Abstract
Field studies in 1978 and 1979 evaluated the effectiveness of single and combination herbicide treatments in processing peas ( Pisum sativum L.) and soybeans [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] for the control of wild proso millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.). Eight treatments that included dinitroaniline herbicides controlled wild proso millet adequately through the entire growing season of the early-planted peas (approximately 60 days). Wild proso millet emergence and growth in untreated peas was suppressed by the early emergence, rapid growth, and high plant density of the drill-planted crop. Trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro- N,N -dipropyl- p -toluidine) at 0.8 kg/ha stunted pea growth and was the only treatment that reduced yields significantly. No herbicide treatment evaluated in soybeans controlled wild proso millet adequately for the entire growing season without reducing soybean growth and yield. Treatments containing dinitroaniline herbicides, which controlled wild proso millet in peas and resulted in good yield, did not perform similarly in soybeans.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Dinitroaniline herbicide treatments controlled wild proso millet adequately through the season in peas.
- Taxon
- peas
Lathyrus oleraceuse1 - Treatment
- dinitroaniline herbicidese1
- Interactor
- wild proso millete1weed
- Outcome
- wild proso millete1
- Qualifier
- adequately through the entire growing seasone1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e1“Eight treatments that included dinitroaniline herbicides controlled wild proso millet adequately through the entire growing season of the early-planted peas (approximately 60 days)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wild proso millet emergence and growth were suppressed in untreated peas by early emergence, rapid growth and high plant density of the crop.
- Taxon
- peas
Lathyrus oleraceuse2 - Interactor
- Wild proso millete2weed
- Outcome
- Wild proso millet emergence and growthe2
- Direction
- suppressede2
- Qualifier
- early emergence, rapid growth, and high plant density of the drill-planted crope2
- Comparator
- untreated pease2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e2“Wild proso millet emergence and growth in untreated peas was suppressed by the early emergence, rapid growth, and high plant density of the drill-planted crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Trifluralin at 0.8 kg/ha stunted pea growth.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceuse3 - Treatment
- Trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro- N,N -dipropyl- p -toluidine) at 0.8 kg/hae3
- Outcome
- pea growthe3
- Direction
- stuntede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e3“Trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro- N,N -dipropyl- p -toluidine) at 0.8 kg/ha stunted pea growth and was the only treatment that reduced yields significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
Trifluralin at 0.8 kg/ha was the only treatment that significantly reduced pea yields.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceuse3 - Treatment
- Trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro- N,N -dipropyl- p -toluidine) at 0.8 kg/hae3
- Outcome
- yieldse3
- Direction
- reducede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e3“Trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro- N,N -dipropyl- p -toluidine) at 0.8 kg/ha stunted pea growth and was the only treatment that reduced yields significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
No herbicide treatment in soybeans controlled wild proso millet adequately for the whole season without reducing soybean growth and yield.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe4 - Treatment
- herbicide treatmente4
- Interactor
- wild proso millete4weed
- Outcome
- wild proso millete4
- Qualifier
- without reducing soybean growth and yielde4
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e4“No herbicide treatment evaluated in soybeans controlled wild proso millet adequately for the entire growing season without reducing soybean growth and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Dinitroaniline herbicide treatments that controlled wild proso millet in peas did not perform similarly in soybeans.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe5 - Treatment
- dinitroaniline herbicidese5
- Interactor
- wild proso millete5weed
- Outcome
- perform similarlye5
- Comparator
- pease5
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e5“Treatments containing dinitroaniline herbicides, which controlled wild proso millet in peas and resulted in good yield, did not perform similarly in soybeans”
The same questions in other papers
trifluralin · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results differ
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →alpha-particle · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
trifluralin · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
herbicide · organism · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →herbicide · organism · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.