18 results
The role of lithology and climate on bedrock river incision and terrace development along the Buffalo National River, Arkansas
- Kathleen Rodrigues, Amanda Keen-Zebert, Stephanie Shepherd, Mark R. Hudson, Charles J. Bitting, Bradley G. Johnson, Abigail Langston
-
- Journal:
- Quaternary Research / Volume 115 / September 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 May 2023, pp. 179-193
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The Buffalo National River in northwest Arkansas preserves an extensive Quaternary record of fluvial bedrock incision and aggradation across lithologies of variable resistance. In this work, we apply optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating to strath and fill terraces along the Buffalo River to elucidate the role of lithology and climate on the development of the two youngest terrace units (Qtm and Qty). Our OSL ages suggest a minimum strath planation age of ca. 250 ka for the Qtm terraces followed by a ca. 200 ka record of aggradation. Qtm incision likely occurred near the last glacial maximum (LGM), prior to the onset of Qty fill terrace aggradation ca. 14 ka. Our terrace ages are broadly consistent with other regional terrace records, and comparison with available paleoclimatic archives suggests that terrace aggradation and incision occurred during drier and wetter hydrological conditions, respectively. Vertical bedrock incision rates were also calculated using OSL-derived estimates of Qtm strath planation and displayed statistically significant spatial variability with bedrock lithology, ranging from ~35 mm/ka in the higher resistance reaches and ~16 mm/ka in the lower resistance reaches. In combination with observations of valley width and terrace distribution, these results suggest that vertical processes outpace lateral ones in lithologic reaches with higher resistance.
Stakeholder-engaged research is necessary across the criminal-legal spectrum
- Part of
- Alysse G. Wurcel, Christina Kraus, O’Dell Johnson, Nicholas D. Zaller, Bradley Ray, Anne C. Spaulding, Tara Flynn, Cynthia Quinn, Ronald Day, Matthew J. Akiyama, Brandon Del Pozo, Fred Meyer, Jason E. Glenn
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue 1 / 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 November 2022, e5
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
People with lived experience of incarceration have higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to people without history of incarceration. Research conducted unethically in prisons and jails led to increased scrutiny of research to ensure the needs of those studied are protected. One consequence of increased restrictions on research with criminal-legal involved populations is reluctance to engage in research evaluations of healthcare for people who are incarcerated and people who have lived experience of incarceration. Ethical research can be done in partnership with people with lived experience of incarceration and other key stakeholders and should be encouraged. In this article, we describe how stakeholder engagement can be accomplished in this setting, and further, how such engagement leads to impactful research that can be disseminated and implemented across disciplines and communities. The goal is to build trust across the spectrum of people who work, live in, or are impacted by the criminal-legal system, with the purpose of moving toward health equity.
Consortium of Otolaryngology Journal Editors: collegiality and contributions
- Robert T Sataloff, Rakesh Chandra, Edward W Fisher, David Goldenberg, Ehab Y Hanna, Jonas Johnson, David W Kennedy, Dennis H Kraus, John H Krouse, Michael Link, Lawrence R Lustig, Bert W O'Malley, Jr,, Jay F Piccirillo, Robert Ruben, Sandra Schwartz, Samuel H Selesnick, Raj Sindwani, Richard J Smith, Michael G Stewart, James Tysome, Peter C Weber, D Bradley Welling
-
- Journal:
- The Journal of Laryngology & Otology / Volume 134 / Issue 5 / May 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 June 2020, pp. 379-380
- Print publication:
- May 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
Influence of Cover Crops on Management of Amaranthus Species in Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean
- Mark M. Loux, Anthony F. Dobbels, Kevin W. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Bryan G. Young, Douglas J. Spaunhorst, Jason K. Norsworthy, Matheus Palhano, Lawrence E. Steckel
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 31 / Issue 4 / August 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 August 2017, pp. 487-495
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
A field study was conducted for the 2014 and 2015 growing season in Arkansas, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Ohio, and Tennessee to determine the effect of cereal rye and either oats, radish, or annual ryegrass on the control of Amaranthus spp. when integrated with comprehensive herbicide programs in glyphosate-resistant and glufosinate-resistant soybean. Amaranthus species included redroot pigweed, waterhemp, and Palmer amaranth. The two herbicide programs included were: a PRE residual herbicide followed by POST application of foliar and residual herbicide (PRE/POST); or PRE residual herbicide followed by POST application of foliar and residual herbicide, followed by another POST application of residual herbicide (PRE/POST/POST). Control was not affected by type of soybean resistance trait. At the end of the season, herbicides controlled 100 and 96% of the redroot pigweed and Palmer amaranth, respectively, versus 49 and 29% in the absence of herbicides, averaged over sites and other factors. The PRE/POST and PRE/POST/POST herbicide treatments controlled 83 and 90% of waterhemp at the end of the season, respectively, versus 14% without herbicide. Cover crop treatments affected control of waterhemp and Palmer amaranth and soybean yield, only in the absence of herbicides. The rye cover crop consistently reduced Amaranthus spp. density in the absence of herbicides compared to no cover treatment.
