MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062532535 · doi:10.4141/cjps08051

Control of common waterhemp (<i>Amaranthus tuberculatus</i> var. <i>rudis</i>) in corn and soybean with sequential herbicide applications

2009· article· en· W2062532535 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Nader Soltani, J. D. Vyn, Peter H. Sikkema

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgricultural Adaptation Council
KeywordsDicambaGlyphosateBiologyAgronomyMesotrioneAtrazineGlufosinateWeedField cornWeed controlPesticideZea mays

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) is an aggressive annual broadleaf whose distribution is expected to increase rapidly in agricultural land in eastern Canada. Eight field experiments (four in corn and four in soybean) over a 2-yr period (2005 and 2006) were established on two Ontario farms (near Comber and Petrolia, Ontario) with waterhemp infestations to evaluate the efficacy of various PRE- and POST-emergence herbicides applied alone or in sequence for the control of waterhemp in corn and soybean. There was minimal injury (up to 3.8%) to corn and soybean from the herbicide treatments evaluated. In corn, sequential herbicide programs of isoxaflutole + atrazine PRE fb either dicamba POST, dicamba/diflufenzopyr POST, dicamba/atrazine POST or mesotrione + atrazine POST provided consistent full-season control of waterhemp. Corn yield was reduced 48% when waterhemp was not controlled. Corn yield was equivalent to the weed-free check with the herbicide treatments evaluated. In soybean, PRE or POST herbicides alone provided 41 to 94% control of waterhemp, however, waterhemp control was increased to 90 to 99% with the sequential herbicide programs. Dimethenamid (PRE; 1250 g ha -1 ) followed by glyphosate (POST1; 900 g ha -1 ) followed by glyphosate (POST2; 900 g ha -1 ) controlled waterhemp 99%. Results with waterhemp density and biomass were similar to visible control. Soybean yield was reduced 41% when waterhemp was not controlled. Soybean yield was equivalent to the weed-free check with all the herbicide treatment except dimethenamid PRE, acifluorfen POST1 and fomesafen POST1 where the yield was 30, 19, and 19% lower, respectively. Key words: Waterhemp, weed control, glyphosate, corn, soybean, pre-emergence herbicide, post-emergence herbicide

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicWeed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207