Weed control in corn with diflufenican plus isoxaflutole
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Diflufenican is a selective phenyl ether, Group 12 herbicide. Limited information exists on the weed control efficacy of diflufenican and the potential improvement in weed control when it is co-applied with isoxaflutole. Three field studies were conducted in Ontario to evaluate preemergence applications of isoxaflutole and diflufenican alone and in combinations for weed control in corn. Isoxaflutole applied at 52.5, 79, and 105 g ai ha −1 provided effective control of velvetleaf (83% to 89%, 91% to 98%, and 92% to 97%), green pigweed (73% to 85%, 85% to 91%, and 94% to 97%), common ragweed (81% to 86%, 93% to 97%, and 95% to 97%), and common lambsquarters (88% to 89%, 96% to 99%, and 98% to 100%), respectively when evaluated at 2, 4, and 8 wk after treatment (WAT). Diflufenican applied alone at 75 to 150 g ai ha −1 provided ≤3% control of velvetleaf, ≤38% of green pigweed, ≤7% of common ragweed, and ≤20% of common lambsquarters. Isoxaflutole applied alone provided 16% to 75% control of barnyardgrass, while diflufenican was ineffective (<3%). The co-application of isoxaflutole + diflufenican improved control to 34% to 86%, with synergistic effects of barnyardgrass control observed at several rates. Isoxaflutole and diflufenican, applied alone controlled green foxtail by 15% to 72% and 0% to 12%, respectively. The co-application of isoxaflutole + diflufenican improved green foxtail control to 25% to 89% with synergistic responses at some rates and evaluation timings. There was minimal corn injury with these treatments. Weed interference reduced corn yield by up to 69%. Weed interference with diflufenican applied alone resulted in corn yields of 4570 to 4750 kg ha −1 , which is similar to yields from the nontreated control (3.33 T ha −1 ). Reduced weed interference with isoxaflutole alone and in mixtures with diflufenican resulted in corn yields of 8.36 to 10.83 T ha −1 , which is higher than yields from both the nontreated control plots and those that received diflufenican treatments. Overall, isoxaflutole provided consistent broadleaf weed control, while synergistic interactions with diflufenican enhanced barnyardgrass and green foxtail suppression.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".