Abstract
Field experiments conducted in Texas at six locations from 1996 to 1998 evaluated peanut tolerance to imazapic applied postemergence. Imazapic at 71 g ai/ha was applied weekly from ground cracking to 56 d after ground cracking (DAGC). Visible injury 70 DAGC ranged from 0 to 40%. No reduction in canopy height, canopy width, yield, or grade was observed at harvest following any imazapic treatment.Nomenclature: Imazapic; peanut, Arachis hypogaea L., ‘AT 120’, ‘GK 7’, ‘NC 7’, ‘Tamspan 90’.Additional index words: Herbicide injury, ground cracking, groundnut, herbicide timings, peanut injury, postemergence, yield.Abbreviations: DAGC, days after ground cracking; DAP, days after planting; POST, postemergence; PPI, preplant incorporated.
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 3
Claim · model-written summary
Visible peanut injury at 70 days after ground cracking ranged from 0 to 40%.
- Taxon
- Peanut
Arachis hypogaeat0 - Outcome
- Visible injurye0
- Value
- 0 to 40%e0
- Qualifier
- 70 DAGCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Visible injury 70 DAGC ranged from 0 to 40%”
t0“Peanut (Arachis hypogaea)”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazapic treatments did not reduce peanut canopy height or width at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- imazapic treatmente0
- Outcome
- canopy height, canopy widthe0
- Direction
- No reductione0
- Qualifier
- at harveste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No reduction in canopy height, canopy width, yield, or grade was observed at harvest following any imazapic treatment”
t0“Peanut (Arachis hypogaea)”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazapic treatments did not reduce peanut yield or grade at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- imazapic treatmente0
- Outcome
- yield, or gradee0
- Direction
- No reductione0
- Qualifier
- at harveste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No reduction in canopy height, canopy width, yield, or grade was observed at harvest following any imazapic treatment”
t0“Peanut (Arachis hypogaea)”
The same questions in other papers
imazapic · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →imazapic · growth · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- negative
- negative
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.