Influence of Tillage Method on Management of Amaranthus Species in Soybean
- Jaime A. Farmer, Kevin W. Bradley, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, William G. Johnson, Jason K. Norsworthy, Vince M. Davis, Mark M. Loux
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 31 / Issue 1 / January 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 30 January 2017, pp. 10-20
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
A field study was conducted in 2014 and 2015 in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and Missouri to determine the effects of tillage system and herbicide program on season-long emergence of Amaranthus species in glufosinate-resistant soybean. The tillage systems evaluated were deep tillage (fall moldboard plow followed by (fb) one pass with a field cultivator in the spring), conventional tillage (fall chisel plow fb one pass with a field cultivator in the spring), minimum tillage (one pass of a vertical tillage tool in the spring), and no-tillage (PRE application of paraquat). Each tillage system also received one of two herbicide programs; PRE application of flumioxazin (0.09 kg ai ha–1) fb a POST application of glufosinate (0.59 kg ai ha−1) plus S-metolachlor (1.39 kg ai ha–1), or POST-only applications of glufosinate (0.59 kg ha−1). The deep tillage system resulted in a 62, 67, and 73% reduction in Amaranthus emergence when compared to the conventional, minimum, and no-tillage systems, respectively. The residual herbicide program also resulted in an 87% reduction in Amaranthus species emergence compared to the POST-only program. The deep tillage system, combined with the residual program, resulted in a 97% reduction in Amaranthus species emergence when compared to the minimum tillage system combined with the POST-only program, which had the highest Amaranthus emergence. Soil cores taken prior to planting and herbicide application revealed that only 28% of the Amaranthus seed in the deep tillage system was placed within the top 5-cm of the soil profile compared to 79, 81, and 77% in the conventional, minimum, and no-tillage systems. Overall, the use of deep tillage with a residual herbicide program provided the greatest reduction in Amaranthus species emergence, thus providing a useful tool in managing herbicide-resistant Amaranthus species where appropriate.
Post-glacial landscape response to climate variability in the southeastern San Juan Mountains of Colorado, USA
- Bradley G. Johnson, Martha Cary Eppes, John A. Diemer, Gonzalo Jiménez-Moreno, Anthony L. Layzell
-
- Journal:
- Quaternary Research / Volume 76 / Issue 3 / November 2011
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 352-362
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Geomorphic mapping in the upper Conejos River Valley of the San Juan Mountains has shown that three distinct periods of aggradation have occurred since the end of the last glacial maximum (LGM). The first occurred during the Pleistocene–Holocene transition (~ 12.5–9.5 ka) and is interpreted as paraglacial landscape response to deglaciation after the LGM. Evidence of the second period of aggradation is limited but indicates a small pulse of sedimentation at ~ 5.5 ka. A third, more broadly identifiable period of sedimentation occurred in the late Holocene (~ 2.2–1 ka). The latest two periods of aggradation are concurrent with increases in the frequency of climate change in the region suggesting that Holocene alpine and sub-alpine landscapes respond more to rapid changes in climate than to large singular climatic swings. Soil development and radiocarbon dating indicate that hillslopes were stable during the Holocene even while aggradation was occurring in valley bottoms. Thus, we can conclude that erosion does not occur equally throughout the landscape but is focused upslope of headwater streams, along tributary channels, or on ridge tops. This is in contrast to some models which assume equal erosion in headwater basins.
