Abstract
Abstract Carrier water quality is an important consideration for herbicide efficacy. Field and greenhouse studies were conducted from 2021 to 2023 to evaluate the effect of carrier water pH and hardness on imazapic efficacy for sicklepod control in peanut crops. In separate field experiments imazapic was applied postemergence at 0.071 kg ai ha −1 with carrier water pH levels of 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9; and hardness levels of 0 (deionized water), 100, 200, 400, or 500 mg L −1 of CaCO 3 equivalent. In greenhouse experiments, imazapic was applied to sicklepod that was either 10 cm, 15 cm, or 20 cm tall at similar carrier water pH levels and hardness levels of 0, 100, 200, 400, or 800 mg L −1 of CaCO 3 . In the field study, sicklepod control, density, and biomass reductions were lower with carrier water pH 5 or 9 compared with pH 7. In the greenhouse study, control was not different among carrier water pH levels when imazapic was applied to 10-cm-tall sicklepod; however, when applied to 15- or 20-cm-tall sicklepod, control was at least 25% greater with acidic (pH 5) compared to alkaline (pH 9) carrier water. Results from the field study showed that carrier water hardness ≤500 ppm did not reduce the efficacy of imazapic to control sicklepod. In the greenhouse study, regardless of sicklepod height, carrier water hardness of 800 mg L −1 reduced sicklepod control by 15% and biomass reduction by 17% compared with deionized water (pH 7). The effects of carrier water pH and hardness on imazapic efficacy did not compromise peanut yield in the field study. However, this study indicates that both acidic and alkaline carrier water pH and hardness (800 mg L −1 CaCO 3 L −1 ) have the potential to reduce imazapic efficacy on sicklepod, and appropriate spray solution amendments maybe be needed to maintain optimum efficacy.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Field sicklepod control and biomass and density reductions were lower at pH 5 or 9 than pH 7.
- Taxon
- peanut
Arachis hypogaeat0 - Treatment
- carrier water pH 5 or 9e0
- Interactor
- sicklepode0weed
- Outcome
- sicklepod control, density, and biomass reductionse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- pH 7e0
- Setting
- fielde1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sicklepod control, density, and biomass reductions were lower with carrier water pH 5 or 9 compared with pH 7”
e1“In the field study, sicklepod control”
t0“peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
At 10 cm sicklepod height, greenhouse control did not differ by carrier water pH.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- carrier water pH levelse0
- Interactor
- sicklepode0weed
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- not differente0
- Comparator
- among carrier water pH levelse0
- Setting
- greenhousee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“control was not different among carrier water pH levels when imazapic was applied to 10-cm-tall sicklepod”
e1“In the greenhouse study, control”
t0“peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
For 15- or 20-cm sicklepod, acidic water improved control by at least 25% over alkaline water.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- acidic (pH 5)e0
- Interactor
- sicklepode0weed
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- at least 25%e0
- Comparator
- alkaline (pH 9) carrier watere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“when applied to 15- or 20-cm-tall sicklepod, control was at least 25% greater with acidic (pH 5) compared to alkaline (pH 9) carrier water”
t0“peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Field water hardness ≤500 ppm did not reduce sicklepod control efficacy.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- carrier water hardness ≤500 ppme0
- Interactor
- sicklepode0weed
- Outcome
- efficacy of imazapic to control sicklepode0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
- Setting
- fielde1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carrier water hardness ≤500 ppm did not reduce the efficacy of imazapic to control sicklepod”
e1“Results from the field study”
t0“peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse water hardness of 800 mg L −1 reduced sicklepod control by 15%.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- carrier water hardness of 800 mg L −1e0
- Interactor
- sicklepode0weed
- Outcome
- sicklepod controle0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- deionized water (pH 7)e0
- Setting
- greenhousee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carrier water hardness of 800 mg L −1 reduced sicklepod control by 15% and biomass reduction by 17% compared with deionized water (pH 7)”
e1“In the greenhouse study, regardless of sicklepod height”
t0“peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse water hardness of 800 mg L −1 reduced sicklepod biomass reduction by 17%.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- carrier water hardness of 800 mg L −1e0
- Interactor
- sicklepode0weed
- Outcome
- sicklepod control by 15% and biomass reductione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 17%e0
- Comparator
- deionized water (pH 7)e0
- Setting
- greenhousee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carrier water hardness of 800 mg L −1 reduced sicklepod control by 15% and biomass reduction by 17% compared with deionized water (pH 7)”
e1“In the greenhouse study, regardless of sicklepod height”
t0“peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Carrier water pH and hardness did not compromise field peanut yield.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- carrier water pH and hardnesse0
- Outcome
- peanut yielde0
- Direction
- did not compromisee0
- Setting
- fielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of carrier water pH and hardness on imazapic efficacy did not compromise peanut yield in the field study”
The same questions in other papers
food additive carrier · control · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
food additive carrier · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- no effect
ph · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- 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.