Paper · 1978 · Weed Science

Influence of Placement of Charcoal on Protection of Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum)from Diuron

J. M. Chandler; O. B. Wooten; F. E. Fulgham

6
claims
10
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The effectiveness of activated charcoal in protecting seedling cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Stoneville 213’) from diuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea] at 1.78 and 3.55 kg/ha was investigated under field conditions over a 5-yr period. Charcoal did not provide adequate protection when applied through the seed hopper box or sprayed in the seed furrow over each hill. Charcoal at 83 and 167 kg/ha applied as a spot over each hill of cotton gave adequate protection. Shallow incorporation of the charcoal significantly reduced the degree of protection. The optimum combination, providing maximum weed control and minimum crop injury, was diuron at 3.55 kg/ha applied over non-incorporated charcoal at 83 kg/ha.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Charcoal applied through the seed hopper box did not adequately protect cotton.

Treatment
Charcoale0
Outcome
protectione0
Direction
did not provide adequatee0

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

“Charcoal did not provide adequate protection when applied through the seed hopper box”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 248–333 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–78 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Charcoal sprayed in the seed furrow over each hill did not adequately protect cotton.

Treatment
sprayed in the seed furrow over each hille0
Outcome
protectione0
Direction
did not provide adequatee0

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

“Charcoal did not provide adequate protection when applied through the seed hopper box or sprayed in the seed furrow over each hill”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 248–378 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–78 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spot application of charcoal at 83 kg/ha adequately protected cotton.

Treatment
Charcoal at 83e0
Outcome
protectione0
Direction
adequatee0
Value
83e0

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

“Charcoal at 83 and 167 kg/ha applied as a spot over each hill of cotton gave adequate protection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 380–476 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spot application of charcoal at 167 kg/ha adequately protected cotton.

Treatment
167 kg/ha applied as a spote0
Outcome
protectione0
Direction
adequatee0
Value
167 kg/hae0

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

“Charcoal at 83 and 167 kg/ha applied as a spot over each hill of cotton gave adequate protection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 380–476 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Shallow incorporation of charcoal significantly reduced protection of cotton.

Treatment
Shallow incorporation of the charcoale0
Outcome
degree of protectione0
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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Shallow incorporation of the charcoal significantly reduced the degree of protection”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 478–562 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–78 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Diuron at 3.55 kg/ha over non-incorporated charcoal at 83 kg/ha gave maximum weed control and minimum cotton injury.

Treatment
diuron at 3.55 kg/ha applied over non-incorporated charcoal at 83 kg/hae0
Outcome
maximum weed control and minimum crop injurye0

Not reportedDirection

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

“The optimum combination, providing maximum weed control and minimum crop injury, was diuron at 3.55 kg/ha applied over non-incorporated charcoal at 83 kg/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 564–720 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton(Gossypium hirsutum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–78 · show in text ↑

irrigation · control · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

application · control · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 11 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 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.