Abstract
Field research was conducted for 2 yr to determine the effect of reduced rates of glufosinate on growth and yield of non–glufosinate-resistant cotton. Rates of 3.4, 6.7, 13, 26.5, 52.5, and 105 g ha−1, representing 0.008, 0.016, 0.031, 0.063, 0.125, and 0.25 of an effective use rate (420 g ha−1), were applied to cotton at the two-, five-, or nine-node growth stage. Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments. Injury response was increased slightly with application at the five- compared with the two-node growth stage and was not significant for the latest application timing (nine-node stage) in two of three experiments. In two of the three experiments, plant height reduction response was lowest at the five-node stage and greatest at the nine-node stage. Regardless of application timing, plant dry weight was negatively affected only with the highest rate of glufosinate. Glufosinate application, based on node above white flower number and percent open boll, did not result in a delay in maturity. Final plant population was reduced in all experiments at the two-node application and in one of the three experiments at the five-node stage. Glufosinate application did not adversely affect final plant population when applied to nine-node cotton. Negative effects on cotton growth were not manifested in seedcotton yield reduction after glufosinate application.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton injury response decreased as glufosinate application timing was delayed, in one of three experiments.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- application timinge0
- Outcome
- cotton responsee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- in one of the three experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Injury response increased slightly with glufosinate application at the five-node compared with the two-node growth stage.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- application at the five-e0
- Outcome
- Injury responsee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- slightlye0
- Comparator
- two-node growth stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Injury response was increased slightly with application at the five- compared with the two-node growth stage and was not significant for the latest application timing (nine-node stage) in two of three experiments”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Injury response was not significant for glufosinate applied at the nine-node stage in two of three experiments.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- latest application timinge0
- Outcome
- Injury responsee0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
- Qualifier
- in two of three experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Injury response was increased slightly with application at the five- compared with the two-node growth stage and was not significant for the latest application timing (nine-node stage) in two of three experiments”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height reduction response was lowest at the five-node stage in two of three experiments.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- five-node stagee0
- Outcome
- plant height reduction responsee0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Qualifier
- In two of the three experimentse0
- Comparator
- nine-node stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In two of the three experiments, plant height reduction response was lowest at the five-node stage and greatest at the nine-node stage”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height reduction response was greatest at the nine-node stage in two of three experiments.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- nine-node stagee0
- Outcome
- plant height reduction responsee0
- Direction
- greateste0
- Qualifier
- In two of the three experimentse0
- Comparator
- five-node stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In two of the three experiments, plant height reduction response was lowest at the five-node stage and greatest at the nine-node stage”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant dry weight was negatively affected only with the highest glufosinate rate, regardless of application timing.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- highest rate of glufosinatee0
- Outcome
- plant dry weighte0
- Direction
- negatively affectede0
- Qualifier
- Regardless of application timinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Regardless of application timing, plant dry weight was negatively affected only with the highest rate of glufosinate”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Glufosinate application did not result in a delay in cotton maturity.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Glufosinate applicatione0
- Outcome
- delay in maturitye0
- Qualifier
- based on node above white flower number and percent open bolle0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Glufosinate application, based on node above white flower number and percent open boll, did not result in a delay in maturity”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Final plant population was reduced in all experiments at the two-node glufosinate application.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- two-node applicatione0
- Outcome
- Final plant populatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- in all experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Final plant population was reduced in all experiments at the two-node application and in one of the three experiments at the five-node stage”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Final plant population was reduced in one of three experiments at the five-node glufosinate application.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- five-node stagee0
- Outcome
- Final plant populatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- in one of the three experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Final plant population was reduced in all experiments at the two-node application and in one of the three experiments at the five-node stage”
e1“Based on analysis of visual injury, cotton response decreased as application timing was delayed in one of the three experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Glufosinate applied to nine-node cotton did not adversely affect final plant population.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Glufosinate applicatione0
- Outcome
- final plant populatione0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
- Qualifier
- when applied to nine-node cottone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Glufosinate application did not adversely affect final plant population when applied to nine-node cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Glufosinate application did not reduce seedcotton yield.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- glufosinate applicatione0
- Outcome
- seedcotton yield reductione0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Negative effects on cotton growth were not manifested in seedcotton yield reduction after glufosinate application”
The same questions in other papers
glufosinate · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →glufosinate · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →glufosinate · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
glufosinate · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.