Abstract
The field research were carried out in 2019–2020, in Picobella sugar beet. The aim of the study was to develop an alternative weed control program without phenmedipham, desmedipham and chloridazone. The tested mixtures containing metamitron, ethofumesate, triflusulfuron-methyl, and lenacil used in various combinations together with the Atpolan BIO 80 EC adjuvant effectively controlled Fat hen (Chenopodium album) up to phase 1 of a pair of true leaves (BBCH 12). Excluding ethofumesate from mixtures of metamitron (700 g/ha) and triflusulfuron-methyl (15 g/ha) reduces the effectiveness of weed control. In the absence of ethofumesate, the effectiveness of the action is improved by increasing the dose of metamitron (1050 g/ha) and adding lenacil (100 g/ha) to the composition of the mixture. The conducted research proved that it is possible to effectively protect beet crops against Fat hen (Ch. album) after the desmedipham withdrawn and possible non-approval of phenmedipham and chloridazone.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 3
Claim · model-written summary
Tested herbicide mixtures with adjuvant controlled Fat hen through BBCH 12.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- tested mixtures containing metamitron, ethofumesate, triflusulfuron-methyl, and lenacile0
- Interactor
- Chenopodium album
Chenopodium albume0weed - Outcome
- controlled Fat hene0
- Direction
- effectively controllede0
- Qualifier
- BBCH 12e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The tested mixtures containing metamitron, ethofumesate, triflusulfuron-methyl, and lenacil used in various combinations together with the Atpolan BIO 80 EC adjuvant effectively controlled Fat hen (Chenopodium album) up to phase 1 of a pair of true leaves (BBCH 12)”
t0“sugar beet crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Removing ethofumesate reduced weed-control effectiveness.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Excluding ethofumesate from mixtures of metamitron (700 g/ha) and triflusulfuron-methyl (15 g/ha)e0
- Outcome
- effectiveness of weed controle0
- Direction
- reducese0
- Comparator
- mixtures of metamitron (700 g/ha) and triflusulfuron-methyl (15 g/ha)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Excluding ethofumesate from mixtures of metamitron (700 g/ha) and triflusulfuron-methyl (15 g/ha) reduces the effectiveness of weed control”
t0“sugar beet crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing metamitron dose and adding lenacil improved weed control without ethofumesate.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- increasing the dose of metamitron (1050 g/ha) and adding lenacil (100 g/ha)e0
- Outcome
- effectiveness of the actione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- absence of ethofumesatee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the absence of ethofumesate, the effectiveness of the action is improved by increasing the dose of metamitron (1050 g/ha) and adding lenacil (100 g/ha)”
t0“sugar beet crop”
The same questions in other papers
metamitron · Chenopodium album · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
ethofumesate · Chenopodium album · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
triflusulfuron-methyl · weed · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
metamitron · weed · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →ethofumesate · weed · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- 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.