Abstract
Abstract Glufosinate serves as both a primary herbicide option and a complement to glyphosate and other postemergence herbicides for managing herbicide-resistant weed species. Enhancing broadleaf weed control with glufosinate through effective mixtures may mitigate further herbicide resistance evolution in soybean and other glufosinate-resistant cropping systems. Two field experiments were conducted in 2020 and 2021 at four locations in Wisconsin (Arlington, Brooklyn, Janesville, and Lancaster) and one in Illinois (Macomb) to evaluate the effects of postemergence-applied glufosinate mixed with inhibitors of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) (flumiclorac-pentyl, fluthiacet-methyl, fomesafen, and lactofen; Group 14 herbicides), bentazon (a Group 6 herbicide), and 2,4-D (a Group 4 herbicide) on waterhemp control, soybean phytotoxicity, and yield. The experiments were established in a randomized, complete block design with four replications. The first experiment focused on soybean phytotoxicity 14 d after treatment (DAT) and yield in the absence of weed competition. All treatments received a preemergence herbicide, with postemergence herbicide applications occurring between the V3 and V6 soybean growth stages, depending on the site-year. The second experiment evaluated the effect of herbicide treatments on waterhemp control 14 DAT and on soybean yield. Lactofen, applied alone or with glufosinate, produced the greatest phytotoxicity to soybean at 14 DAT, but this injury did not translate into yield loss. Mixing glufosinate with 2,4-D, bentazon, and PPO-inhibitor herbicides did not increase waterhemp control, nor did it affect soybean yield compared to when glufosinate was applied alone, but it may be an effective practice to reduce selection pressure for glufosinate-resistant waterhemp.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Lactofen alone produced the greatest soybean phytotoxicity at 14 days after treatment.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- Lactofen, applied alonee0
- Outcome
- phytotoxicity to soybeane0
- Direction
- greateste0
- Qualifier
- 14 DATe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lactofen, applied alone or with glufosinate, produced the greatest phytotoxicity to soybean at 14 DAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Lactofen with glufosinate produced the greatest soybean phytotoxicity at 14 days after treatment.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Lactofen, applied alone or with glufosinatee0
- Outcome
- phytotoxicity to soybeane0
- Direction
- greateste0
- Qualifier
- 14 DATe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lactofen, applied alone or with glufosinate, produced the greatest phytotoxicity to soybean at 14 DAT”
Claim · model-written summary
The lactofen injury did not cause soybean yield loss.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Outcome
- yield losse0
- Direction
- did not translatee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“this injury did not translate into yield loss”
e1“phytotoxicity to soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding 2,4-D to glufosinate did not increase waterhemp control compared with glufosinate alone.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- glufosinate with 2,4-De0
- Interactor
- waterhempe0weed
- Outcome
- waterhemp controle0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
- Comparator
- glufosinate was applied alonee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mixing glufosinate with 2,4-D, bentazon, and PPO-inhibitor herbicides did not increase waterhemp control”
e1“compared to when glufosinate was applied alone”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding bentazon to glufosinate did not increase waterhemp control compared with glufosinate alone.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- bentazone0
- Interactor
- waterhempe0weed
- Outcome
- waterhemp controle0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
- Comparator
- glufosinate was applied alonee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mixing glufosinate with 2,4-D, bentazon, and PPO-inhibitor herbicides did not increase waterhemp control”
e1“compared to when glufosinate was applied alone”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding PPO-inhibitor herbicides to glufosinate did not increase waterhemp control.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- PPO-inhibitor herbicidese0
- Interactor
- waterhempe0weed
- Outcome
- waterhemp controle0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
- Comparator
- glufosinate was applied alonee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mixing glufosinate with 2,4-D, bentazon, and PPO-inhibitor herbicides did not increase waterhemp control”
e1“compared to when glufosinate was applied alone”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Glufosinate mixtures did not affect soybean yield compared with glufosinate alone.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Mixing glufosinate with 2,4-D, bentazon, and PPO-inhibitor herbicidese0
- Outcome
- soybean yielde0
- Direction
- nor did it affecte0
- Comparator
- glufosinate was applied alonee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mixing glufosinate with 2,4-D, bentazon, and PPO-inhibitor herbicides did not increase waterhemp control, nor did it affect soybean yield compared to when glufosinate was applied alone”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest these mixtures may reduce selection pressure for glufosinate-resistant waterhemp.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Interactor
- waterhempe0weed
- Outcome
- reduce selection pressure for glufosinate-resistant waterhempe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it may be an effective practice to reduce selection pressure for glufosinate-resistant waterhemp”
t0“soybean”
The same questions in other papers
bentazone · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →glufosinate · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →2,4-D · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →EC 1.3.3.4 (protoporphyrinogen oxidase) inhibitor · control · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
bentazone · control · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →2,4-D · control · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →glufosinate · control · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- positive
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →EC 1.3.3.4 (protoporphyrinogen oxidase) inhibitor · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.