Abstract
The potential widespread adoption of cotton and soybean varieties with 2,4-D and dicamba resistance traits in the southeastern US will increase the risk of accidental exposure of peanut to these herbicides because of drift or application errors. When such accidents occur, growers must decide between continuing the crop and terminating it. In order to make this decision, growers need to estimate the potential yield reduction caused by 2,4-D or dicamba. Dose-response studies were conducted under field conditions in Citra and Jay, FL in 2012 and 2013 to determine peanut injury and yield reduction after exposure to 70, 140, 280, 560, and 1120 g ae ha −1 of 2,4-D or to 35, 70, 140, 280, and 560 g ae ha −1 of dicamba at 21 and 42 d after planting (DAP). Only herbicide by rate interactions were significant (P < 0.04). Dicamba caused 2 to 5 times higher peanut injury and 0.5 to 2 times higher yield reductions than 2,4-D. Injury ranged from 0 to 35% when peanut plants were treated with 2,4-D and from 20 to 78% with dicamba. The maximum yield reduction was 41% with 1,120 g ha −1 of 2,4-D and 65% with 560 g ha −1 of dicamba. Linear regression indicated that the intercept for yield reduction was 12% for 2,4-D and 23% for dicamba, and there was a 2.5% and 7.7% increase in yield reduction per additional 100 g ha −1 , respectively. Although high variability was observed for the different variables, there was a positive correlation between injury and peanut yield reduction (P < 0.0001) with Pearson's Rho values ranging from 0.45 to 0.59 for 2,4-D and from 0.27 to 0.55 for dicamba, suggesting that growers can use injury data to make rough projections of yield reduction and decide if they continue their crop, especially when injury is evident.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Only herbicide-by-rate interactions were significant.
- Taxon
- Peanut
Arachis hypogaeat0 - Treatment
- herbicidee0
- Outcome
- herbicide by rate interactionse0
- Value
- P < 0.04e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Peanut”
e0“Only herbicide by rate interactions were significant (P < 0.04).”
Claim · model-written summary
Dicamba caused 2 to 5 times more peanut injury than 2,4-D.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- Dicambae0
- Outcome
- peanut injurye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 2 to 5 timese0
- Comparator
- 2,4-De0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dicamba caused 2 to 5 times higher peanut injury and 0.5 to 2 times higher yield reductions than 2,4-D.”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Dicamba caused 0.5 to 2 times higher yield reductions than 2,4-D.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- Dicambae0
- Outcome
- yield reductionse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 0.5 to 2 timese0
- Comparator
- 2,4-De0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dicamba caused 2 to 5 times higher peanut injury and 0.5 to 2 times higher yield reductions than 2,4-D.”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut injury under 2,4-D ranged from 0 to 35%.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- 2,4-De0
- Outcome
- Injurye0
- Value
- 0 to 35%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Injury ranged from 0 to 35% when peanut plants were treated with 2,4-D”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut injury under dicamba ranged from 20 to 78%.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae1
- Treatment
- dicambae0
- Value
- 20 to 78%e0
Not reportedComparatorOutcomeDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“from 20 to 78% with dicamba”
e1“peanut plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum yield reduction was 41% at 1,120 g ha −1 of 2,4-D.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- 1,120 g ha −1 of 2,4-De0
- Outcome
- yield reductione0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 41%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum yield reduction was 41% with 1,120 g ha −1 of 2,4-D”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum yield reduction was 65% at 560 g ha −1 of dicamba.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- 560 g ha −1 of dicambae0
- Outcome
- yield reductione1
- Direction
- maximume1
- Value
- 65%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“65% with 560 g ha −1 of dicamba”
e1“The maximum yield reduction was 41% with 1,120 g ha −1 of 2,4-D and 65% with 560 g ha −1 of dicamba.”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
The yield-reduction regression intercept was 12% for 2,4-D.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- 2,4-De0
- Outcome
- intercept for yield reductione0
- Value
- 12%e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the intercept for yield reduction was 12% for 2,4-D”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
The yield-reduction regression intercept was 23% for dicamba.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- dicambae0
- Outcome
- intercept for yield reductione1
- Value
- 23%e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“23% for dicamba”
e1“the intercept for yield reduction was 12% for 2,4-D and 23% for dicamba”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield reduction rose 2.5% per additional 100 g ha −1 of 2,4-D.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- 2,4-De1
- Outcome
- yield reductione0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 2.5%e0
- Qualifier
- per additional 100 g ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was a 2.5% and 7.7% increase in yield reduction per additional 100 g ha −1 , respectively”
e1“for 2,4-D and 23% for dicamba”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield reduction rose 7.7% per additional 100 g ha −1 of dicamba.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- dicambae1
- Outcome
- yield reductione0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 7.7%e0
- Qualifier
- per additional 100 g ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was a 2.5% and 7.7% increase in yield reduction per additional 100 g ha −1 , respectively”
e1“for 2,4-D and 23% for dicamba”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Injury and yield reduction correlated positively under 2,4-D, with Pearson rho 0.45 to 0.59.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- 2,4-De0
- Outcome
- injury and peanut yield reductione0
- Direction
- positive correlatione0
- Value
- 0.45 to 0.59e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was a positive correlation between injury and peanut yield reduction (P < 0.0001) with Pearson's Rho values ranging from 0.45 to 0.59 for 2,4-D”
Claim · model-written summary
Injury and yield reduction correlated positively under dicamba, with Pearson rho 0.27 to 0.55.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- dicambae0
- Outcome
- injury and peanut yield reductione0
- Direction
- positive correlatione0
- Value
- 0.27 to 0.55e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was a positive correlation between injury and peanut yield reduction (P < 0.0001) with Pearson's Rho values ranging from 0.45 to 0.59 for 2,4-D and from 0.27 to 0.55 for dicamba”
Claim · model-written summary
Growers can use visible injury to roughly project yield loss and decide whether to continue the crop.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Outcome
- use injury data to make rough projections of yield reductione0
- Qualifier
- especially when injury is evidente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“growers can use injury data to make rough projections of yield reduction and decide if they continue their crop, especially when injury is evident.”
t0“Peanut”
The same questions in other papers
dicamba · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →dicamba · crop injury · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
2,4-D · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- no effect
2,4-D · crop injury · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- 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.