Abstract
Abstract The threat of herbicide-resistant weed species, such as Palmer amaranth, has driven the development of robust weed management programs that rely on more than chemicals for weed control. Previous research has shown that zero-tolerance weed thresholds, cover crops, deep tillage, and diverse herbicide programs are effective strategies for controlling Palmer amaranth. Unfortunately, research investigating the integration of all four of these weed management strategies in a system is lacking. To better leverage these integrated weed management strategies in cotton production systems, a long-term study was initiated in fall 2018 near Marianna, AR, with zero tolerance, deep tillage, a cereal rye cover crop, and either a dicamba or non-dicamba in-crop herbicide program as factors. Results found that total Palmer amaranth emergence was reduced 76% as the result of deep tillage in 2019 and, in the absence of a zero-tolerance strategy, 73% in 2020. In the absence of a zero-tolerance strategy, the combination of a non–cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide program decreased total Palmer amaranth emergence by 73%, while the combination of a cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide program decreased total Palmer amaranth emergence by 78% compared to the combination of a cover crop and non-dicamba herbicide program. Under a zero-tolerance strategy in 2019, tillage reduced cotton yield by 12% and partial returns by US$370 ha −1 . In 2020, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14% and partial returns of US$371 ha −1 under a non-zero-tolerance strategy, while a 12% yield reduction and a US$260 ha −1 decrease in partial returns were observed under a zero-tolerance strategy. In 2019, the non-dicamba program resulted in greater partial returns than the dicamba in-crop program because of greater yield and lower program costs. However, in 2020, partial returns were greater for the dicamba in-crop herbicide program owing to greater yields achieved by this program.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Deep tillage reduced Palmer amaranth emergence by 76% in 2019.
- Taxon
- Palmer amaranthe0
- Treatment
- deep tillagee0
- Outcome
- total Palmer amaranth emergencee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 76%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“total Palmer amaranth emergence was reduced 76% as the result of deep tillage in 2019”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep tillage reduced Palmer amaranth emergence by 73% in 2020 without zero tolerance.
- Taxon
- Palmer amaranthe0
- Treatment
- deep tillagee0
- Outcome
- total Palmer amaranth emergencee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 73%e0
- Qualifier
- in the absence of a zero-tolerance strategye0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“total Palmer amaranth emergence was reduced 76% as the result of deep tillage in 2019 and, in the absence of a zero-tolerance strategy, 73% in 2020”
Claim · model-written summary
Without zero tolerance, no cover crop plus dicamba reduced weed emergence by 73%.
- Taxon
- Palmer amarantht0
- Treatment
- non–cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide programe0
- Outcome
- total Palmer amaranth emergencee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 73%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“the combination of a non–cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide program decreased total Palmer amaranth emergence by 73%”
t0“Palmer amaranth”
Claim · model-written summary
Without zero tolerance, cover crop plus dicamba reduced weed emergence by 78% versus cover crop plus non-dicamba.
Verbatim
e0“the combination of a cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide program decreased total Palmer amaranth emergence by 78% compared to the combination of a cover crop and non-dicamba herbicide program”
t0“Palmer amaranth”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2019 under zero tolerance, tillage reduced cotton yield by 12%.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- tillagee0
- Outcome
- cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 12%e0
- Qualifier
- Under a zero-tolerance strategy in 2019e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under a zero-tolerance strategy in 2019, tillage reduced cotton yield by 12% and partial returns by US$370 ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2019 under zero tolerance, tillage reduced partial returns by US$370 ha −1.
- Treatment
- tillagee0
- Outcome
- partial returnse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- US$370 ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- Under a zero-tolerance strategy in 2019e0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Under a zero-tolerance strategy in 2019, tillage reduced cotton yield by 12% and partial returns by US$370 ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2020 without zero tolerance, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- tillagee0
- Outcome
- cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 14%e0
- Qualifier
- under a non-zero-tolerance strategye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2020, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14% and partial returns of US$371 ha −1 under a non-zero-tolerance strategy”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2020 without zero tolerance, tillage reduced partial returns by US$371 ha −1.
- Treatment
- tillagee0
- Outcome
- partial returnse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- US$371 ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- under a non-zero-tolerance strategye0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“In 2020, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14% and partial returns of US$371 ha −1 under a non-zero-tolerance strategy”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2020 under zero tolerance, tillage reduced cotton yield by 12%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- tillagee1
- Outcome
- yield reductione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 12%e0
- Qualifier
- under a zero-tolerance strategye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a 12% yield reduction and a US$260 ha −1 decrease in partial returns were observed under a zero-tolerance strategy”
t0“cotton”
e1“In 2020, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14%”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2020 under zero tolerance, tillage decreased partial returns by US$260 ha −1.
- Treatment
- tillagee1
- Outcome
- partial returnse0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- US$260 ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- under a zero-tolerance strategye0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“a 12% yield reduction and a US$260 ha −1 decrease in partial returns were observed under a zero-tolerance strategy”
e1“In 2020, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14%”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2019 non-dicamba gave greater partial returns than dicamba due to yield and cost.
- Treatment
- non-dicamba programe0
- Outcome
- partial returnse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- greater yield and lower program costse0
- Comparator
- dicamba in-crop programe0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“In 2019, the non-dicamba program resulted in greater partial returns than the dicamba in-crop program because of greater yield and lower program costs”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2020 dicamba gave greater partial returns due to greater yields.
- Treatment
- dicamba in-crop herbicide programe0
- Outcome
- partial returnse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- greater yieldse0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“in 2020, partial returns were greater for the dicamba in-crop herbicide program owing to greater yields achieved by this program”
The same questions in other papers
dicamba · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →tillage · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 113 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
155 papers more in this group
See all 159 papers →herbicide · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
122 papers in the same direction as this paper · 51 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
178 papers more in this group
See all 182 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.