Abstract
Vineyard-growing Concord and Ives grapevines were treated with benomyl or EDU (N-(2-(2-oxo-1-imidazolidinyl)ethyl)-N'-phenylurea, a DuPont experimental anti-oxidant) to compare their effectiveness as protectants against oxidant stipple injury. With biweekly foliar applications, 0.56 kg/ha EDU or 1.12 kg/ha benomyl responded similarly in their control of oxidant stipple. There was no fungicidal activity evident with EDU. Folair applications of EDU at weekly intervals were more effective than biweekly applications in reducing oxidant stipple, and applications at three week intervals or greater were much less effective. Soil applications of EDU were less effective than foliar applications. Timing of EDU foliar applications to precede the relatively infrequent high ambient ozone episodes was examined and showed promise of effectively reducing oxidant stipple injury of grapevines.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Biweekly EDU and benomyl applications similarly controlled grapevine oxidant stipple.
- Material
- Concord and Ivese0
- Treatment
- 0.56 kg/ha EDUe1
- Outcome
- control of oxidant stipplee1
- Direction
- similarlye1
- Comparator
- 1.12 kg/ha benomyle1
VitisOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Concord and Ives grapevines”
e1“With biweekly foliar applications, 0.56 kg/ha EDU or 1.12 kg/ha benomyl responded similarly in their control of oxidant stipple”
Claim · model-written summary
EDU showed no evident fungicidal activity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapevines”
e0“There was no fungicidal activity evident with EDU”
Claim · model-written summary
Weekly EDU sprays reduced oxidant stipple more effectively than biweekly sprays.
- Treatment
- Folair applications of EDU at weekly intervalse0
- Outcome
- oxidant stipplee0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Comparator
- biweekly applicationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapevines”
e0“Folair applications of EDU at weekly intervals were more effective than biweekly applications in reducing oxidant stipple”
Claim · model-written summary
EDU applications at intervals of at least three weeks were much less effective.
- Treatment
- applications at three week intervals or greatere0
- Outcome
- less effectivee0
- Direction
- less effectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapevines”
e0“applications at three week intervals or greater were much less effective”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil EDU applications were less effective than foliar applications.
- Treatment
- Soil applications of EDUe0
- Outcome
- less effectivee0
- Direction
- less effectivee0
- Comparator
- foliar applicationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“grapevines”
e0“Soil applications of EDU were less effective than foliar applications”
Claim · model-written summary
Timing EDU foliar applications before high ambient ozone episodes showed promise for reducing grapevine injury.
- Treatment
- EDU foliar applications to precede the relatively infrequent high ambient ozone episodese0
- Outcome
- oxidant stipple injurye0
- Direction
- reducinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Timing of EDU foliar applications to precede the relatively infrequent high ambient ozone episodes was examined and showed promise of effectively reducing oxidant stipple injury of grapevines”
The same questions in other papers
ozone · crop injury · VitisPositive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
application · crop injury · VitisPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.