Cited by 5Weed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactionsAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems

Weed interference period and economic threshold level in barley

Open access
Leandro Galon, Felipe José Menin Basso, César Tiago Forte, Maico André Michelon Bagnara, Alessandra Gallina, Ignácio Aspiazú, André Luiz Radünz, Gismael Francisco Perin +1 more·2023·Journal of Plant Protection Research

Abstract

Determination of interference periods, competitive ability and economic threshold level (ETL) are important tools for integrated weed management (IWM) in barley.The objective of the work was to determine the periods of interference, the competitive ability and the ETL of weeds in barley (Hordeum vulgare).Two field experiments were carried out, in a randomized block design, with four replications.In this study, the periods of coexistence and control for ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) and turnip (Raphanus raphanistrum) infesting barley cultivar, cv.ANA 01 were evaluated.The coexistence periods and/or control were: 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42 and 120 days after barley emergence (DAE).In experiment 2the treatments for determination of ETLs were composed by barley cultivars (BRS Suábia, ANA 01, BRS Korbel, BRS Manduri, BRS Cauê and BRS Greta), and turnip densities, from zero (0) to maximum densities of 816, 788, 948, 394, 584 and 618 plants • m -2 , in competition with each cultivar.Control of turnip and ryegrass should be adopted in barley in the period between 12 to 22 DAE, which is described as a critical control period.The rectangular hyperbola adequately estimates losses in grain yield due to turnip infestation.There is an effect on the competitive ability of the cultivars in relation to turnip, which resulted in ETLs that ranged from 0.27 to 1.99 plants • m -2 .The cultivars BRS Greta, BRS Suábia, ANA 01 and BRS Manduri were the most competitive in the presence of turnip.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24425/jppr.2022.140295

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some weeds have developed resistance to herbicides that inhibit acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase (ACCase), acetolactate synthase (ALS), and enol pyruvyl shiquimate phosphate synthase (EPSPS), suggesting that herbicides with new modes of action are needed.

    “Some of these weeds have developed resistance to herbicides that inhibit acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase (ACCase), acetolactate synthase (ALS), and enol pyruvyl shiquimate phosphate synthase (EPSPS), suggesting that herbicides with new modes of action are needed (Galon et al., 2022).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Kumar V., Jha P. 2017. Influence of nitrogen rate, seeding rate, and weed removal timing on weed interference in barley and effect of nitrogen on weed response to herbicides. Weed Science 65 (1): 189-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1614/WS- D-16-00047. · DOI
  2. Paynter B.H., Hills A.L. 2009. Barley and rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) competition is influenced by crop cultivar and density. Weed Technology 23 (1): 40-48. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1614/WT-08-093. · DOI
  3. Swanton C.J., Nkoa R., Blackshaw R.E. 2015. Experimental methods for crop-weed competition studies. Weed Sci- ence 63 (2): 1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-13- 00062. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Galon, L., Basso, F. J. M., Forte, C. T., Bagnara, M. A. M., Gallina, A., Aspiazú, I., Radünz, A. L., Perin, G. F., & Brunetto, L.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul (BR)
  • Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros (BR)
Venue
Journal of Plant Protection Research
Published
2023-11-06
ISSN
  • 1427-4345 (ISSN-L)
  • 1899-007X
OpenAlex
W3202299781
Cited by
5
References
24
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.63
Type
journal article
Language
pl
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of Plant Protection Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (2019-5, 306927/2019-5)
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul
  • Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Weed Control and Herbicide Applications
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Allelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Keywords
economic threshold, barley, Lolium multiflorum, wild radish, turnip, ryegrass, integrated weed management, grain yield loss, rectangular hyperbola, barley cultivars, weed control timing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review