Abstract
Dissipation of imidazolinone herbicides imazaquin and imazethapyr under no-till field conditions was not affected by straw mulch level (1,300, 3,600, or 5,900 kg/ha) in either of 2 yr of field data. Half-lives averaged 7 d for imazaquin and 8 d for imazethapyr. Chlorimuron half-lives averaged 5 d. Imazaquin and imazethapyr residues did not injure corn (Zea mays) the growing season following application. Injury from chlorimuron to corn planted the next year was greatest where applications were made to the highest straw level, reducing corn yield 6%. In laboratory experiments, uniformly cut wheat (Triticum aestivum) straw placed over sand intercepted all three herbicides equally. Herbicide interception was 16, 43, 69, and 89% for straw levels of 840, 1,680, 3,360, and 6,720 kg/ha, respectively. In the laboratory, simulated rainfall removed more imazaquin and imazethapyr from straw than chlorimuron, and approximately 10% of the applied imazaquin or imazethapyr and 20% of the applied chlorimuron remained on the straw after application of 1.0 cm of water. Imazaquin and imazethapyr dissipated 59 and 20%, respectively, during a 7-d incubation period in the greenhouse. Imazaquin dissipation was equal between sand and straw, whereas imazethapyr dissipation was primarily from sand. Chlorimuron did not dissipate from either straw or sand. This indicated that chlorimuron, a sulfonylurea, was more stable than either imidazolinone under these conditions.Nomenclature: Chlorimuron; imazaquin; imazethapyr; wheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Caldwell’; corn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3369A’, ‘Pioneer 3320’.Additional index words: Degradation, imidazolinone, persistence, photodegradation, photolysis, rotational crop, sulfonylurea.Abbreviations: DAT, days after treatment; HPLC, high-performance liquid chromatography; WAP, weeks after planting.
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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Straw level did not affect imazaquin dissipation in no-till fields.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- straw mulch level (1,300, 3,600, or 5,900 kg/ha)e0
- Outcome
- Dissipation of imidazolinone herbicides imazaquine0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dissipation of imidazolinone herbicides imazaquin and imazethapyr under no-till field conditions was not affected by straw mulch level (1,300, 3,600, or 5,900 kg/ha) in either of 2 yr of field data”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw level did not affect imazethapyr dissipation in no-till fields.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- straw mulch level (1,300, 3,600, or 5,900 kg/ha)e0
- Outcome
- imazethapyre0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dissipation of imidazolinone herbicides imazaquin and imazethapyr under no-till field conditions was not affected by straw mulch level (1,300, 3,600, or 5,900 kg/ha) in either of 2 yr of field data”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazaquin half-life averaged seven days.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Half-lives averaged 7 d for imazaquin”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazethapyr half-life averaged eight days.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“8 d for imazethapyr”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorimuron half-life averaged five days.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Chlorimuron half-lives averaged 5 d”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazaquin residues did not injure following-season corn.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- Imazaquine0
- Outcome
- did not injure corne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Imazaquin and imazethapyr residues did not injure corn (Zea mays) the growing season following application”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazethapyr residues did not injure following-season corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- imazethapyre0
- Outcome
- did not injure corne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Imazaquin and imazethapyr residues did not injure corn (Zea mays) the growing season following application”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorimuron injury to corn was greatest at the highest straw level.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- highest straw levele0
- Outcome
- Injury from chlorimuron to corne0
- Direction
- greateste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Injury from chlorimuron to corn planted the next year was greatest where applications were made to the highest straw level”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorimuron at the highest straw level reduced next-year corn yield by 6%.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- chlorimurone0
- Outcome
- corn yielde0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Value
- 6%e0
- Qualifier
- highest straw levele0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Injury from chlorimuron to corn planted the next year was greatest where applications were made to the highest straw level, reducing corn yield 6%”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat straw intercepted all three herbicides equally in the laboratory.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- strawe0
- Outcome
- intercepted all three herbicides equallye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“uniformly cut wheat (Triticum aestivum) straw placed over sand intercepted all three herbicides equally”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide interception at 840 straw was 16.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 840e0
- Outcome
- Herbicide interceptione0
- Value
- 16e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicide interception was 16, 43, 69, and 89% for straw levels of 840, 1,680, 3,360, and 6,720 kg/ha, respectively”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide interception at 1,680 straw was 43.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 1,680e0
- Outcome
- Herbicide interceptione0
- Value
- 43e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicide interception was 16, 43, 69, and 89% for straw levels of 840, 1,680, 3,360, and 6,720 kg/ha, respectively”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide interception at 3,360 straw was 69.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 3,360e0
- Outcome
- Herbicide interceptione0
- Value
- 69e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicide interception was 16, 43, 69, and 89% for straw levels of 840, 1,680, 3,360, and 6,720 kg/ha, respectively”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide interception at 6,720 kg/ha straw was 89%.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 6,720 kg/hae0
- Outcome
- Herbicide interceptione0
- Value
- 89%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicide interception was 16, 43, 69, and 89% for straw levels of 840, 1,680, 3,360, and 6,720 kg/ha, respectively”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall removed more imazaquin and imazethapyr from straw than chlorimuron.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- removed more imazaquin and imazethapyr from strawe0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- chlorimurone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“simulated rainfall removed more imazaquin and imazethapyr from straw than chlorimuron”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
About 10% of imazaquin or imazethapyr remained on straw after 1 cm water.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- applied imazaquin or imazethapyre0
- Value
- 10%e0
- Qualifier
- 1.0 cm of watere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“approximately 10% of the applied imazaquin or imazethapyr and 20% of the applied chlorimuron remained on the straw after application of 1.0 cm of water”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
About 20% of chlorimuron remained on straw after 1 cm water.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- applied chlorimuron remained on the strawe0
- Value
- 20%e0
- Qualifier
- 1.0 cm of watere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“approximately 10% of the applied imazaquin or imazethapyr and 20% of the applied chlorimuron remained on the straw after application of 1.0 cm of water”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazaquin dissipated 59% in seven days in the greenhouse.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Imazaquin and imazethapyr dissipated 59 and 20%, respectively, during a 7-d incubation period in the greenhouse”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazethapyr dissipated 20% in seven days in the greenhouse.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Imazaquin and imazethapyr dissipated 59 and 20%, respectively, during a 7-d incubation period in the greenhouse”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorimuron did not dissipate from straw or sand.
- Outcome
- Chlorimuron did not dissipatee0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Chlorimuron did not dissipate from either straw or sand”
The same questions in other papers
chlorimuron · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- 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.