Abstract
Field experiments were conducted near Scottsbluff, NE, in 2001 and 2002 to compare economic aspects of glyphosate applied to different glyphosate-resistant sugar beet cultivars with that of conventional herbicide programs applied to near-equivalent, non–glyphosate-resistant conventional cultivars. Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervals, beginning when weeds were 10 cm tall, provided excellent weed control, yield, and net economic return regardless of the glyphosate-resistant sugar beet cultivar. All conventional herbicide treatments resulted in similar net economic returns. Although the conventional sugar beet cultivars ‘HM 1640’ and ‘Beta 4546’ responded similarly to herbicide treatments with respect to sucrose content, ‘Beta 4546RR’ produced roots with 1% more sucrose than ‘HM 1640RR’. When averaged over herbicide treatments, a producer planting Beta 4546RR could afford to pay US $185/ha more for glyphosate-resistant technology as could a producer planting HM 1640RR. When averaged over cultivars and herbicide treatments, it is estimated that a producer could afford to pay an additional US $385/ha for glyphosate-resistant technology without decreasing net return.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Two or three glyphosate applications at two-week intervals starting at 10 cm weed height provided excellent weed control.
- Taxon
- weedse0
- Treatment
- Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervalse0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- excellente0
- Qualifier
- beginning when weeds were 10 cm talle0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervals, beginning when weeds were 10 cm tall, provided excellent weed control, yield, and net economic return regardless of the glyphosate-resistant sugar beet cultivar.”
Claim · model-written summary
The glyphosate program provided excellent yield regardless of resistant sugar beet cultivar.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Treatment
- Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervalse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- excellente0
- Qualifier
- regardless of the glyphosate-resistant sugar beet cultivare0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervals, beginning when weeds were 10 cm tall, provided excellent weed control, yield, and net economic return regardless of the glyphosate-resistant sugar beet cultivar.”
Claim · model-written summary
The glyphosate program provided excellent net economic return regardless of resistant cultivar.
- Treatment
- Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervalse0
- Outcome
- net economic returne0
- Direction
- excellente0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Glyphosate applied two or three times at 2-wk intervals, beginning when weeds were 10 cm tall, provided excellent weed control, yield, and net economic return regardless of the glyphosate-resistant sugar beet cultivar.”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional herbicide treatments gave similar net economic returns.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“All conventional herbicide treatments resulted in similar net economic returns.”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional HM 1640 and Beta 4546 responded similarly in sucrose content to herbicide treatments.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Material
- ‘HM 1640’e0
- Treatment
- herbicide treatmentse0
- Outcome
- sucrose contente0
- Direction
- similarlye0
- Comparator
- ‘Beta 4546’e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although the conventional sugar beet cultivars ‘HM 1640’ and ‘Beta 4546’ responded similarly to herbicide treatments with respect to sucrose content”
Claim · model-written summary
Beta 4546RR roots contained 1% more sucrose than HM 1640RR.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Material
- ‘Beta 4546RR’e0
- Organ / stage
- rootse0
- Outcome
- sucrosee0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 1%e0
- Comparator
- ‘HM 1640RR’e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“‘Beta 4546RR’ produced roots with 1% more sucrose than ‘HM 1640RR’.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
A Beta 4546RR producer could pay US $185/ha more for resistant technology than an HM 1640RR producer, averaged over herbicides.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“When averaged over herbicide treatments, a producer planting Beta 4546RR could afford to pay US $185/ha more for glyphosate-resistant technology as could a producer planting HM 1640RR.”
Claim · model-written summary
Averaged over cultivars and treatments, producers could pay an additional US $385/ha for resistant technology without decreasing net return.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“When averaged over cultivars and herbicide treatments, it is estimated that a producer could afford to pay an additional US $385/ha for glyphosate-resistant technology without decreasing net return.”
The same questions in other papers
glyphosate · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →herbicide · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →herbicide · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
50 papers more in this group
See all 54 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.