Abstract
The results of eleven experiments dealing with (1) lime application, (2) herbicides, (3) nematicides, (4) varieties, (5) fungicides, (6) sowing date and (7) yield potential, are discussed. Lime was necessary, not to create a more neutral soil reaction, but to eliminate most of the exchangeable aluminium in the soil. It was necessary to incorporate lime to a depth of 200 mm but not deeper. Cycloate and ethofumesate applied at 3,7 and 1,O kg ailha respectively allowed the crop to emerge free of weeds. Broadleaf weeds emerged soon afterwards and were controllled with an application of 0,8 kg ailha desmedipham. The efficacy of cycloate depended on the method of incorporation. Nernaticides applied at very high rates prevented a decline iin the plant population due to Meloidogyne incognita but did not prevent serious losses in sucrose yield. Nematodes in clay soils would, for economic reasons, have to be controlled by cultural means. Varieties designated by the breeders as resistant to Cercospora beticola outyielded those that were not even though their resistance was only partial. Cremona, Kawerita' and AM2 Hybrid B were noted as the best varieties for Niital. Triphenyltin acetate (TPTA) was the most effective fungicide used against Cercospora leaf spot while benomyl, which had proved effective in the past, was no longer effective againgt the disease. Fortnightly applications of TPTA from mid-December to the end of March controlled leaf spot almost completely at all sites. Crops grown at commercially acceptable standards yielded 6 to 8 tons sucrose per hectare in April and 10 to 12 tons sucrose per hectare in August and September.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Lime eliminated most exchangeable soil aluminium.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEET
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- Limee0
- Outcome
- exchangeable aluminium in the soile0
- Direction
- eliminatee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lime was necessary, not to create a more neutral soil reaction, but to eliminate most of the exchangeable aluminium in the soil”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Cycloate and ethofumesate let the crop emerge free of weeds.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Cycloate and ethofumesate applied at 3,7 and 1,O kg ailha respectivelye0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- crop to emerge free of weedse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cycloate and ethofumesate applied at 3,7 and 1,O kg ailha respectively allowed the crop to emerge free of weeds”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Desmedipham controlled broadleaf weeds emerging after crop establishment.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- an application of 0,8 kg ailha desmediphame0
- Interactor
- Broadleaf weedse0weed
- Outcome
- Broadleaf weedse0
- Direction
- controlllede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Broadleaf weeds emerged soon afterwards and were controllled with an application of 0,8 kg ailha desmedipham”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Cycloate efficacy depended on its incorporation method.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- method of incorporatione0
- Outcome
- efficacy of cycloatee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The efficacy of cycloate depended on the method of incorporation”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Very high nematicide rates prevented plant population decline from Meloidogyne incognita.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Nernaticides applied at very high ratese0
- Interactor
- Meloidogyne incognita
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogyne incognitae0pathogen - Outcome
- plant populatione0
- Direction
- prevented a declinee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Nernaticides applied at very high rates prevented a decline iin the plant population due to Meloidogyne incognita”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Very high nematicide rates did not prevent serious sucrose yield losses.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Nernaticides applied at very high ratese0
- Interactor
- Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
- Outcome
- sucrose yielde0
- Direction
- did not prevent serious lossese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nernaticides applied at very high rates prevented a decline iin the plant population due to Meloidogyne incognita but did not prevent serious losses in sucrose yield”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Cercospora resistant varieties outyielded nonresistant varieties despite partial resistance.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Material
- Varieties designated by the breeders as resistante0
- Interactor
- Cercospora beticola
Cercospora beticolae0pathogen - Outcome
- outyieldede0
- Direction
- outyieldede0
- Comparator
- those that were note0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Varieties designated by the breeders as resistant to Cercospora beticola outyielded those that were not even though their resistance was only partial”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Cremona, Kawerita and AM2 Hybrid B were identified as the best Natal varieties.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Material
- Cremona, Kawerita' and AM2 Hybrid Be0
- Outcome
- best varietiese0
- Setting
- Niitale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cremona, Kawerita' and AM2 Hybrid B were noted as the best varieties for Niital”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Triphenyltin acetate was the most effective fungicide against Cercospora leaf spot.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Triphenyltin acetate (TPTA)e0
- Interactor
- CercosporaCercosporae0pathogen
- Outcome
- Cercospora leaf spote0
- Direction
- most effectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triphenyltin acetate (TPTA) was the most effective fungicide used against Cercospora leaf spot”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Benomyl was no longer effective against Cercospora leaf spot.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- benomyle0
- Interactor
- CercosporaCercosporae1pathogen
- Outcome
- Cercospora leaf spote1
- Direction
- no longer effectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“benomyl, which had proved effective in the past, was no longer effective againgt the disease”
e1“Cercospora leaf spot”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Fortnightly TPTA applications almost completely controlled leaf spot at all sites.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Fortnightly applications of TPTA from mid-December to the end of Marche0
- Outcome
- leaf spote0
- Direction
- controllede0
- Qualifier
- almost completely at all sitese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fortnightly applications of TPTA from mid-December to the end of March controlled leaf spot almost completely at all sites”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Commercial crops yielded 6 to 8 tons sucrose per hectare in April.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- sucrosee0
- Value
- 6 to 8 tons sucrose per hectaree0
- Qualifier
- in Aprile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crops grown at commercially acceptable standards yielded 6 to 8 tons sucrose per hectare in April”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
Claim · model-written summary
Commercial crops yielded 10 to 12 tons sucrose per hectare in August and September.
- Taxon
- SUGAR BEETBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- sucrosee0
- Value
- 10 to 12 tons sucrose per hectaree0
- Qualifier
- in August and Septembere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“10 to 12 tons sucrose per hectare in August and September”
t0“SUGAR BEET”
The same questions in other papers
benomyl · Cercospora · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
fentin acetate · Cercospora · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Cycloate · weed · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →desmedipham · weed · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →ethofumesate · weed · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →lime · nutrient: content · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 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.