Herbicide Program Approaches for Managing Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus and Amaranthus rudis) in Future Soybean-Trait Technologies
- Christopher J. Meyer, Jason K. Norsworthy, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, Kevin W. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Mark M. Loux, Vince M. Davis, Greg R. Kruger, Mohammad T. Bararpour, Joseph T. Ikley, Douglas J. Spaunhorst, Thomas R. Butts
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 29 / Issue 4 / December 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 716-729
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Herbicide-resistant Amaranthus spp. continue to cause management difficulties in soybean. New soybean technologies under development, including resistance to various combinations of glyphosate, glufosinate, dicamba, 2,4-D, isoxaflutole, and mesotrione, will make possible the use of additional herbicide sites of action in soybean than is currently available. When this research was conducted, these soybean traits were still regulated and testing herbicide programs with the appropriate soybean genetics in a single experiment was not feasible. Therefore, the effectiveness of various herbicide programs (PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides) was evaluated in bare-ground experiments on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and glyphosate-resistant waterhemp (both tall and common) at locations in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, and Tennessee. Twenty-five herbicide programs were evaluated; 5 of which were PRE herbicides only, 10 were PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides 3 to 4 wks after (WA) the PRE application (EPOST), and 10 were PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides 6 to 7 WA the PRE application (LPOST). Programs with EPOST herbicides provided 94% or greater control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp at 3 to 4 WA the EPOST. Overall, programs with LPOST herbicides resulted in a period of weed emergence in which weeds would typically compete with a crop. Weeds were not completely controlled with the LPOST herbicides because weed sizes were larger (≥ 15 cm) compared with their sizes at the EPOST application (≤ 7 cm). Most programs with LPOST herbicides provided 80 to 95% control at 3 to 4 WA applied LPOST. Based on an orthogonal contrast, using a synthetic-auxin herbicide LPOST improves control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp over programs not containing a synthetic-auxin LPOST. These results show herbicides that can be used in soybean and that contain auxinic- or HPPD-resistant traits will provide growers with an opportunity for better control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and waterhemp over a wide range of geographies and environments.
Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the foliar activity of mesotrione
- Bradley C. Johnson, Bryan G. Young
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 50 / Issue 2 / April 2002
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 157-161
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Greenhouse studies were conducted to examine the influence of temperature and relative humidity (RH) on the foliar activity of mesotrione on five weed species. Regression analysis was performed allowing for comparison of estimated GR50 (herbicide dose to inhibit growth by 50%) values for each weed response at either temperature (18 or 32 C) or RH level (30 or 85%). Temperature and relative humidity did not influence the response of ivyleaf morningglory, common cocklebur, and velvetleaf to mesotrione markedly. An increase in temperature or relative humidity increased the efficacy of mesotrione on common cocklebur and velvetleaf up to threefold. Conversely, common waterhemp and large crabgrass were six- and sevenfold more susceptible at 18 C than at 32 C, respectively. Common waterhemp and large crabgrass were four- and twofold more susceptible to mesotrione at 85% compared with 30% RH, respectively. The influence of temperature and RH on the efficacy of mesotrione in foliar applications is species dependent and may be an important consideration for field applications.
