Paper · 1998 · UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona)

Interactions Between Herbicides and Cotton Seedling Damping-off in the field

Amir Heydari; I. J. Misaghi

7
claims
13
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

We studied the impact of three pre plant herbicides, trifluralin, pendimethalin and prometryn on the incidence and the development of Rhizoctonia solani- induced cotton seedling damping-off in the field. In a field experiment conducted in Safford, Arizona, pre plant application of pendimethalin or prometryn but not trifluralin caused significant (P < 0.05) increases in disease incidence. In another field experiment in Tucson, Arizona, significant (P < 0.05) increase in disease incidence was observed in plots treated with prometryn and not in those treated with pendimethalin and trijuralin. In Tucson field experiment, application of herbicides also affected disease development as judged by the slope of disease progress curves.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin significantly increased cotton damping-off incidence at Safford.

Treatment
pre plant application of pendimethaline0
Interactor
Rhizoctonia solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
increasese0
Setting
Safford, Arizonae0

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 ↗
Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solani · Interactoranonimowy, niektóre prawa zastrzeżone (CC BY) · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Rhizoctonia solani- induced cotton seedling damping-off in the field. In a field experiment conducted in Safford, Arizona, pre plant application of pendimethalin or prometryn but not trifluralin caused significant (P < 0.05) increases in disease incidence”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 134–389 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Prometryn significantly increased cotton damping-off incidence at Safford.

Treatment
prometryne0
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
increasese0
Setting
Safford, Arizonae0

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

“In a field experiment conducted in Safford, Arizona, pre plant application of pendimethalin or prometryn but not trifluralin caused significant (P < 0.05) increases in disease incidence”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 204–389 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton seedling damping-off”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 36–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Trifluralin did not significantly increase cotton damping-off incidence at Safford.

Treatment
trifluraline0
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
note0

Not reportedComparatorSetting

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

“pre plant application of pendimethalin or prometryn but not trifluralin caused significant (P < 0.05) increases in disease incidence”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 257–389 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton seedling damping-off”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 36–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Prometryn significantly increased cotton damping-off incidence at Tucson.

Treatment
prometryne0
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
increasee0
Setting
Tucson, Arizonae0

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

“In another field experiment in Tucson, Arizona, significant (P < 0.05) increase in disease incidence was observed in plots treated with prometryn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 391–536 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton seedling damping-off”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 36–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin did not significantly increase cotton damping-off incidence at Tucson.

Treatment
pendimethaline0
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
note0

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

“significant (P < 0.05) increase in disease incidence was observed in plots treated with prometryn and not in those treated with pendimethalin and trijuralin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 439–595 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton seedling damping-off”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 36–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Trijuralin did not significantly increase cotton damping-off incidence at Tucson.

Treatment
trijuraline0
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
note0

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

“significant (P < 0.05) increase in disease incidence was observed in plots treated with prometryn and not in those treated with pendimethalin and trijuralin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 439–595 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton seedling damping-off”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 36–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide application also affected disease development in the Tucson trial.

Treatment
application of herbicidese0
Outcome
disease developmente0
Direction
affectede0
Setting
Tucson field experimente0

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

“In Tucson field experiment, application of herbicides also affected disease development as judged by the slope of disease progress curves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 597–734 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton seedling damping-off”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 36–63 · show in text ↑

prometryn · disease · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

trifluralin · disease · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

pendimethalin · Rhizoctonia solani · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
  2. negative
See all 3 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.