Paper · 2012 · Weed Technology

Simulated Spray Drift of Aminocyclopyrachlor on Cantaloupe, Eggplant, and Cotton

Michael L. Flessner; J. Scott McElroy; Leonildo A. Cardoso; et al.

4
claims
7
verbatim quotes
11
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Aminocyclopyrachlor (AMCP) is a herbicide with an auxin-mimic mode of action. AMCP is registered for use in the United States on right-of-way and other noncropland sites, causing concern for potential off-target spray drift. The objectives of this study were to evaluate cantaloupe and eggplant response to simulated AMCP spray drift in the field and cotton response in the greenhouse. Cantaloupe and eggplant responded with little to no injury from drift rates up to 10 g AMCP ha −1 , roughly 3.2% of the maximum labeled use rate for right-of-way weed control. Slight yield reductions occurred but were not consistent between 2008 and 2009. Therefore, eggplant and cantaloupe injury and yield-reduction potential from AMCP spray drift is low. Cotton response to AMCP drift was compared to similar spray drift rates of 2,4-D and aminopyralid. Cotton responded with injury and reductions in height and dry mass from all three herbicides. Responses were greatest from AMCP, indicating AMCP is potentially more damaging to cotton than 2,4-D or aminopyralid if spray drift occurs, when comparing percentages of labeled rates.

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 resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cantaloupe and eggplant had little to no injury from simulated AMCP spray drift up to 10 g ha-1 in the field.

Treatment
drift rates up to 10 g AMCP ha −1e1
Outcome
injurye1
Direction
little to noe1
Setting
in the fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Solanum melongena
Solanum melongena · TaxonBeraDigle · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“evaluate cantaloupe and eggplant response to simulated AMCP spray drift in the field and cotton response in the greenhouse”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 262–384 · show in text ↑
e1

“Cantaloupe and eggplant responded with little to no injury from drift rates up to 10 g AMCP ha −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 386–483 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Simulated AMCP spray drift caused slight, inconsistent yield reductions in cantaloupe and eggplant across 2008 and 2009.

Treatment
simulated AMCP spray drifte0
Outcome
yield reductionse2
Direction
reductionse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Solanum melongena
Solanum melongena · TaxonBeraDigle · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“evaluate cantaloupe and eggplant response to simulated AMCP spray drift in the field and cotton response in the greenhouse”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 262–384 · show in text ↑
e2

“Slight yield reductions occurred but were not consistent between 2008 and 2009”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 562–640 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Simulated spray drift from all three herbicides caused injury and reductions in height and dry mass of cotton in the greenhouse.

Treatment
all three herbicidese3
Outcome
injury and reductions in height and dry masse3
Direction
reductionse3
Setting
greenhousee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“evaluate cantaloupe and eggplant response to simulated AMCP spray drift in the field and cotton response in the greenhouse”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 262–384 · show in text ↑
e3

“Cotton responded with injury and reductions in height and dry mass from all three herbicides”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 843–935 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AMCP drift was potentially more damaging to cotton than 2,4-D or aminopyralid drift when compared at percentages of labeled rates.

Treatment
AMCPe4
Outcome
Responsese4
Direction
greateste4
Qualifier
when comparing percentages of labeled ratese4
Comparator
2,4-D or aminopyralide4

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“Responses were greatest from AMCP, indicating AMCP is potentially more damaging to cotton than 2,4-D or aminopyralid if spray drift occurs, when comparing percentages of labeled rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 937–1120 · show in text ↑

application · yield · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

25 papers: 17 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

21 papers more in this group

See all 25 papers →

herbicide · crop injury · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 7 positive, 32 negative or no effect

31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 papers →

application · yield · Solanum melongena (eggplant)Positive and negative results

77 papers: 74 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 74 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

73 papers more in this group

See all 77 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.