Abstract
Abstract In the mid‐southern United States, rice ( Oryza sativa L.) is flooded primarily to suppress weed germination and growth. Two experiments were conducted to determine whether herbicide performance in conventional or Clearfield rice weed control programs was affected by intermittent flooding. The effects of flooding and herbicide program on barnyardgrass [ Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) P. Beauv] control, rice grain yield, and water applied were investigated at the Delta Research and Extension Center in Stoneville, MS, on Sharkey clay (very fine, smectitic, thermic Chromic Epiaquert). For herbicides commonly applied in conventional (clomazone, quinclorac, pendimethalin, thiobencarb, fenoxaprop‐ethyl, cyhalofop‐butyl, and bisypriboac sodium) or Clearfield rice weed control programs (imazethapyr plus bispyribac‐sodium followed by imazethapyr, imazamox or bispyribac‐sodium), intermittent flooding had no adverse effect on barnyardgrass control relative to a continuous flood. Moreover, initiating irrigation when the perched water table drops to 8 inches below the soil surface had no effect on rice grain yield and reduced water applied by 51%. Mid‐southern US rice producers can capture the water‐saving benefits of intermittent flooding while having no adverse effects on herbicide activity or crop productivity in conventional and Clearfield systems.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Intermittent flooding did not adversely affect barnyardgrass control compared with continuous flooding.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0 - Treatment
- intermittent floodinge0
- Interactor
- barnyardgrass
Echinochloa crus-gallie0weed - Outcome
- barnyardgrass controle0
- Direction
- no adverse effecte0
- Comparator
- a continuous floode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intermittent flooding had no adverse effect on barnyardgrass control relative to a continuous flood”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigating when the perched water table fell 8 inches did not affect rice grain yield.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- initiating irrigation when the perched water table drops to 8 inches below the soil surfacee0
- Outcome
- rice grain yielde0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“initiating irrigation when the perched water table drops to 8 inches below the soil surface had no effect on rice grain yield and reduced water applied by 51%”
Claim · model-written summary
That irrigation trigger reduced water applied by 51%.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- initiating irrigation when the perched water table drops to 8 inches below the soil surfacee0
- Outcome
- water appliede0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 51%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“initiating irrigation when the perched water table drops to 8 inches below the soil surface had no effect on rice grain yield and reduced water applied by 51%”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that intermittent flooding can save water without adverse herbicide or productivity effects in conventional and Clearfield rice.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Outcome
- water‐saving benefits of intermittent floodinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rice producers can capture the water‐saving benefits of intermittent flooding while having no adverse effects on herbicide activity or crop productivity in conventional and Clearfield systems”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · Echinochloa crus-galli · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →soil water · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →irrigation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
264 papers in the same direction as this paper · 906 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,167 papers more in this group
See all 1,171 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.