A Novel Water Conditioning Adjuvant for Use with Formulated and Nonformulated Glyphosate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Glyphosate is a weak acid, sold as the isopropylamine, ammonium, potassium, or trimethylsulfonium salt. A water conditioning adjuvant such as diammonium sulfate is commonly recommended for glyphosate application in hard water. This is especially necessary for applications to velvetleaf, which has calcium-rich leaves. There is an application preference to handle liquids rather than solids. Our goal was to identify a liquid water conditioning adjuvant with high specific activity, which is cost effective, as well as efficacious across herbicides and weed species. The specific objective of the research was to evaluate the performance characteristics of NT3 as a water conditioning adjuvant for various glyphosate formulations on several weed species. Studies were conducted in the greenhouse with supplemental lighting. Ammonium sulfate was a more effective water conditioning adjuvant than ammonium nitrate, ammonium hydroxide, or sulfuric acid for use with glyphosate on velvetleaf. The novel water conditioning adjuvant, NT, at 1 % was as effective as or more effective than ammonium sulfate at 2 % with glyphosate across various glyphosate salts and formulations and across the weed species, velvetleaf, giant foxtail, and common lambsquarters. Furthermore, it provided limited rainfastness. NT is a liquid, it has a higher specific activity than ammonium sulfate, and it is efficacious across weed species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".