PRE herbicides and POST halosulfuron for purple nutsedge control in tomato grown in plasticulture systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purple nutsedge is a troublesome weed in tomato grown in plasticulture systems. Field trials were conducted in the fall of 2017 and spring of 2018 at Balm, FL, to evaluate multiple herbicide programs applied pretransplanting (pre-T), post-transplanting (post-T), and pre-T followed by (fb) post-T for purple nutsedge control in plasticulture tomato. Pre-T treatment of sulfentrazone or S -metolachlor alone were ineffective and did not decrease purple nutsedge density compared with the nontreated control. Post-T application of halosulfuron did not reduce purple nutsedge density at 12 wk after initial treatment (WAIT) in fall 2017 but reduced the purple nutsedge density at 17 WAIT in both seasons. Pre-T sulfentrazone or S -metolachlor application fb halosulfuron applied post-T were the most effective treatments and consistently reduced purple nutsedge population in both seasons. Herbicide treatments did not injure or reduce tomato height or yield. Overall, these results suggest sequential herbicide programs, including pre-T application of sulfentrazone or S -metolachlor fb post-T application of halosulfuron generally resulted in greater purple nutsedge control compared with pre-T or post-T application only. Halosulfuron applied post-T is critical to provide season-long purple nutsedge control in plasticulture tomato.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".