Abstract
Field studies were conducted at Yoakum and Stephenville, TX; Jay, FL; and Midville and Plains, GA, to determine the persistence of imazapic applied to peanuts at 0, 70, 140, and 210 g ai/ha. The following year, cotton, sorghum, and corn were planted in the treated plots in Texas, cotton was planted in Florida, and corn and cotton were planted in Georgia and evaluated for carryover injury. Data collected to determine injury included plant heights and weights. In 1999 in Texas and in Florida and Georgia, there was no significant carryover injury to rotational crops from any of the imazapic rates. Data on cotton and sorghum plant height from Texas in 2000 showed height reductions for the 210-g/ha rate on cotton and the 140- and 210-g/ha rates on sorghum. These data showed no significant carryover effects to rotational crops from the 70-g/ha rate of imazapic applied to peanuts the previous year.Nomenclature: Imazapic; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.; corn, Zea mays L.; peanut, Arachis hypogaea L.; sorghum, Sorghum bicolor L.Additional index words: Carryover injury, herbicide persistence, herbicide residue.Abbreviations: DAP, days after planting; EPOST, early postemergence; MAP, months after planting; 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 4
Claim · model-written summary
In 1999 there was no significant carryover injury to rotational crops from any imazapic rate applied to peanuts in Texas, Florida and Georgia.
- Taxon
- peanuts
Arachis hypogaeae0 - Treatment
- imazapice0
- Outcome
- carryover injury to rotational cropse1
- Qualifier
- from any of the imazapic ratese1
- Setting
- Texas and in Florida and Georgiae1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“to determine the persistence of imazapic applied to peanuts at 0, 70, 140, and 210 g ai/ha”
e1“In 1999 in Texas and in Florida and Georgia, there was no significant carryover injury to rotational crops from any of the imazapic rates”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2000 in Texas, the 210 g/ha imazapic rate reduced plant height of cotton.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume2 - Treatment
- 210-g/ha ratee2
- Outcome
- plant heighte2
- Direction
- reductionse2
- Setting
- Texase2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Data on cotton and sorghum plant height from Texas in 2000 showed height reductions for the 210-g/ha rate on cotton and the 140- and 210-g/ha rates on sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2000 in Texas, the 140 and 210 g/ha imazapic rates reduced plant height of sorghum.
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Data on cotton and sorghum plant height from Texas in 2000 showed height reductions for the 210-g/ha rate on cotton and the 140- and 210-g/ha rates on sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2000 the 70 g/ha imazapic rate applied to peanuts had no significant carryover effects on rotational crops.
- Taxon
- peanutsArachis hypogaeae3
- Treatment
- 70-g/ha rate of imazapice3
- Outcome
- carryover effects to rotational cropse3
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“These data showed no significant carryover effects to rotational crops from the 70-g/ha rate of imazapic applied to peanuts the previous year”
The same questions in other papers
imazapic · crop injury · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
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.