Meadow Knapweed (<i>Centaurea debeauxii</i>) Response to Herbicides and Mechanical Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Meadow knapweed is a fertile European hybrid between black and brown knapweed that has expanded its North American distribution to 27 of the United States and four provinces in Canada. Two experiments were conducted on meadow knapweed in northwestern Washington to determine (1) whether meadow knapweed is similarly sensitive to several herbicides commonly used to control related knapweeds, (2) if herbicide application timing plays a role in control of meadow knapweed, and (3) whether mowing before, after, or instead of herbicide treatment can aid in meadow knapweed control. In the first experiment, herbicides were applied to meadow knapweed at rosette or bolting stages of growth, and again with the same herbicides in the autumn. In the summer following treatment, clopyralid alone or with 2,4-D, dicamba + 2,4-D, and triclopyr ester + 2,4-D ester provided 81 to 100% meadow knapweed control; the only other treatment providing similar control was glyphosate + ammonium sulfate applied at bolting and in autumn in the 2004 to 2005 trial. In the second experiment, combinations of mowing and dicamba + 2,4-D were applied at rosette or early flowering stages of growth. In the 2002 to 2003 trial, control when dicamba + 2,4-D was used exceeded 90%, except when meadow knapweed was mowed at rosette and sprayed at early flowering (78% control). Mowing twice the previous year had only a slight effect on meadow knapweed (10% control). Grass biomass exceeded meadow knapweed biomass in all herbicide-treated plots. In the 2004 to 2005 trial, meadow knapweed control and grass biomass was maximized when plots were mowed at rosette and treated with dicamba + 2,4-D at early flowering or when treated twice with these herbicides; these were the only treatments where grass biomass exceeded meadow knapweed biomass.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".