Abstract
Rice was planted at 78 kg/ha with different densities of creeping rivergrass. Creeping rivergrass at stand densities (SD) of 10,000 to 70,000 stolon segments/ha produced 5.4 to 6 stolons per introduced segment; however, 130,000 through 520,000 SD produced 1.4 to 2.1 stolons per segment. Stolon production was 60,000 plants/ha and increased to 760,000 stolons/ha at planting densities of 10,000 to 520,000/ha, respectively. The 260,000 and 520,000 SD produced similar stolon lengths of 217 and 318 km/ha; however, stolon length was less at lower SD. Total node production was 290,000 nodes per ha with an average of 29 nodes per segment in the 10,000 SD and 5.4 to 9.8 nodes per segment with 70,000 or greater SD. Total biomass increased as SD increased. Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soil was 31, 63, 44, and 25% for segments planted at 0, 1.3, 2.5, and 5 cm deep, respectively. In a greenhouse study, glyphosate at 1,260 g ai/ha controlled creeping rivergrass 91% and biomass production was 19% of the nontreated creeping rivergrass. Bispyribac, cyhalofop, fenoxaprop/s, fenoxaprop/s plus fenoxaprop, glufosinate, imazethapyr, penoxsulam, propanil, and quinclorac were less effective than glyphosate.Nomenclature: Bispyribac, clomazone, cyhalofop, fenoxaprop, glufosinate, glyphosate, imazethapyr, penoxsulam, propanil, quinclorac, barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. ECHCG, creeping rivergrass, Echinochloa polystachya (Kunth) A.S. Hitchc., rice, Oryza sativa L
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass produced 5.4 to 6 stolons per segment at low stand densities.
- Taxon
- Rice
Oryza sativat0 - Interactor
- Creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- stolons per introduced segmente0
- Value
- 5.4 to 6 stolons per introduced segmente0
- Qualifier
- 10,000 to 70,000 stolon segments/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Creeping rivergrass at stand densities (SD) of 10,000 to 70,000 stolon segments/ha produced 5.4 to 6 stolons per introduced segment”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass produced 1.4 to 2.1 stolons per segment at higher stand densities.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- stolons per segmente0
- Value
- 1.4 to 2.1 stolons per segmente0
- Qualifier
- 130,000 through 520,000 SDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“130,000 through 520,000 SD produced 1.4 to 2.1 stolons per segment.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass stolon production increased from 60,000 to 760,000 stolons/ha across planting densities.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- Stolon productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 760,000 stolons/hae0
- Qualifier
- planting densities of 10,000 to 520,000/hae0
Not reportedSetting
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stolon production was 60,000 plants/ha and increased to 760,000 stolons/ha at planting densities of 10,000 to 520,000/ha, respectively.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
At 260,000 and 520,000 stand densities, creeping rivergrass stolon lengths were 217 and 318 km/ha, respectively.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- stolon lengthse0
- Value
- 217 and 318 km/hae0
- Qualifier
- 260,000 and 520,000 SDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 260,000 and 520,000 SD produced similar stolon lengths of 217 and 318 km/ha”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass stolon length was lower at lower stand densities.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- stolon lengthe0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Qualifier
- lower SDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“stolon length was less at lower SD.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
At 10,000 stand density, total node production was 290,000 nodes per ha.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- Total node productione0
- Value
- 290,000 nodes per hae0
- Qualifier
- 10,000 SDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total node production was 290,000 nodes per ha with an average of 29 nodes per segment in the 10,000 SD”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
At 10,000 stand density, node production averaged 29 per segment.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- nodes per segmente0
- Value
- 29 nodes per segmente0
- Qualifier
- 10,000 SDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total node production was 290,000 nodes per ha with an average of 29 nodes per segment in the 10,000 SD”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
At 70,000 or greater stand density, node production was 5.4 to 9.8 per segment.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- nodes per segmente0
- Value
- 5.4 to 9.8 nodes per segmente0
- Qualifier
- 70,000 or greater SDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“5.4 to 9.8 nodes per segment with 70,000 or greater SD.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass total biomass increased with stand density.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- Total biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- SD increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total biomass increased as SD increased.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass emergence was 31% from surface planted segments.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- Creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soile0
- Value
- 31e0
- Qualifier
- 0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soil was 31, 63, 44, and 25% for segments planted at 0, 1.3, 2.5, and 5 cm deep, respectively.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass emergence was 63% from 1.3 cm.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- Creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soile0
- Value
- 63e0
- Qualifier
- 1.3e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soil was 31, 63, 44, and 25% for segments planted at 0, 1.3, 2.5, and 5 cm deep, respectively.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass emergence was 44% from 2.5 cm.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- Creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soile0
- Value
- 44e0
- Qualifier
- 2.5e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soil was 31, 63, 44, and 25% for segments planted at 0, 1.3, 2.5, and 5 cm deep, respectively.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Creeping rivergrass emergence was 25% from 5 cm.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- Creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soile0
- Value
- 25%e0
- Qualifier
- 5 cm deepe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Creeping rivergrass shoot emergence from soil was 31, 63, 44, and 25% for segments planted at 0, 1.3, 2.5, and 5 cm deep, respectively.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Glyphosate at 1,260 g ai/ha controlled creeping rivergrass 91% in a greenhouse.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- glyphosate at 1,260 g ai/hae0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- controlled creeping rivergrasse0
- Direction
- controllede0
- Value
- 91%e0
- Comparator
- nontreated creeping rivergrasse0
- Setting
- greenhouse studye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In a greenhouse study, glyphosate at 1,260 g ai/ha controlled creeping rivergrass 91% and biomass production was 19% of the nontreated creeping rivergrass.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Glyphosate reduced creeping rivergrass biomass production to 19% of untreated plants.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- glyphosate at 1,260 g ai/hae0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse0weed
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 19%e0
- Comparator
- nontreated creeping rivergrasse0
- Setting
- greenhouse studye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In a greenhouse study, glyphosate at 1,260 g ai/ha controlled creeping rivergrass 91% and biomass production was 19% of the nontreated creeping rivergrass.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
Claim · model-written summary
The other listed herbicides controlled creeping rivergrass less effectively than glyphosate.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Interactor
- creeping rivergrasse1weed
- Outcome
- less effective than glyphosatee0
- Direction
- less effectivee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bispyribac, cyhalofop, fenoxaprop/s, fenoxaprop/s plus fenoxaprop, glufosinate, imazethapyr, penoxsulam, propanil, and quinclorac were less effective than glyphosate.”
t0“Rice”
e1“Creeping Rivergrass”
The same questions in other papers
glyphosate · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →glyphosate · control · Oryza sativa (rice)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.