Abstract
The demand for pesticide-free food has increased the need for sustainable organic farming. Onion (Allium cepa L.) is an important vegetable crop cultivated worldwide. The available weed control tools for intra-row weeds following onion emergence are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the potential use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) flaming as a pre- and post-emergence weed control method for both direct-seeded onion seedlings and transplanted onion bulbs. The safety of cross-row, where the flames are targeted to the intra-row area from both sides of the row, and broadcast flaming for bulb onion was compared. Cross-row flaming at twelve days after planting had no effect on onion dry weight, while broadcast flaming-treated plants’ dry weight was reduced by 36% as compared to controls. For the cross-row technique, the tested burners’ angle (45° and 30°) and inter-burner distances (30 and 40 cm) had no impact on weed control efficacy, and similar control levels, between 55% (15 cm) and 45% (10 cm), were observed 15 cm from both sides of the row-center. Direct-seeded onion cultivars were treated at various growth stages. The pre-crop-emergence stage was completely safe for the crop, and the second leaf stage exhibited a wide range of tolerance levels to flaming treatment across the different onion cultivars, with dry weights ranging between 39 and 117% compared to non-treated control in the flaming sensitive and tolerant cultivars, respectively. These results were validated under field conditions using the two most tolerant cultivars (Orlando and Browny); no yield reductions were observed for either cultivar when treated from the third leaf stage. In bulb onion, flaming had no impact on dry weight of shoots or roots when applied from four weeks after planting. This study demonstrates, for the first time, the potential of using flaming as a post-emergence weed control tool for direct-seeded and bulb onion, and at earlier time points than previously shown. Cross-row flaming proved effective for controlling intra-row weeds and can lower weeding costs. Future research should evaluate the safety of sequential applications and test complementary control methods for the initial growth stages.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Cross-row flaming at day 12 left onion dry weight unchanged.
- Taxon
- onion
Allium cepae0 - Treatment
- Cross-row flaming at twelve days after plantinge0
- Outcome
- onion dry weighte0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cross-row flaming at twelve days after planting had no effect on onion dry weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Broadcast flaming reduced onion dry weight by 36% versus controls.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- broadcast flaminge0
- Outcome
- dry weighte0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 36%e0
- Comparator
- controlse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“broadcast flaming-treated plants’ dry weight was reduced by 36% as compared to controls”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Burner angle had no impact on weed control efficacy.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- burners’ angle (45° and 30°)e0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed control efficacye0
- Direction
- no impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tested burners’ angle (45° and 30°) and inter-burner distances (30 and 40 cm) had no impact on weed control efficacy”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Inter-burner distance had no impact on weed control efficacy.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- inter-burner distances (30 and 40 cm)e0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed control efficacye0
- Direction
- no impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tested burners’ angle (45° and 30°) and inter-burner distances (30 and 40 cm) had no impact on weed control efficacy”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Cross-row flaming gave 55% weed control 15 cm from row center.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Outcome
- control levelse0
- Value
- 55%e0
- Qualifier
- 15 cm from both sides of the row-centere0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“similar control levels, between 55% (15 cm) and 45% (10 cm), were observed 15 cm from both sides of the row-center”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Cross-row flaming gave 45% weed control at the reported 10 cm spacing.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Outcome
- control levelse0
- Value
- 45%e0
- Qualifier
- 10 cme0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“similar control levels, between 55% (15 cm) and 45% (10 cm), were observed 15 cm from both sides of the row-center”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Pre-emergence flaming was completely safe for direct-seeded onion.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Organ / stage
- pre-crop-emergence stagee0
- Outcome
- completely safe for the crope0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The pre-crop-emergence stage was completely safe for the crop”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-leaf flaming tolerance differed across onion cultivars, with dry weight of sensitive cultivars at 39% of control.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepae0
- Material
- flaming sensitivee0
- Organ / stage
- second leaf stagee0
- Treatment
- flaming treatmente0
- Outcome
- dry weightse0
- Value
- 39 and 117%e0
- Comparator
- non-treated controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the second leaf stage exhibited a wide range of tolerance levels to flaming treatment across the different onion cultivars, with dry weights ranging between 39 and 117% compared to non-treated control in the flaming sensitive and tolerant cultivars, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Tolerant second-leaf onion cultivars had dry weight at 117% of untreated control under flaming.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepae0
- Material
- tolerant cultivarse0
- Organ / stage
- second leaf stagee0
- Treatment
- flaming treatmente0
- Outcome
- dry weightse0
- Value
- 117%e0
- Comparator
- non-treated controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the second leaf stage exhibited a wide range of tolerance levels to flaming treatment across the different onion cultivars, with dry weights ranging between 39 and 117% compared to non-treated control in the flaming sensitive and tolerant cultivars, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Orlando onion yield did not decline when flamed from the third leaf stage in field conditions.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Material
- Orlandoe0
- Treatment
- treated from the third leaf stagee0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no yield reductionse0
- Setting
- field conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under field conditions using the two most tolerant cultivars (Orlando and Browny); no yield reductions were observed for either cultivar when treated from the third leaf stage”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Browny onion yield did not decline when flamed from the third leaf stage in field conditions.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Material
- Brownye0
- Treatment
- treated from the third leaf stagee0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no yield reductionse0
- Setting
- field conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under field conditions using the two most tolerant cultivars (Orlando and Browny); no yield reductions were observed for either cultivar when treated from the third leaf stage”
t0“Onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Flaming from four weeks after planting did not change bulb-onion shoot or root dry weight.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepae0
- Treatment
- flaminge0
- Outcome
- dry weight of shoots or rootse0
- Direction
- no impacte0
- Qualifier
- from four weeks after plantinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In bulb onion, flaming had no impact on dry weight of shoots or roots when applied from four weeks after planting”
Claim · model-written summary
Cross-row flaming was effective against intra-row weeds and could lower weeding costs.
- Taxon
- OnionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- Cross-row flaminge0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- controlling intra-row weeds and can lower weeding costse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cross-row flaming proved effective for controlling intra-row weeds and can lower weeding costs”
t0“Onion”
The same questions in other papers
fire · weed · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
transplanting · growth · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 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.