Abstract
Guar production in the United States is limited to a relatively small region in the semiarid southern Great Plains of Texas and Oklahoma. The lack of POST broadleaf herbicides is a potential limiting factor to increased production. A greenhouse study was initiated in 2001 at the Texas A&M Research Center near Vernon, TX to evaluate guar tolerance to 10 POST herbicides typically used in soybean or cotton. Guar seedlings were grown in pots, and herbicides with appropriate adjuvants were applied to 3-wk-old seedlings at the registered rate (1×) and twice (2×) the registered rate for soybean or cotton. The study was repeated twice, with six replications in each run. Twenty-eight d after treatment (DAT), visual injury and aboveground dry weight of viable biomass were recorded for each plant. Significant differences (P = 0.05) were noted among herbicides for visual injury and viable biomass. Little or no differences in visual injury and aboveground dry weight were observed between the control (no herbicide applied) and the 1× rate of 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butanoic acid, bentazon, or imazethapyr 28 DAT. A 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron, or bromoxynil caused minor visual injury of 7 to 9% and a reduction in dry weight of 8 to 23%. Pyrithiobac and chlorimuron caused 38 and 47% visible injury and a 35 and 58% reduction in dry weight, respectively. Guar was most sensitive to lactofen, with the 1× rate causing 100% visual injury and no recoverable aboveground biomass. This greenhouse study identified three POST herbicide candidates with potential to control broadleaf weeds in guar without noticeable plant injury, and offers data to support herbicide registrations for this minor crop.Nomenclature: Acifluorfen; bentazon; bromoxynil; chlorimuron; imazamox; imazethapyr; lactofen; pyrithiobac; thifensulfuron; 2,4-DB; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L; guar, Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) Taub ‘Kinman’; soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Significant differences among herbicides were found for visual injury and viable biomass in guar.
- Taxon
- Guar
Cyamopsis tetragonolobat0 - Treatment
- herbicidese1
- Outcome
- visual injury and viable biomasse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e1“Significant differences (P = 0.05) were noted among herbicides for visual injury and viable biomass”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1× rate of 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butanoic acid, bentazon or imazethapyr showed little or no change in visual injury and aboveground dry weight relative to the control at 28 DAT.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- 1× rate of 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butanoic acid, bentazon, or imazethapyre2
- Outcome
- visual injury and aboveground dry weighte2
- Direction
- Little or no differencese2
- Comparator
- control (no herbicide applied)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e2“Little or no differences in visual injury and aboveground dry weight were observed between the control (no herbicide applied) and the 1× rate of 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)butanoic acid, bentazon, or imazethapyr 28 DAT”
Claim · model-written summary
A 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron or bromoxynil caused minor visual injury of 7 to 9% in guar.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron, or bromoxynile3
- Outcome
- visual injurye3
- Value
- 7 to 9%e3
- Qualifier
- minore3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e3“A 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron, or bromoxynil caused minor visual injury of 7 to 9% and a reduction in dry weight of 8 to 23%”
Claim · model-written summary
A 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron or bromoxynil reduced aboveground dry weight of guar by 8 to 23%.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron, or bromoxynile3
- Outcome
- reduction in dry weighte3
- Value
- 8 to 23%e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e3“A 1× application rate of acifluorfen, imazamox, thifensulfuron, or bromoxynil caused minor visual injury of 7 to 9% and a reduction in dry weight of 8 to 23%”
Claim · model-written summary
Pyrithiobac caused 38% visible injury in guar.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Pyrithiobace4
- Outcome
- visible injurye4
- Value
- 38e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e4“Pyrithiobac and chlorimuron caused 38 and 47% visible injury and a 35 and 58% reduction in dry weight, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Pyrithiobac reduced dry weight of guar by 35%.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Pyrithiobace4
- Outcome
- reduction in dry weighte4
- Value
- 35e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e4“Pyrithiobac and chlorimuron caused 38 and 47% visible injury and a 35 and 58% reduction in dry weight, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorimuron caused 47% visible injury in guar.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- chlorimurone4
- Outcome
- visible injurye4
- Value
- 47%e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e4“Pyrithiobac and chlorimuron caused 38 and 47% visible injury and a 35 and 58% reduction in dry weight, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorimuron reduced dry weight of guar by 58%.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- chlorimurone4
- Outcome
- reduction in dry weighte4
- Value
- 58%e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e4“Pyrithiobac and chlorimuron caused 38 and 47% visible injury and a 35 and 58% reduction in dry weight, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Guar was most sensitive to lactofen, with the 1× rate causing 100% visual injury and no recoverable aboveground biomass.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- lactofene5
- Outcome
- visual injurye5
- Value
- 100%e5
- Qualifier
- no recoverable aboveground biomasse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e5“Guar was most sensitive to lactofen, with the 1× rate causing 100% visual injury and no recoverable aboveground biomass”
Claim · model-written summary
Three POST herbicide candidates were identified with potential to control broadleaf weeds in guar without noticeable plant injury.
- Taxon
- GuarCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Outcome
- POST herbicide candidatese6
- Value
- threee6
- Qualifier
- without noticeable plant injurye6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Guar Tolerance to Postemergence Herbicides”
e6“This greenhouse study identified three POST herbicide candidates with potential to control broadleaf weeds in guar without noticeable plant injury”
The same questions in other papers
Imazethapyr · crop injury · Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (cluster bean)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- negative
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.