Reduced Translocation Is Associated with Tolerance of Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) to Glyphosate
- Melinda K. Yerka, Andrew T. Wiersma, R. Bradley Lindenmayer, Philip Westra, William G. Johnson, Natalia de Leon, David E. Stoltenberg
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 61 / Issue 3 / September 2013
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 353-360
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Common lambsquarters tolerance to glyphosate is problematic because of the species' widespread distribution, competitive ability with many crop species, the widespread use of glyphosate in agriculture, and the weed's potential to develop decreased sensitivity to multiple herbicide sites of action. The mechanism that confers common lambsquarters tolerance to glyphosate is not known. Therefore, we conducted experiments to determine the mechanism of tolerance to glyphosate in an accession of common lambsquarters from Indiana relative to a sensitive accession from Wisconsin. The ED50 (the effective dose that reduced shoot mass 50% relative to nontreated plants) value for the tolerant accession (1.6 kg ae ha−1 ± 0.4 standard error of the mean [SEM]) was eightfold greater than the ED50 for the sensitive accession (0.2 kg ae ha−1 ± 0.2 SEM) 28 d after treatment. The glyphosate target-site (EPSPS) DNA sequence at proline 106, shikimate accumulation as an estimate of EPSPS sensitivity, and EPSPS protein abundance did not differ between accessions. Absorption of 14C-glyphosate was slightly greater in the tolerant accession than it was in the sensitive accession at 48 and 72 h after treatment (HAT). However, the tolerant accession translocated a smaller percentage of absorbed 14C-glyphosate to the tissue above the treated leaf, which included the shoot apical meristem, at 24, 48, and 72 HAT (P ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.10, respectively). These results suggest an important role of reduced translocation in conferring tolerance of common lambsquarters to glyphosate.
Response of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Atrazine, Ammonium Sulfate, and Glyphosate1
- Pauley R. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Reid J. Smeda
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 14 / Issue 1 / March 2000
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 15-18
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Experiments were conducted to determine whether antagonism between atrazine and glyphosate on shattercane observed in field studies could be duplicated under greenhouse conditions on ‘Rox Orange’ forage sorghum and whether it could be overcome by the addition of ammonium sulfate, other adjuvants, or additional glyphosate. Atrazine or surfactant added to glyphosate did not significantly affect sorghum dry weights compared to glyphosate alone. The Colby equation for synergism indicated that atrazine did not antagonize sorghum control with glyphosate in the greenhouse. Glyphosate at 0.43 kg ae/ha plus ammonium sulfate provided greater control of sorghum than glyphosate at 0.43 kg/ha without ammonium sulfate; however, glyphosate at 0.84 kg/ha plus ammonium sulfate did not provide greater control of sorghum than glyphosate at 0.84 kg/ha without ammonium sulfate. Reduced activity of glyphosate at 0.43 kg/ha in the absence of ammonium sulfate was likely due to an abundance of calcium cations in the carrier water that associated with glyphosate molecules and subsequently reduced herbicide uptake by plants. Thus, antagonism observed under cool conditions in field studies was not evident in controlled-temperature greenhouse studies.
Comparison of Weed Management Systems in Narrow-Row, Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean (Glycine max)
- Michelle L. Wiesbrook, William G. Johnson, Stephen E. Hart, Pauley R. Bradley, Loyd M. Wax
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 15 / Issue 1 / March 2001
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 122-128
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments were conducted near DeKalb and Urbana, IL, and Columbia, MO, in 1997 and 1998 to evaluate weed management systems in glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant soybean planted in 18-cm rows. Overall weed control was improved to a greater extent when the rate of glufosinate was increased from 300 to 400 g ai/ha than when the rate of glyphosate increased from 630 to 840 g ae/ha. Sequential applications of glufosinate improved control over single applications, whereas sequential treatments of glyphosate generally provided no advantages over single applications. When averaged across all weed species in these trials, the systems that provided 95% or higher average control were sequential applications of glufosinate, sequential applications of glyphosate, and clomazone followed by (fb) glyphosate. Single applications of glufosinate provided somewhat variable control of giant foxtail, common lambsquarters, ragweed, and common cocklebur similar to that observed with pendimethalin fb imazethapyr. The addition of fomesafen to glufosinate did not improve control of any of the weeds in this study with the exception of velvetleaf at DeKalb. The addition of clomazone to glufosinate treatments resulted in slightly better giant foxtail and velvetleaf control. Single applications of glyphosate provided somewhat variable control of giant ragweed at DeKalb in 1997 and ivyleaf morningglory and common cocklebur control at Columbia. The addition of fomesafen to glyphosate provided an increase in ivyleaf morningglory and common cocklebur control at Columbia but did not improve control of any other species. The addition of clomazone to glyphosate-based programs resulted in slightly higher velvetleaf, common cocklebur, and ivyleaf morningglory control. In the glyphosate-based herbicide programs there were no substantial differences in relative yield, with all programs protecting over 95% of soybean yield. Glufosinate-based programs were effective in protecting 85 to 92% of soybean yield.
