Abstract
Abstract A well‐designed crop rotation can create an unstable environment that disrupts weed population growth rates. In combination with effective herbicide programs, growers may maintain weed populations at levels below competitive and economic thresholds. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate how the preceding rotational crop determines the response of weed populations to in‐season postemergence herbicide programs and the weed population density of the following crop season. The first‐year crop treatments were corn ( Zea mays L.), cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.), peanut ( Arachis hypogaea L.), grain sorghum [ Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench.], and soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton, and herbicide treatments were single applications 2 or 6 weeks after planting (WAP), two sequential applications 2 and 4 or 4 and 6 WAP, three sequential applications 2, 4, and 6 WAP, and a weedy control without herbicides was included. In the absence of herbicides, corn had the lowest population growth rates for broadleaf weeds (λ = 0.8) while peanut and grain sorghum had the highest (λ = 1.7 and 1.3, respectively). The results indicated that herbicide applications focused exclusively on preventing yield loss may not be sufficient to ensure weed population reductions. Thus, the observed population growth rates (λ = 2 for grassy weeds and λ = 1.26 for broadleaved weeds) indicated that weed issues would continue increasing, despite meeting yield goals. Considering population growth rates when assessing weed management strategies is key to determining the sustainability of the crop production operation.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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
Without herbicide, corn had the lowest broadleaf weed population growth rate, 0.8.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Treatment
- corne0
- Interactor
- broadleaf weedse0weed
- Outcome
- population growth rates for broadleaf weedse0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Value
- λ = 0.8e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the absence of herbicides, corn had the lowest population growth rates for broadleaf weeds (λ = 0.8)”
e1“In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Without herbicide, peanut had a high broadleaf weed growth rate of 1.7.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- peanute0
- Interactor
- broadleaf weedse1weed
- Outcome
- population growth rates for broadleaf weedse1
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- λ = 1.7e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“peanut and grain sorghum had the highest (λ = 1.7 and 1.3, respectively)”
e1“population growth rates for broadleaf weeds”
e2“In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Without herbicide, grain sorghum had a high broadleaf weed growth rate of 1.3.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- grain sorghume0
- Interactor
- broadleaf weedse1weed
- Outcome
- population growth rates for broadleaf weedse1
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 1.3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“peanut and grain sorghum had the highest (λ = 1.7 and 1.3, respectively)”
e1“population growth rates for broadleaf weeds”
e2“In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Grassy weed population growth was 2 despite meeting yield goals.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Interactor
- grassy weedse0weed
- Outcome
- population growth ratese0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Value
- λ = 2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“population growth rates (λ = 2 for grassy weeds and λ = 1.26 for broadleaved weeds) indicated that weed issues would continue increasing, despite meeting yield goals”
e1“In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Broadleaved weed population growth was 1.26 despite meeting yield goals.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Interactor
- broadleaved weedse0weed
- Outcome
- population growth ratese0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Value
- λ = 1.26e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“population growth rates (λ = 2 for grassy weeds and λ = 1.26 for broadleaved weeds) indicated that weed issues would continue increasing, despite meeting yield goals”
e1“In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed management assessment should consider population growth rates for production sustainability.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- Considering population growth rates when assessing weed management strategiese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Considering population growth rates when assessing weed management strategies is key to determining the sustainability of the crop production operation”
e1“In the second year, all plots were planted with cotton”
The same questions in other papers
Sorghum · weed · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Arachis hypogaea · weed · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
Zea mays subsp. mays · weed · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.