Abstract
수수 재배시 생산비 절감을 위해 몇몇 약제에 대해 약효 및 약해를 검토한 결과 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 수수에 적용이 가능한 제초제로는 약해로 보면, 메타벤즈티아주론(수)은 약해정도가 기준량에서 1, 배량에서 3 정도로 수량에 미치는 영향이 적었다. 그러나 시마진(수)는 기준량에서 2, 배량에서 4로 다소 약해 정도가 높았다. 옥사디아길(유)과 디메테나미드-피 +펜디메탈린(유)는 수수에는 약해가 기준량에서는 1, 배량에서는 3 정도이었으나 잡초방제 효과는 낮았다. 예천과 밀양 2개 지역에서 수량은 메타벤즈티아주론과 시마진 약제에서 각각 $314kg\;10a^{-1}$과 $284kg\;10a^{-1}$로 손제초구 $321kg\;10a^{-1}$, $336kg\;10a^{-1}$로 손제초구와 유의적인 차이가 없었다. 한편, 잡초방제효과는 메타벤즈티아주론(수)는 예천, 밀양 2개 지역에서 각각 95%, 81%로 수수에 적용이 가능한 수준이었다. 그러나 시마진(수)은 2개지역 모두 84%, 79% 이었으며, 옥사디아길(유)과 디메테나미드-피 +펜디메탈린(유)의 방제가는 각각 32%, 68%로 낮았다. Herbicide options for weed control in sorghum is very limited, hence there is a need for exploring potential herbicides. Sorghum herbicide tolerance field trails were conducted at two locations, Yaechoun, Gyeongsangbuk-do, and Miryang, Gyeongsangnam-do, in 2013. Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application of methabenzthiazuron 70% (WP), simazine 50% (WP), oxadiargyl 1.7% (EC), and dimethenamid-P 5% + pendimethalin 20% (EC) at the standard rate 157.5 g, 75 g, 5.1 g, and 75 g a.i. $10a^{-1}$, respectively. As well as double the standard rate. On a phytotoxicity scale of 0 to 9, methabenzthiazuron (WP) induced injury to sorghum up to level 1 at the standard rate and to 3 at double the rate, but did not significantly affect the yield any statistical difference from the untreated. Simazine (WP) induced phytotoxicity up to levels 2 and 4 at single and double rates, respectively. Simazine (WP) did not significantly affect yield: however, the values were numerically lower than those in the methabenzthiazuron (WP) treatment. Oxidiargyl (EC) and dimethenamid + pendimethalin (EC) induced no or slight phytotoxicity; however they failed to provide effective weed control at the standard rate (32 and 68% control, respectively). Out of the tested, methabenzthiazuron (WP) was found to have potential for use in sorghum whereas the other herbicides caused unacceptable levels of injury.
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
Methabenzthiazuron caused sorghum injury level 1 at the standard rate.
- Treatment
- methabenzthiazuron (WP)e0
- Outcome
- injury to sorghume0
- Direction
- inducede0
- Value
- level 1e0
- Qualifier
- at the standard ratee0
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“methabenzthiazuron (WP) induced injury to sorghum up to level 1 at the standard rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Methabenzthiazuron caused sorghum injury level 3 at double the rate.
- Treatment
- methabenzthiazuron (WP)e0
- Outcome
- injury to sorghume0
- Direction
- inducede0
- Value
- 3e0
- Qualifier
- at double the ratee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“methabenzthiazuron (WP) induced injury to sorghum up to level 1 at the standard rate and to 3 at double the rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Methabenzthiazuron did not significantly affect sorghum yield relative to untreated plots.
- Treatment
- methabenzthiazuron (WP)e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not significantly affecte0
- Comparator
- the untreatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“methabenzthiazuron (WP) induced injury to sorghum up to level 1 at the standard rate and to 3 at double the rate, but did not significantly affect the yield any statistical difference from the untreated”
Claim · model-written summary
Simazine caused sorghum phytotoxicity level 2 at the single rate.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Simazine (WP) induced phytotoxicity up to levels 2 and 4 at single and double rates, respectively”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Simazine caused sorghum phytotoxicity level 4 at the double rate.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Simazine (WP) induced phytotoxicity up to levels 2 and 4 at single and double rates, respectively”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Simazine did not significantly affect sorghum yield, although yield was numerically below methabenzthiazuron treatment.
- Treatment
- Simazine (WP)e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- numerically lowere0
- Comparator
- methabenzthiazuron (WP) treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Simazine (WP) did not significantly affect yield: however, the values were numerically lower than those in the methabenzthiazuron (WP) treatment”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Oxidiargyl induced no or slight sorghum phytotoxicity.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Oxidiargyl (EC) and dimethenamid + pendimethalin (EC) induced no or slight phytotoxicity”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Dimethenamid plus pendimethalin induced no or slight sorghum phytotoxicity.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Oxidiargyl (EC) and dimethenamid + pendimethalin (EC) induced no or slight phytotoxicity”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Oxidiargyl provided 32% weed control at the standard rate, judged ineffective.
- Treatment
- Oxidiargyl (EC)e0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- failed to provide effectivee0
- Value
- 32e0
- Qualifier
- at the standard ratee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Oxidiargyl (EC) and dimethenamid + pendimethalin (EC) induced no or slight phytotoxicity; however they failed to provide effective weed control at the standard rate (32 and 68% control, respectively)”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Dimethenamid plus pendimethalin provided 68% weed control at the standard rate, judged ineffective.
- Treatment
- dimethenamid + pendimethalin (EC)e0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- failed to provide effectivee0
- Value
- 68%e0
- Qualifier
- at the standard ratee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Oxidiargyl (EC) and dimethenamid + pendimethalin (EC) induced no or slight phytotoxicity; however they failed to provide effective weed control at the standard rate (32 and 68% control, respectively)”
e1“Tolerance of sorghum was evaluated following the pre-emergence application”
Claim · model-written summary
Methabenzthiazuron was identified as a potential herbicide for sorghum.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“methabenzthiazuron (WP) was found to have potential for use in sorghum”
The same questions in other papers
pendimethalin · crop injury · SorghumPositive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
pendimethalin · weed · SorghumPositive and negative results
4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →simazine · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results
5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.