Abstract
Maize or corn is the third most important crop worldwide; the area occupied by this crop is over 157 million acres. In Romania, corn is the main crop. One of the main problems linked to this crop facing Romania is the weeds control. Different types of pre and post-emergence herbicides are available in the market, but their effectiveness on different weed species in the field still needs to be determined under different agro-climatic conditions. During the period 2012-2013 on the experimental field of the SC Profarma Holding SRL from Fundulea, under non irrigated conditions on cambic chernozem soil a field experiment with maize (Zea mays) was carried out. The paper presents the results concerning the efficiency of some herbicides (aryloxiacid and different mixtures) on weeds control in maize crop and their impact on soil quality. In the year 2013 the degree of weed infestation was higher due to heavy rainfall, but we got a good weed control with the combined herbicides in both years. Higher effect of new combined herbicides applied in vegetation against annual weeds, is due to their broad spectrum, including annual resistant dicotyledonous, such as Xanthium strumarium, Solanum nigrum, Sinapis arvensis. The treatments with pre-emergence herbicide with dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (trade name Wing P) and post-emergence herbicide with bentazone + dicamba (trade name Cambio), achieved a rate of weed control of 97%, being qualified as having very good efficiency. The treatments with acetochlor (trade name Guardian) and 2,4D + dicamba (trade name Ceredin) achieved a level of weed control of 88%, because the foxtail (Setaria spp.) could not be controlled effectively by a this single post-emergence herbicide. Corn yields in control variants were 4430 kg ha -1 and 4830 kg ha -1 in the two years of experimentation. All of the herbicides tested, ensured higher average yields compared to the control. Yields were very significantly correlated with weed control efficiency of herbicides (r = 0.91***; r = 0.93***). Cellulolytic activity of soil was influenced by climatic conditions, type of herbicide used and time of applications. Water stress negatively influenced soil cellulolytic activity. In optimal conditions of soil humidity, cellulolytic activity increased, except after applying dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine herbicide (Akris), suggesting an improvement of biological conditions in soil (except for the above mentioned herbicide). Soil respiration was influenced by herbicides applied. Among the herbicides studied Izoxaflutole + terbuthylazine (Merlin Duo) negatively influenced soil respiration. Herbicides dimethenamide P (Frontier Forte), dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine (Akris) and dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (Wing) had a beneficial effect, suggesting (1) a possible use of herbicides and/or their breakdown products by certain microorganisms in soil as a carbon source, leading to an increase in soil respiration, or (2) the effects of simulation (hormesis) of vital processes from the soil.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Weed infestation was higher in 2013 following heavy rainfall.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the year 2013 the degree of weed infestation was higher due to heavy rainfall”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined herbicides gave good weed control in both years.
- Treatment
- combined herbicidese0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- goode0
- Qualifier
- both yearse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“we got a good weed control with the combined herbicides in both years.”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
New combined herbicides applied in vegetation had higher efficacy against annual weeds.
- Treatment
- new combined herbicides applied in vegetatione0
- Interactor
- annual weedse0weed
- Outcome
- effecte0
- Direction
- Highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher effect of new combined herbicides applied in vegetation against annual weeds”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
The Wing P plus Cambio treatment achieved 97% weed control.
- Treatment
- pre-emergence herbicide with dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (trade name Wing P) and post-emergence herbicide with bentazone + dicamba (trade name Cambio)e0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- rate of weed controle0
- Value
- 97%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treatments with pre-emergence herbicide with dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (trade name Wing P) and post-emergence herbicide with bentazone + dicamba (trade name Cambio), achieved a rate of weed control of 97%”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Guardian plus Ceredin achieved 88% weed control.
- Treatment
- acetochlor (trade name Guardian) and 2,4D + dicamba (trade name Ceredin)e0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- level of weed controle0
- Value
- 88%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treatments with acetochlor (trade name Guardian) and 2,4D + dicamba (trade name Ceredin) achieved a level of weed control of 88%”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Foxtail was not controlled effectively by the single post-emergence herbicide.
- Treatment
- this single post-emergence herbicidee0
- Interactor
- Setaria spp.e0weed
- Outcome
- foxtail (Setaria spp.) could not be controlled effectivelye0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the foxtail (Setaria spp.) could not be controlled effectively by a this single post-emergence herbicide”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Control corn yield was 4430 kg ha -1 in the first year.
- Taxon
- Corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Outcome
- Corn yieldse0
- Value
- 4430 kg ha -1e0
- Qualifier
- control variantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn yields in control variants were 4430 kg ha -1 and 4830 kg ha -1 in the two years of experimentation.”
Claim · model-written summary
Control corn yield was 4830 kg ha -1 in the second year.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- Corn yieldse0
- Value
- 4830 kg ha -1e0
- Qualifier
- control variantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn yields in control variants were 4430 kg ha -1 and 4830 kg ha -1 in the two years of experimentation.”
Claim · model-written summary
Every tested herbicide raised average maize yield relative to control.
- Treatment
- All of the herbicides testede0
- Outcome
- average yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All of the herbicides tested, ensured higher average yields compared to the control.”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield correlated very significantly with herbicide weed-control efficiency.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yields were very significantly correlated with weed control efficiency of herbicides (r = 0.91***; r = 0.93***).”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Water stress reduced soil cellulolytic activity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water stress negatively influenced soil cellulolytic activity.”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil cellulolytic activity increased under optimal soil humidity except after Akris.
- Outcome
- cellulolytic activitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- except after applying dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine herbicide (Akris)e0
- Setting
- optimal conditions of soil humiditye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In optimal conditions of soil humidity, cellulolytic activity increased, except after applying dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine herbicide (Akris)”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Merlin Duo negatively influenced soil respiration.
- Treatment
- Izoxaflutole + terbuthylazine (Merlin Duo)e0
- Outcome
- soil respiratione0
- Direction
- negatively influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Izoxaflutole + terbuthylazine (Merlin Duo) negatively influenced soil respiration.”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Frontier Forte had a beneficial effect on soil respiration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicides dimethenamide P (Frontier Forte), dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine (Akris) and dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (Wing) had a beneficial effect”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Akris had a beneficial effect on soil respiration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicides dimethenamide P (Frontier Forte), dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine (Akris) and dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (Wing) had a beneficial effect”
t0“maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing had a beneficial effect on soil respiration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Herbicides dimethenamide P (Frontier Forte), dimethenamide P + terbuthylazine (Akris) and dimethenamide P + pendimethalin (Wing) had a beneficial effect”
t0“maize.”
The same questions in other papers
terbutylazine · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
herbicide · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →acetochlor · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →dicamba · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →pendimethalin · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
42 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →bentazone · weed · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →herbicide · control · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 94 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
115 papers more in this group
See all 119 papers →herbicide · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
359 papers in the same direction as this paper · 36 in the opposite direction · 10 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
402 papers more in this group
See all 406 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.