Paper · 1992 · Weed Technology

Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) Response to Simulated Herbicide Spray Drift

Kassim Al-Khatib; Robert Parker; E. Patrick Fuerst

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
25
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

‘Vernal’ alfalfa response was evaluated when chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and selected combinations of those herbicides were applied at rates simulating spray drift during the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage following the first cutting in 1990 and 1991. The order of phytotoxicity was 2,4-D > chlorsulfuron > thifensulfuron > glyphosate > bromoxynil. By the end of each growing season, alfalfa had recovered from injury caused by all herbicides except the highest rates of 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate. The alfalfa stand was reduced only by 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate. All herbicides caused characteristic symptoms, but some specific symptoms were similar among different herbicides or resembled symptoms caused by disease, mineral imbalance, and adverse weather conditions.

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 4

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The phytotoxicity order of the tested herbicides on alfalfa was 2,4-D > chlorsulfuron > thifensulfuron > glyphosate > bromoxynil.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Organ / stage
fourth trifoliolate leaf stagee0
Outcome
order of phytotoxicitye1
Setting
1990 and 1991e0

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“alfalfa response was evaluated when chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and selected combinations of those herbicides were applied at rates simulating spray drift during the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage following the first cutting in 1990 and 1991”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–284 · show in text ↑
e1

“The order of phytotoxicity was 2,4-D > chlorsulfuron > thifensulfuron > glyphosate > bromoxynil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 286–381 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

By season end, alfalfa had recovered from injury caused by all herbicides except the highest rates of 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae2
Treatment
all herbicidese2
Outcome
recovered from injurye2
Direction
recoverede2
Comparator
highest rates of 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosatee2

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“alfalfa response was evaluated when chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and selected combinations of those herbicides were applied at rates simulating spray drift during the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage following the first cutting in 1990 and 1991”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–284 · show in text ↑
e2

“By the end of each growing season, alfalfa had recovered from injury caused by all herbicides except the highest rates of 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 383–536 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The alfalfa stand was reduced only by 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae3
Treatment
2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosatee3
Outcome
alfalfa stande3
Direction
reducede3

Not reportedComparator

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“alfalfa response was evaluated when chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and selected combinations of those herbicides were applied at rates simulating spray drift during the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage following the first cutting in 1990 and 1991”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–284 · show in text ↑
e3

“The alfalfa stand was reduced only by 2,4-D and 2,4-D plus glyphosate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 538–607 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All herbicides caused characteristic symptoms on alfalfa.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
All herbicidese4
Outcome
characteristic symptomse4

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“alfalfa response was evaluated when chlorsulfuron, thifensulfuron, 2,4-D, glyphosate, bromoxynil, and selected combinations of those herbicides were applied at rates simulating spray drift during the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage following the first cutting in 1990 and 1991”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–284 · show in text ↑
e4

“All herbicides caused characteristic symptoms”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 609–654 · show in text ↑

glyphosate · organism · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ

12 papers: 7 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

2,4-D · organism · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
See all 3 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.