Weed control and crop safety in sulfonylurea/glyphosate-resistant soybean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A soybean trait resistant to sulfonylurea herbicides along with glyphosate (Bolt™ soybean) has been developed. Information is needed to determine herbicide programs for weed control and crop safety in this new multiple herbicide–resistant soybean trait. The objectives of this study were to evaluate weed control and crop safety in sulfonylurea/glyphosate-resistant soybean with herbicide programs, including but not limited to acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors. Field experiments were conducted near Clay Center, NE, USA, in 2016 and 2017. Herbicide programs with multiple sites-of-action including rimsulfuron/thifensulfuron in mixture with flumioxazin, flumioxazin/chlorimuron, pyroxasulfone, chlorimuron/metribuzin, or saflufenacil/imazethapyr plus dimethenamid-P provided 91%–97% control of common waterhemp, velvetleaf, and common lambsquarters. Rimsulfuron and (or) thifensulfuron resulted in 92%–97% control of velvetleaf and common lambsquarters and 81%–87% common waterhemp control at 21 d after pre-emergence (PRE) (DAPRE) herbicide application. Soybean injury was transient and varied from 3% to 11% at 21 DAPRE and 14 d after post-emergence (POST) (DAPOST) herbicide application without causing yield loss. At 30 and 60 DAPOST, 87%–97% velvetleaf control and 92%–98% common lambsquarters control was achieved with herbicide programs tested (PRE, POST, or PRE followed by POST). Common waterhemp control at 30 and 60 DAPOST was not consistent between years. Weed density and biomass reduction were mostly similar to weed control achieved. Untreated control resulted in the lowest soybean yield (1811 kg ha −1 ) in 2016 compared with 3406–4611 kg ha −1 in herbicide programs.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".