Abstract
With growing public concern about environmental quality, farmers must turn to new plant protection alternatives that minimize the use of agrochemicals. Flaming has been practiced for several years as a means of weed control in noncropped areas (railroad, ditches, etc.), but its selectivity toward crops has yet to be defined. Experiments were conducted in the ICG-Propane laboratory at Laval Univ. to determine the temperature needed to kill weeds and the temperature that corn could tolerate. Four weed species were studied: Amaranthus retroflexus, Brassica kaber, Chenopodium album , and Setaria viridis and each species was tested at three growth stages: 0–2, 4–6, and >8 leaves. Corn tolerance was tested at four growth stages: coleoptile, 0–2, 4–6, >8 leaves. All plants were grown in the green-house and were submitted to different combinations of operation speeds and of propane pressures, giving 10 temperature intensities ranging from 110 to 390C. The response of each species was evaluated by measuring its height and dry biomass 2 weeks after treatment. The threshold temperature for corn was below 200C; above this temperature, significant corn injury occurred at all growth stages tested. The corn growth stages most tolerant to heat were coleoptile and >8 leaves. While the most sensitive was 4–6 leaves. All weeds tested were sensitive to heat at 0–2 leaf stage. Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album were controlled until six leaves with temperatures that were not harmful to corn. Weeds with more than eight leaves needed higher temperature, and control rarely reached 60%. Flaming could be a selective method of weed control if operated at a temperature of 170C. Selectivity can be increased by creating a growth differential between corn and weeds.
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
Corn showed significant injury above 200C at all tested growth stages.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The threshold temperature for corn was below 200C; above this temperature, significant corn injury occurred at all growth stages tested.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
Coleoptile and greater-than-eight-leaf corn were most heat tolerant.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The corn growth stages most tolerant to heat were coleoptile and >8 leaves.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
Corn at four to six leaves was most heat sensitive.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“While the most sensitive was 4–6 leaves.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
All tested weeds were heat sensitive at zero to two leaves.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“All weeds tested were sensitive to heat at 0–2 leaf stage.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
Amaranthus retroflexus was controlled up to six leaves at corn-safe temperatures.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0e1
- Interactor
- Amaranthus retroflexus
Amaranthus retroflexuse0e1weed
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album were controlled until six leaves with temperatures that were not harmful to corn.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
Chenopodium album was controlled up to six leaves at corn-safe temperatures.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0e1
- Interactor
- Chenopodium album
Chenopodium albume0e1weed
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album were controlled until six leaves with temperatures that were not harmful to corn.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
Weeds older than eight leaves required higher temperatures and control rarely reached 60%.
Verbatim
e0“Weeds with more than eight leaves needed higher temperature, and control rarely reached 60%.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors proposed flaming at 170C for selective weed control.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flaming could be a selective method of weed control if operated at a temperature of 170C.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors proposed creating a corn–weed growth differential to improve selectivity.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Selectivity can be increased by creating a growth differential between corn and weeds.”
e1“temperature that corn could tolerate”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays subsp. mays · Chenopodium album · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.