Paper · 2004 · Vegetable Report

Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicide Combinations for Weed Control in Melons

Kai Umeda

6
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Sandea at 0.05 lb ai/A tank-mixed with Matrix at 0.02 lb ai/A and applied POST following Prefar applied preemergence on cantaloupes gave very good control of pigweeds, lambsquarters, purple nutsedge, and junglerice. Melon injury was just acceptable at 15%. The tank-mix treatment applied POST was similarly effective on the pigweeds, lambsquarters, and nutsedge but grass weed control decreased slightly and melon injury increased when following preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateau. Single or multiple POST applications of Sandea alone were not effective against pigweeds.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Prefar followed by Sandea and Matrix gave very good control of four weed groups in cantaloupes.

Treatment
Sandea at 0.05 lb ai/A tank-mixed with Matrix at 0.02 lb ai/A and applied POST following Prefar applied preemergencee0
Interactor
pigweedse0weed
Outcome
very good control of pigweeds, lambsquarters, purple nutsedge, and junglericee0
Direction
very goode0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Sandea at 0.05 lb ai/A tank-mixed with Matrix at 0.02 lb ai/A and applied POST following Prefar applied preemergence on cantaloupes gave very good control of pigweeds, lambsquarters, purple nutsedge, and junglerice.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–215 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The Prefar followed by tank mix treatment caused 15% melon injury.

Taxon
MelonsCucumis melot0
Outcome
Melon injurye0
Value
15%e0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo
Cucumis melo · TaxonUSDA photo by Scott Bauer. Image Number K7355-11. · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Melon injury was just acceptable at 15%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 216–256 · show in text ↑
t0

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
t1

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Following Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateau, the POST tank mix was similarly effective on pigweeds, lambsquarters, and nutsedge.

Taxon
MelonsCucumis melot0
Treatment
tank-mix treatment applied POSTe0
Interactor
pigweedse0weed
Outcome
effective on the pigweeds, lambsquarters, and nutsedgee0
Direction
similarly effectivee0
Comparator
preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateaue0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo
Cucumis melo · TaxonUSDA photo by Scott Bauer. Image Number K7355-11. · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The tank-mix treatment applied POST was similarly effective on the pigweeds, lambsquarters, and nutsedge but grass weed control decreased slightly and melon injury increased when following preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateau.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 257–516 · show in text ↑
t0

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
t1

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grass weed control decreased slightly after the alternative preemergence herbicides.

Taxon
MelonsCucumis melot0
Treatment
preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateaue0
Interactor
grass weede0weed
Outcome
grass weed controle0
Direction
decreased slightlye0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo
Cucumis melo · TaxonUSDA photo by Scott Bauer. Image Number K7355-11. · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“grass weed control decreased slightly and melon injury increased when following preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateau.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 366–516 · show in text ↑
t0

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
t1

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Melon injury increased after the alternative preemergence herbicides.

Taxon
MelonsCucumis melot0
Treatment
preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateaue0
Outcome
melon injurye0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo
Cucumis melo · TaxonUSDA photo by Scott Bauer. Image Number K7355-11. · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“melon injury increased when following preemergence herbicide treatments of Dual Magnum, Outlook, or Chateau.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 408–516 · show in text ↑
t0

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
t1

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sandea alone was ineffective against pigweeds.

Taxon
MelonsCucumis melot0
Treatment
Single or multiple POST applications of Sandea alonee0
Interactor
pigweedse0weed
Outcome
effective against pigweedse0
Direction
not effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis melo
Cucumis melo · TaxonUSDA photo by Scott Bauer. Image Number K7355-11. · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Single or multiple POST applications of Sandea alone were not effective against pigweeds.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 517–606 · show in text ↑
t0

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑
t1

“Melons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–80 · show in text ↑

3699220 · control · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

herbicide · control · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

herbicide · crop injury · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 1 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative
See all 4 papers →

herbicide · weed · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. 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.