direction
moste6

Not reportedComparator

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

Panicum miliaceum
Panicum miliaceum · TaxonKurt Stüber [1] · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Production of proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) results in volunteer plants the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–106 · show in text ↑
e6

“Moldboard plowing gave the most control of annual weeds other than proso”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1315–1387 · show in text ↑

tillage · yield · SorghumResults differ

123 papers: 102 positive, 21 negative or no effect

101 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

119 papers more in this group

See all 123 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.