Paper · 1998 · PubMed

Responses of Cotton Yield and Meloidogyne incognita Soil Populations to Soil Applications of Aldicarb and 1,3-D in Florida.

R A Kinloch; J R Rich

10
claims
24
verbatim quotes
16
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

In four tests conducted in loamy-sand soils in northern Florida, cotton lint yield increased and post-harvest soil populations of Meloidogyne incognita were more effectively suppressed by 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) than aldicarb when both nematicides were evaluated over a range of recommended rates. Significant positive relationships existed between lint yield and rates of 1,3-D in three tests, whereas only one significant positive relationship occurred between lint yield and aldicarb rates. Yield increases ranged from 16% to 124%, depending on rate of 1,3-D, and 35% in one aldicarb-treated test. Only a weak negative relationship between post-harvest soil densities of second-stage juveniles (J2) and aldicarb rates was determined by combining data from the four tests. Aldicarb failed to suppress post-harvest J2 soil population densities in any test. All rates of 1,3-D significantly reduced post-harvest M. incognita J2 soil population densities in two tests and provided a stronger negative correlation between nematode soil densities and rates than aldicarb when all test data were combined for each nematicide.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton lint yield increased more with 1,3-D than aldicarb.

Treatment
1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D)e0
Outcome
cotton lint yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
aldicarbe0

Not reportedSetting

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton lint yield increased and post-harvest soil populations of Meloidogyne incognita were more effectively suppressed by 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) than aldicarb”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 65–229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1,3-D suppressed post-harvest soil populations of Meloidogyne incognita more effectively than aldicarb.

Treatment
1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D)e0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
Outcome
post-harvest soil populations of Meloidogyne incognitae0
Direction
suppressede0
Comparator
aldicarbe0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“post-harvest soil populations of Meloidogyne incognita were more effectively suppressed by 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) than aldicarb”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 97–229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Lint yield was positively related to 1,3-D rate in three tests.

Treatment
1,3-De0
Outcome
lint yielde0
Direction
positivee0
Value
three testse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant positive relationships existed between lint yield and rates of 1,3-D in three tests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 302–397 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Lint yield was positively related to aldicarb rate in one test.

Treatment
aldicarbe0
Outcome
lint yielde0
Direction
positivee0
Value
onee0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“only one significant positive relationship occurred between lint yield and aldicarb rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 407–496 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield increases with 1,3-D ranged from 16% to 124%.

Treatment
1,3-De0
Outcome
Yielde0
Direction
increasese0
Value
16% to 124%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yield increases ranged from 16% to 124%, depending on rate of 1,3-D”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 498–565 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield increased 35% in one aldicarb-treated test.

Treatment
aldicarb-treatede0
Outcome
Yielde0
Direction
increasese0
Value
35%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yield increases ranged from 16% to 124%, depending on rate of 1,3-D, and 35% in one aldicarb-treated test”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 498–603 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Post-harvest J2 soil density had a weak negative relation with aldicarb rate across four tests.

Treatment
aldicarbe0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
post-harvest soil densities of second-stage juveniles (J2)e0
Direction
negativee0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Only a weak negative relationship between post-harvest soil densities of second-stage juveniles (J2) and aldicarb rates was determined by combining data from the four tests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 605–777 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 130–151 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Aldicarb did not suppress post-harvest J2 soil density in any test.

Treatment
Aldicarbe0
Interactor
Meloidogyne incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae1pathogen
Outcome
post-harvest J2 soil population densitiese0
Direction
failed to suppresse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Aldicarb failed to suppress post-harvest J2 soil population densities in any test”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 779–860 · show in text ↑
e1

“Meloidogyne incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 130–151 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

All 1,3-D rates significantly reduced post-harvest M. incognita J2 density in two tests.

Treatment
1,3-De0
Interactor
M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae0pathogen
Outcome
post-harvest M. incognita J2 soil population densitiese0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“All rates of 1,3-D significantly reduced post-harvest M. incognita J2 soil population densities in two tests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 862–970 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1,3-D rate had a stronger negative correlation with nematode soil density than aldicarb.

Treatment
1,3-De1
Interactor
M. incognitaMeloidogyne incognitae2pathogen
Outcome
nematode soil densitiese0
Direction
stronger negative correlatione0
Comparator
aldicarbe0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Meloidogyne incognita
Meloidogyne incognita · InteractorPhoto by William Wergin and Richard Sayre. Colorized by Stephen Ausmus. U.S. Department of Agriculture · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“provided a stronger negative correlation between nematode soil densities and rates than aldicarb when all test data were combined for each nematicide”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 975–1124 · show in text ↑
e1

“1,3-D significantly reduced”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 875–902 · show in text ↑
e2

“M. incognita”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 916–928 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–19 · show in text ↑

aldicarb · Meloidogyne incognita · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 7 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 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.