Abstract
Nematicide/irrigation rate trials were conducted in Texas (TX) in 2009 and 2010 in cotton grown at three irrigation rates, where irrigation rate (base (B), B - 33%, B + 33%) was the main plot and treatment (untreated check, aldicarb, and nematicide seed treatment (NST) and NST + aldicarb) were the subplots. Aldicarb improved cotton lint yield with the base (medium) irrigation rate over the untreated check, but not at the B - 33% and B + 33% irrigation rates. In a second evaluation, 20 tests conducted over 7 yr at the same field in TX and 12 tests conducted over 6 yr at the same field in Alabama (AL) were examined for impact of environmental variables (EV) on the response to NST (containing thiodicarb or abamectin), aldicarb, a nontreated check (CK), insecticide seed treatment (TX only), and a combination of NST + aldicarb + oxamyl (NST/A/O, AL only) on root galls (TX only), early season nematode eggs (AL only), and yield (both sites). Galls/root system were lower with aldicarb-treated plots, than for the CK- or NST-treated plots. As water (irrigation plus rain) in May increased, galls/root system increased for CK or insecticide-only-treated plots, and decreased for NST- and aldicarb-treated plots, suggesting efficacy of nematicides was strongly improved by adequate soil moisture. Nematode reproduction was not affected by EV in either location, though yield was negatively affected by root-knot nematode eggs in AL at 60 d. Yield in both AL and TX was negatively related to temperature parameters and positively related to water parameters. With the addition of EV in TX, chemical treatments went from not significantly different in the absence of EV to aldicarb-treated plots having higher yields than nonnematicide-treated plots in the presence of EV. In AL, NST/A/O-treated plots yielded similar to aldicarb and better than CK or NST in the absence of EV and had significantly higher yields than all other treatments in the presence of most EV.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Aldicarb increased cotton lint yield at base irrigation relative to untreated plots.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Aldicarbe0
- Outcome
- cotton lint yielde0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Qualifier
- base (medium) irrigation ratee0
- Comparator
- untreated checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Aldicarb improved cotton lint yield with the base (medium) irrigation rate over the untreated check”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Aldicarb did not improve lint yield at the lower or higher irrigation rate.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Aldicarbt1
- Outcome
- lint yieldt1
- Qualifier
- B - 33% and B + 33% irrigation ratese0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“but not at the B - 33% and B + 33% irrigation rates”
t0“cotton”
t1“Aldicarb improved cotton lint yield with the base (medium) irrigation rate over the untreated check, but not at the B - 33% and B + 33% irrigation rates.”
Claim · model-written summary
Aldicarb plots had fewer galls per root system than untreated or NST plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- aldicarb-treated plotse0
- Outcome
- Galls/root systeme0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- CK- or NST-treated plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Galls/root system were lower with aldicarb-treated plots, than for the CK- or NST-treated plots.”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
May water was positively associated with galls in untreated or insecticide-only plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CK or insecticide-only-treated plotse0
- Outcome
- galls/root systeme0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- water (irrigation plus rain) in Maye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“As water (irrigation plus rain) in May increased, galls/root system increased for CK or insecticide-only-treated plots”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
May water was negatively associated with galls in NST and aldicarb plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- NST- and aldicarb-treated plotse0
- Outcome
- galls/root systemt1
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“and decreased for NST- and aldicarb-treated plots”
t0“cotton”
t1“As water (irrigation plus rain) in May increased, galls/root system increased for CK or insecticide-only-treated plots, and decreased for NST- and aldicarb-treated plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Environmental variables did not affect nematode reproduction at either location.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- Nematode reproductione0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nematode reproduction was not affected by EV in either location”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Root-knot nematode eggs at 60 days were negatively related to yield in Alabama.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Interactor
- root-knot nematode
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogynee0pathogen - Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- negatively affectede0
- Qualifier
- at 60 de0
- Setting
- ALe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“yield was negatively affected by root-knot nematode eggs in AL at 60 d”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Temperature parameters were negatively related to yield in Alabama and Texas.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- negatively relatede0
- Qualifier
- temperature parameterse0
- Setting
- AL and TXe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield in both AL and TX was negatively related to temperature parameters”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Water parameters were positively related to yield in Alabama and Texas.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- Yieldt1
- Direction
- positively relatede0
- Qualifier
- water parameterse0
- Setting
- AL and TXt1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positively related to water parameters”
t0“cotton”
t1“Yield in both AL and TX was negatively related to temperature parameters and positively related to water parameters.”
Claim · model-written summary
With environmental variables included, aldicarb plots yielded more than plots without nematicide in Texas.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- aldicarb-treated plotse0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- in the presence of EVe0
- Comparator
- nonnematicide-treated plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“aldicarb-treated plots having higher yields than nonnematicide-treated plots in the presence of EV”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Without environmental variables, Alabama NST/A/O yields resembled aldicarb yields.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- NST/A/O-treated plotse0
- Outcome
- yielded similare0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- aldicarbe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NST/A/O-treated plots yielded similar to aldicarb”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Without environmental variables, Alabama NST/A/O outyielded untreated and NST plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- NST/A/Ot1
- Outcome
- bettere0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- CK or NSTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“and better than CK or NST in the absence of EV”
t0“cotton”
t1“In AL, NST/A/O-treated plots yielded similar to aldicarb and better than CK or NST in the absence of EV and had significantly higher yields than all other treatments in the presence of most EV.”
Claim · model-written summary
With most environmental variables, Alabama NST/A/O had significantly higher yields than every other treatment.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- NST/A/Ot1
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- in the presence of most EVe0
- Comparator
- all other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had significantly higher yields than all other treatments in the presence of most EV”
t0“cotton”
t1“In AL, NST/A/O-treated plots yielded similar to aldicarb and better than CK or NST in the absence of EV and had significantly higher yields than all other treatments in the presence of most EV.”
The same questions in other papers
aldicarb · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →insecticide · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 papers →seed treatment · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 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.