Paper · 2001 · Agronomy Journal

Water‐Seeded Rice Cultivars Differ in Ability to Interfere with Watergrass

Kevin D. Gibson; James E. Hill; Theodore C. Foin; et al.

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
83
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The repeated use of a limited number of herbicides has led to the development of resistant weed species in California rice ( Oryza sativa L.). Competitive rice cultivars could help reduce herbicide dependency and decrease selective pressure for resistance. We conducted field experiments to determine if differences in competitive ability existed between two semidwarf cultivars of water‐seeded rice. Cultivars M‐202 and A‐301 were grown on Stockton clay soil at two seed rates (84 and 168 kg ha −1 ) in 1996 and four seed rates (56, 112, 168, and 224 kg ha −1 ) in 1997. Molinate ( S ‐ethyl hexahydro‐1 H ‐azepine‐1‐carbothioate) and propanil [ N ‐(3,4‐dichlorophenyl)propanamide] were used to control a mixed infestation of watergrass [ Echinochloa oryzoides (Ard.) Fritsch, E. phyllopogon (Stapf) Koss] in 1996 and 1997, respectively. Molinate (0 and 4.5 kg a.i. ha −1 ) was applied in 1996, and propanil (0, 1, 2 and 4 kg a.i. ha −1 ) was applied in 1997. M‐202 was taller, produced more leaf dry weight, had greater light interception, and reduced watergrass biomass more than A‐301 in both years of the study. The more competitive M‐202 also had higher yields than A‐301 under weedy and weed‐free conditions. Watergrass growth was not affected by rice seed rates in either year. This study suggests that herbicide rates could be reduced and weed control could be improved if more competitive cultivars were developed for water‐seeded rice.

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 5

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

M‐202 was taller, had more leaf dry weight and intercepted more light than A‐301.

Material
M‐202e0
Outcome
taller, produced more leaf dry weight, had greater light interceptione0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
A‐301e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“M‐202 was taller, produced more leaf dry weight, had greater light interception, and reduced watergrass biomass more than A‐301 in both years of the study”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1114 · show in text ↑
e1

“rice ( Oryza sativa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 118–141 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

M‐202 reduced watergrass biomass more than A‐301.

Material
M‐202e1
Interactor
watergrasse0weed
Outcome
watergrass biomasse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
A‐301e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“reduced watergrass biomass more than A‐301 in both years of the study”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1045–1114 · show in text ↑
e1

“M‐202 was taller”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–976 · show in text ↑
e2

“rice ( Oryza sativa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 118–141 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

M‐202 yielded more than A‐301 in weedy and weed-free conditions.

Material
M‐202e0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
weedy and weed‐free conditionse0
Comparator
A‐301e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The more competitive M‐202 also had higher yields than A‐301 under weedy and weed‐free conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1116–1213 · show in text ↑
e1

“rice ( Oryza sativa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 118–141 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rice seeding rates did not affect watergrass growth.

Treatment
rice seed ratese0
Interactor
Watergrasse0weed
Outcome
Watergrass growthe0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Watergrass growth was not affected by rice seed rates in either year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1215–1283 · show in text ↑
e1

“rice ( Oryza sativa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 118–141 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors suggest developing competitive water-seeded rice cultivars to reduce herbicide rates and improve weed control.

Outcome
more competitive cultivars were developed for water‐seeded ricee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“herbicide rates could be reduced and weed control could be improved if more competitive cultivars were developed for water‐seeded rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1310–1444 · show in text ↑

density · growth · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

96 papers: 73 positive, 23 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 73 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

92 papers more in this group

See all 96 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.