Response of glyphosate-resistant horseweed [Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq.] to a premix of atrazine, bicyclopyrone, mesotrione, and S-metolachlor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A premix of atrazine, bicyclopyrone, mesotrione, and S-metolachlor has recently been commercialized for pre-emergence (PRE) and early post-emergence (POST) control of broadleaved and annual grass weeds in corn in the United States. Field and greenhouse dose-response bioassays were conducted in 2015 and 2016 to evaluate the response of glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed to this premix applied before or after emergence (PRE or POST). In a field PRE study, the 90% effective doses (ED90) were 2613 and 2863 g a.i. ha−1 at 14 and 35 d after treatment (DAT), respectively, which were comparable to the labeled rate (2900 g a.i. ha−1) of the premix. Under greenhouse conditions, POST applications made at the labeled rate to 8–10 or 15–18 cm diameter horseweed rosettes provided ≥97% control. The ED90 values for the in-field POST dose-response study were ≥3431 and ≥6717 g a.i. ha−1 for the 8–10 and 15–18 cm tall GR horseweed, respectively. At 14 DAT, the premix applied at the labeled rate provided 85% and 68% control of 8–10 and 15–18 cm tall GR horseweed, respectively. The root mean square error for the log-logistic model ranged from 4.2 to 9.2 and the model efficiency coefficient values were ≥0.94 (≈ 1.00), indicating a good fit for the prediction model. In conclusion, a new premix applied before emergence (PRE) will effectively control GR horseweed at the labeled rate compared with POST applications made to ≥8 cm tall plants.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".