Abstract
ABSTRACT Field experiments were conducted from 2009 through 2011 to evaluate peanut tolerance to postemergence (POST) applications of pyroxasulfone applied alone or in combination with commonly used foliar herbicides. Hherbicide treatments were arranged in a factorial arrangement that included three pyroxasulfone rates (0, 240, and 480 g ai/ha) and four POST application timings [10, 30, 60, and 90 days after planting (DAP)]. Pyroxasulfone applied at 240 or 480 g ai/ha 10 DAP caused 24 and 33% stunting 2 weeks after treatment (WAT), respectively. Regardless of pyroxasulfone rate, peanut stunting following application 30, 60, or 90 DAP was less than 3%. Peanut yield was not influenced by POST applied pyroxasulfone applied alone. In a second experiment, herbicide treatments were applied in a factorial treatment arrangement that included two pyroxasulfone rates (0 and 240 g ai/ha) and six POST herbicide systems [none; paraquat (140 g ai/ha); paraquat (210 g ai/ha) plus bentazon (280 g ai/ha); paraquat (210 g ai/ha) plus bentazon (560 g ai/ha) plus acifluorfen (280 g ai/ha); imazapic (70 g ai/ha); and lactofen (220 g ai/ha)]. Stunting 2 WAT with paraquat applied 10 DAP ranged from 33 to 37% while less injury was observed with lactofen or imazapic. Peanut stunting 9 WAT ranged from 3 to 6% regardless of weed management system. Pyroxasulfone applied in combination with POST herbicides did not reduce peanut yield.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Pyroxasulfone at 240 g ai/ha at 10 DAP caused 24% peanut stunting after two weeks.
- Taxon
- Peanut
Arachis hypogaeat0 - Treatment
- Pyroxasulfone applied at 240e0
- Outcome
- stuntinge0
- Direction
- causede0
- Value
- 24e0
- Qualifier
- 10 DAPe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pyroxasulfone applied at 240 or 480 g ai/ha 10 DAP caused 24 and 33% stunting 2 weeks after treatment (WAT), respectively”
t0“Peanut Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Pyroxasulfone at 480 g ai/ha at 10 DAP caused 33% peanut stunting after two weeks.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- 480 g ai/ha 10 DAPe0
- Outcome
- stuntinge0
- Direction
- causede0
- Value
- 33%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pyroxasulfone applied at 240 or 480 g ai/ha 10 DAP caused 24 and 33% stunting 2 weeks after treatment (WAT), respectively”
t0“Peanut Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut stunting after application at 30, 60 or 90 DAP was under 3% regardless of pyroxasulfone rate.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Outcome
- peanut stuntinge0
- Value
- less than 3%e0
- Qualifier
- 30, 60, or 90 DAPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Regardless of pyroxasulfone rate, peanut stunting following application 30, 60, or 90 DAP was less than 3%”
Claim · model-written summary
Pyroxasulfone alone did not influence peanut yield.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- POST applied pyroxasulfone applied alonee0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Peanut yield was not influenced by POST applied pyroxasulfone applied alone”
Claim · model-written summary
Paraquat applied at 10 DAP caused 33 to 37% stunting two weeks after treatment.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- paraquat applied 10 DAPe0
- Outcome
- Stuntinge0
- Value
- 33 to 37%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stunting 2 WAT with paraquat applied 10 DAP ranged from 33 to 37%”
t0“Peanut Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Lactofen caused less peanut injury than paraquat.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“less injury was observed with lactofen or imazapic”
e1“Stunting 2 WAT with paraquat applied 10 DAP ranged from 33 to 37%”
t0“Peanut Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Imazapic caused less peanut injury than paraquat.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“less injury was observed with lactofen or imazapic”
e1“Stunting 2 WAT with paraquat applied 10 DAP ranged from 33 to 37%”
t0“Peanut Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut stunting nine weeks after treatment was 3 to 6% across weed management systems.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Outcome
- stuntinge0
- Value
- 3 to 6%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Peanut stunting 9 WAT ranged from 3 to 6% regardless of weed management system”
Claim · model-written summary
Pyroxasulfone combined with postemergence herbicides did not reduce peanut yield.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- Pyroxasulfone applied in combination with POST herbicidese0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pyroxasulfone applied in combination with POST herbicides did not reduce peanut yield”
The same questions in other papers
pyroxasulfone · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →pyroxasulfone · crop injury · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →imazapic · crop injury · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
6 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →paraquat · crop injury · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →herbicide · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
57 papers in the same direction as this paper · 172 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
226 papers more in this group
See all 230 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.