Abstract
Field trials were conducted at five sites from 2001 through 2003 to determine the influence on sugarbeet and weeds of repeated broadcast and banded reduced rates of desmedipham plus phenmedipham, triflusulfuron, and clopyralid in combination with either 1.5 or 3% v/v methylated seed oil (MSO). Desmedipham plus phenmedipham, triflusulfuron, and clopyralid were applied POST three times at 5 to 7 d intervals at either 25, 50, 75, or 100% of a 180 plus 180 plus 18 plus 100 g ai/ha dosage (full rate). When averaged over all herbicide rates, crop injury was 6% greater, but common lambsquarters control was 5% higher, and crop yield was 15% greater with broadcast compared with banded herbicide application. In most situations, adding MSO at 3% rather than 1.5% did not improve weed control. Sugarbeet injury was lowest (11%) and the average weed control was 86% when herbicide rates (with 1.5% MSO) were 25% of the full rate (microrate). Applying an herbicide rate (with 1.5% MSO) that was 50% of the full rate (half rate) increased crop injury from 11% with the microrate to 18% with the half rate and elevated average weed control from 86% with the microrate to 92% with the half rate. Common lambsquarters control increased from 81% with the microrate to 89% with the half rate. Sugarbeet root yield was 23 t/ha when no herbicide was used, 48 t/ha with the microrate, and 49 t/ha with the half rate compared with 54 t/ha when the full rate was applied without MSO. Increasing herbicide rates to 75% of the full rate (three-quarter rate) (with 1.5% MSO) increased crop injury to 27% and average weed control to 96%. Applying 1.5% MSO to the full rate increased crop injury to 35% with no improvement in average weed control over that achieved with the full rate without MSO.Nomenclature: Clopyralid; desmedipham; phenmedipham; triflusulfuron; common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. #3 CHEAL; sugarbeet, Beta vulgaris L. ‘Beta 1775’, ‘Beta 4546’, ‘HM1639RZ’.Additional index words: Adjuvants, crop tolerance, crop yield.Abbreviations: DAT, days after treatment; full rate, desmedipham plus phenmedipham, triflusulfuron, and clopyralid at 180 plus 180 plus 18 plus 100 g/ha; half rate, desmedipham plus phenmedipham, triflusulfuron, and clopyralid at 90 plus 90 plus 9 plus 50 g/ha; microrate, desmedipham plus phenmedipham, triflusulfuron, and clopyralid at 45 plus 45 plus 4.5 plus 25 g/ha; MSO, methylated seed oil; three-quarters rate, desmedipham plus phenmedipham, triflusulfuron, and clopyralid at 135 plus 135 plus 13.5 plus 75 g/ha.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Broadcast application caused 6% greater crop injury than banding.
- Taxon
- sugarbeet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- broadcaste0
- Outcome
- crop injurye0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 6%e0
- Comparator
- banded herbicide applicatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“crop injury was 6% greater, but common lambsquarters control was 5% higher, and crop yield was 15% greater with broadcast compared with banded herbicide application”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
Broadcast application increased common lambsquarters control by 5% compared with banding.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- broadcaste0
- Interactor
- common lambsquarters
Chenopodium albume0weed - Outcome
- common lambsquarters controle0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5%e0
- Comparator
- banded herbicide applicatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“common lambsquarters control was 5% higher, and crop yield was 15% greater with broadcast compared with banded herbicide application”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
Broadcast application increased crop yield by 15% compared with banding.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- broadcaste0
- Outcome
- crop yielde0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- banded herbicide applicatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“crop yield was 15% greater with broadcast compared with banded herbicide application”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing MSO from 1.5% to 3% generally did not improve weed control.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- MSO at 3%e0
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- did not improvee0
- Qualifier
- In most situationse0
- Comparator
- 1.5%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In most situations, adding MSO at 3% rather than 1.5% did not improve weed control”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
At the microrate with 1.5% MSO, sugarbeet injury was lowest at 11%.
