Abstract
Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities. At low weed densities (122 total plants/m 2 ), giant foxtail and Pennsylvania smartweed control were not different with full rates of herbicide applied in starch encapsulated or commercial formulations. Velvetleaf control was less with starch-encapsulated than commercial formulations regardless of velvetleaf density. At high giant foxtail densities (740 plants/m 2 ), control was not affected by formulation with full rates of alachlor plus atrazine. However, giant foxtail control was less with starch-encapsulated formulations than commercial formulations with 75% rates of alachlor plus atrazine and both 75 and 100% rates of metolachlor plus atrazine. At low weed densities, corn yield was not different with any treatment, except starch-encapsulated metolachlor plus atrazine at 75% rates, compared to the weed-free control. Alachlor plus atrazine at full rates was the only starch-encapsulated treatment to result in corn yield not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities. Conversely, all commercial formulation treatments resulted in corn yields not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities.
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
At low weed densities, giant foxtail and Pennsylvania smartweed control did not differ between full-rate starch-encapsulated and commercial herbicide formulations.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- full rates of herbicide applied in starch encapsulatede1
- Interactor
- giant foxtaile1weed
- Second interactor
- Pennsylvania smartweede1weed
- Outcome
- giant foxtail and Pennsylvania smartweed controle1
- Direction
- not differente1
- Comparator
- commercial formulationse1
- Setting
- Rosemount, MNe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e1“At low weed densities (122 total plants/m 2 ), giant foxtail and Pennsylvania smartweed control were not different with full rates of herbicide applied in starch encapsulated or commercial formulations”
Claim · model-written summary
Velvetleaf control was lower with starch-encapsulated than with commercial herbicide formulations, regardless of velvetleaf density.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- starch-encapsulatede2
- Interactor
- Velvetleaf
Abutilon theophrastie2weed - Outcome
- Velvetleaf controle2
- Direction
- lesse2
- Qualifier
- regardless of velvetleaf densitye2
- Comparator
- commercial formulationse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e2“Velvetleaf control was less with starch-encapsulated than commercial formulations regardless of velvetleaf density”
Claim · model-written summary
At high giant foxtail densities, control was not affected by formulation with full rates of alachlor plus atrazine.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- full rates of alachlor plus atrazinee3
- Interactor
- giant foxtaile3weed
- Outcome
- controle3
- Direction
- not affectede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e3“At high giant foxtail densities (740 plants/m 2 ), control was not affected by formulation with full rates of alachlor plus atrazine”
Claim · model-written summary
At 75% rates of alachlor plus atrazine, giant foxtail control was lower with starch-encapsulated than with commercial formulations.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- 75% rates of alachlor plus atrazinee4
- Interactor
- giant foxtaile4weed
- Outcome
- giant foxtail controle4
- Direction
- lesse4
- Comparator
- commercial formulationse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e4“However, giant foxtail control was less with starch-encapsulated formulations than commercial formulations with 75% rates of alachlor plus atrazine”
Claim · model-written summary
At 75 and 100% rates of metolachlor plus atrazine, giant foxtail control was lower with starch-encapsulated than with commercial formulations.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- 75 and 100% rates of metolachlor plus atrazinee5
- Interactor
- giant foxtaile5weed
- Outcome
- giant foxtail controle5
- Direction
- lesse5
- Comparator
- commercial formulationse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e5“However, giant foxtail control was less with starch-encapsulated formulations than commercial formulations with 75% rates of alachlor plus atrazine and both 75 and 100% rates of metolachlor plus atrazine”
Claim · model-written summary
At low weed densities, corn yield did not differ from the weed-free control with any treatment.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- any treatmente6
- Outcome
- corn yielde6
- Direction
- not differente6
- Qualifier
- At low weed densitiese6
- Comparator
- weed-free controle6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e6“At low weed densities, corn yield was not different with any treatment, except starch-encapsulated metolachlor plus atrazine at 75% rates, compared to the weed-free control”
Claim · model-written summary
At low weed densities, corn yield with starch-encapsulated metolachlor plus atrazine at 75% rates differed from the weed-free control.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- starch-encapsulated metolachlor plus atrazine at 75% ratese6
- Outcome
- corn yielde6
- Qualifier
- At low weed densitiese6
- Comparator
- weed-free controle6
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e6“At low weed densities, corn yield was not different with any treatment, except starch-encapsulated metolachlor plus atrazine at 75% rates, compared to the weed-free control”
Claim · model-written summary
Alachlor plus atrazine at full rates was the only starch-encapsulated treatment whose corn yield did not differ from the weed-free control at high weed densities.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- Alachlor plus atrazine at full ratese7
- Outcome
- corn yielde7
- Direction
- not differente7
- Qualifier
- at high weed densitiese7
- Comparator
- weed-free controle7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e7“Alachlor plus atrazine at full rates was the only starch-encapsulated treatment to result in corn yield not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities”
Claim · model-written summary
All commercial formulation treatments gave corn yields not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- all commercial formulation treatmentse1
- Outcome
- corn yieldse1
- Direction
- not differente1
- Qualifier
- at high weed densitiese1
- Comparator
- weed-free controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field research was conducted at Rosemount, MN in 1990 and 1991 to determine the effect of starch encapsulation on weed control in corn with alachlor, metolachlor, and atrazine under two weed densities”
e1“Conversely, all commercial formulation treatments resulted in corn yields not different from the weed-free control at high weed densities”
The same questions in other papers
atrazine · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 205 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
236 papers more in this group
See all 240 papers →alachlor · control · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →metolachlor · control · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →alachlor · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →atrazine · control · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 69 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
82 papers more in this group
See all 86 papers →herbicide · control · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 94 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
115 papers more in this group
See all 119 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.