Abstract
Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory are difficult to manage weeds present in South Carolina soybean production fields. Glyphosate and ALS-resistant Palmer amaranth biotypes have spread rapidly throughout South Carolina making the control of these weeds more difficult. Recently, soybean varieties with tolerance to dicamba have been introduced along with several new ultra-low volatility formulations of dicamba to help with the problem. Field experiments were conducted near Blackville, SC in 2012 and 2013 to evaluate dicamba herbicide programs for broadleaf weed management in dicamba tolerant soybean. At 2 weeks after POST1 (2 WAP1), Palmer amaranth control ranged from 93% to 100% across the PRE followed by POST treatments in 2012 and 2013. By 2 weeks after POST2 (2 WAP2), control was 95% or better. Treatments containing two or three herbicide applications (PRE, POST1 and POST2) offered good to excellent (92% - 100%) pitted morningglory control. No differences in weed control were observed among treatments with 3 application times compared to those applied twice. In general, all treatments with a PRE followed by at least one POST application provided good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory. Overall, a PRE (either dicamba or flumioxazin) followed by a dicamba or a non-dicamba containing POST treatment provided good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory when applied at the correct growth stage.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Claim · model-written summary
PRE followed by POST treatments controlled Palmer amaranth 93% to 100% at 2 WAP1.
- Taxon
- Soybean
Glycine maxt0 - Treatment
- PRE followed by POST treatmentse0
- Interactor
- Palmer amaranthe0weed
- Outcome
- Palmer amaranth controle0
- Value
- 93% to 100%e0
- Setting
- 2012 and 2013e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At 2 weeks after POST1 (2 WAP1), Palmer amaranth control ranged from 93% to 100% across the PRE followed by POST treatments in 2012 and 2013.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Palmer amaranth control was at least 95% by 2 WAP2.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“By 2 weeks after POST2 (2 WAP2), control was 95% or better.”
t0“Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.) and Pitted Morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa L.) Control in Dicamba Tolerant Soybean (Glycine max L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Two or three herbicide applications controlled pitted morningglory by 92% to 100%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- two or three herbicide applicationse0
- Interactor
- pitted morningglorye0weed
- Outcome
- pitted morningglory controle0
- Direction
- good to excellente0
- Value
- 92% - 100%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments containing two or three herbicide applications (PRE, POST1 and POST2) offered good to excellent (92% - 100%) pitted morningglory control.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control did not differ between three and two application times.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- 3 application timese0
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- No differencese0
- Comparator
- those applied twicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No differences in weed control were observed among treatments with 3 application times compared to those applied twice.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
A PRE followed by at least one POST application gave good to excellent Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory control.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- a PRE followed by at least one POST applicatione0
- Interactor
- Palmer amaranthe0weed
- Second interactor
- pitted morningglorye0weed
- Outcome
- control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglorye0
- Direction
- good to excellente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“all treatments with a PRE followed by at least one POST application provided good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that a PRE followed by dicamba or non-dicamba POST treatment gives good to excellent weed control at the correct growth stage.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- a PRE (either dicamba or flumioxazin) followed by a dicamba or a non-dicamba containing POST treatmente0
- Interactor
- Palmer amaranthe0weed
- Second interactor
- pitted morningglorye0weed
- Outcome
- good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglorye0
- Qualifier
- when applied at the correct growth stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a PRE (either dicamba or flumioxazin) followed by a dicamba or a non-dicamba containing POST treatment provided good to excellent control of Palmer amaranth and pitted morningglory when applied at the correct growth stage.”
t0“Soybean”
The same questions in other papers
herbicide · control · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
98 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
119 papers more in this group
See all 123 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.