- Taxon
- SugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- 25% of the full rate (microrate)e0
- Outcome
- Sugarbeet injurye0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Value
- 11%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarbeet injury was lowest (11%) and the average weed control was 86% when herbicide rates (with 1.5% MSO) were 25% of the full rate (microrate)”
Claim · model-written summary
At the microrate with 1.5% MSO, average weed control was 86%.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 25% of the full rate (microrate)e0
- Outcome
- average weed controle0
- Value
- 86%e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average weed control was 86% when herbicide rates (with 1.5% MSO) were 25% of the full rate (microrate)”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
The half rate increased crop injury from 11% to 18% relative to the microrate.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 50% of the full rate (half rate)e0
- Outcome
- crop injurye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 18%e0
- Qualifier
- 11%e0
- Comparator
- microratee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying an herbicide rate (with 1.5% MSO) that was 50% of the full rate (half rate) increased crop injury from 11% with the microrate to 18% with the half rate”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
The half rate increased average weed control from 86% to 92% relative to the microrate.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- half ratee0
- Outcome
- average weed controle0
- Direction
- elevatede0
- Value
- 92%e0
- Qualifier
- 86%e0
- Comparator
- microratee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“elevated average weed control from 86% with the microrate to 92% with the half rate”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
The half rate increased common lambsquarters control from 81% to 89% relative to the microrate.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- half ratee0
- Interactor
- Common lambsquartersChenopodium albume0weed
- Outcome
- Common lambsquarters controle0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 89%e0
- Qualifier
- 81%e0
- Comparator
- microratee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Common lambsquarters control increased from 81% with the microrate to 89% with the half rate”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarbeet root yield without herbicide was 23 t/ha.
- Taxon
- SugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- no herbicidee0
- Outcome
- Sugarbeet root yielde0
- Value
- 23 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarbeet root yield was 23 t/ha when no herbicide was used”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarbeet root yield with the microrate was 48 t/ha.
- Taxon
- SugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- microratee0
- Outcome
- Sugarbeet root yielde0
- Value
- 48 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarbeet root yield was 23 t/ha when no herbicide was used, 48 t/ha with the microrate”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarbeet root yield with the half rate was 49 t/ha.
- Taxon
- SugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- half ratee0
- Outcome
- Sugarbeet root yielde0
- Value
- 49 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarbeet root yield was 23 t/ha when no herbicide was used, 48 t/ha with the microrate, and 49 t/ha with the half rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarbeet root yield with the full rate without MSO was 54 t/ha.
- Taxon
- SugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- full ratee0
- Outcome
- Sugarbeet root yielde0
- Value
- 54 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarbeet root yield was 23 t/ha when no herbicide was used, 48 t/ha with the microrate, and 49 t/ha with the half rate compared with 54 t/ha when the full rate was applied without MSO”
Claim · model-written summary
The three-quarter rate with 1.5% MSO increased crop injury to 27%.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 75% of the full rate (three-quarter rate)e0
- Outcome
- crop injurye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 27%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing herbicide rates to 75% of the full rate (three-quarter rate) (with 1.5% MSO) increased crop injury to 27%”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
The three-quarter rate with 1.5% MSO increased average weed control to 96%.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 75% of the full rate (three-quarter rate)e0
- Outcome
- average weed controle0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 96%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing herbicide rates to 75% of the full rate (three-quarter rate) (with 1.5% MSO) increased crop injury to 27% and average weed control to 96%”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding 1.5% MSO to the full rate increased crop injury to 35%.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 1.5% MSO to the full ratee0
- Outcome
- crop injurye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 35%e0
- Comparator
- full rate without MSOe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying 1.5% MSO to the full rate increased crop injury to 35% with no improvement in average weed control over that achieved with the full rate without MSO”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding 1.5% MSO to the full rate did not improve weed control over the full rate without MSO.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 1.5% MSO to the full ratee0
- Outcome
- average weed controle0
- Direction
- no improvemente0
- Comparator
- full rate without MSOe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying 1.5% MSO to the full rate increased crop injury to 35% with no improvement in average weed control over that achieved with the full rate without MSO”
t0“Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)”
The same questions in other papers
transplanting · crop injury · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
transplanting · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 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.