Effect of Postemergence Application Rate and Timing of Mesotrione on Corn (Zea mays) Response and Weed Control
- Bradley C. Johnson, Bryan G. Young, Joseph L. Matthews
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 16 / Issue 2 / June 2002
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 414-420
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments were conducted in 1999 and 2000 to determine the influence of mesotrione postemergence application rate, application timing, and addition of atrazine on corn injury, weed control, and corn grain yield. Corn injury in the form of leaf bleaching ranged from 0 to 15% at 7 d after treatment (DAT). In general, most of the bleaching injury rapidly dissipated with slight (≤ 8%) to no corn injury observed at 28 DAT. Control of common cocklebur with mesotrione at 14 DAT ranged from 79 to 98% for all treatments over both years. Applying mesotrione at 140 g/ha, at the early postemergence (EPOST) timing, or in combination with atrazine provided the greatest control of common cocklebur at 14 DAT. Application rate of mesotrione was the only factor that was significant in both years for control of common cocklebur later in the season at 56 DAT. Control of ivyleaf morningglory with mesostrione at 14 DAT ranged from 60 to 90% for all treatments in both years. Control of ivyleaf morningglory at 14 DAT was enhanced by the addition of atrazine to mesotrione. Control of ivyleaf morningglory at 56 DAT was greater with mid-postemergence and late postemergence than with EPOST applications, and was generally enhanced by the addition of atrazine. Yellow nutsedge control with mesotrione was inconsistent, ranging from 40 to 87% at 14 DAT for all treatments over both years. The addition of atrazine to mesotrione increased yellow nutsedge control from 47 to 87% at 14 DAT in 2000. Increasing the rate of mesotrione from 70 to 140 g/ha, as well as the addition of atrazine, improved control of yellow nutsedge at 56 DAT. Corn grain yield was not affected by corn injury or weed control as there were no significant differences in grain yield between herbicide-treated plots and handweeded plots.
Economics of Weed Management in Glufosinate-Resistant Corn (Zea mays L.)1
- Pauley R. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Stephen E. Hart, Michelle L. Buesinger, Raymond E. Massey
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 14 / Issue 3 / September 2000
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 495-501
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments were conducted in 1997 and 1998 near Columbia and Novelty, MO, and at Urbana, IL, to evaluate corn injury, weed control, corn yield, and estimated economic returns with weed management programs in glufosinate-resistant corn. Herbicide programs included acetochlor preemergence (PRE) followed by glufosinate alone or with atrazine postemergence (POST) and total POST programs consisting of single and sequential applications of glufosinate alone or tank mixed with acetochlor, atrazine, or acetochlor plus atrazine. Metolachlor PRE followed by dicamba plus atrazine early POST (EPOST) and metolachlor plus atrazine PRE were included for comparison. In the total POST treatments, mid-POST applications controlled shattercane and common cocklebur better than EPOST applications. However, yield reductions as high as 23% occurred because of early-season weed interference, although weeds were controlled later in the season. Applying atrazine with glufosinate generally increased control of giant foxtail, common cocklebur, morningglory species, and common waterhemp compared to glufosinate alone, but did not increase control of common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, or Pennsylvania smartweed. Corn yield was positively correlated with weed control (r = 0.88) and more strongly dependent on grass (r = 0.82) than broadleaf (r = 0.70) weed control. Net incomes were positively correlated to corn yield (r = 0.73). Four of the top six net income-producing treatments included two herbicide applications. Three of the treatments were PRE followed by POST programs, and the fourth was a sequential POST treatment of glufosinate.
Early-Season Palmer Amaranth and Waterhemp Control from Preemergence Programs Utilizing 4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate Dioxygenase–Inhibiting and Auxinic Herbicides in Soybean
- Christopher J. Meyer, Jason K. Norsworthy, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, Kevin W. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Mark M. Loux, Vince M. Davis, Greg R. Kruger, Mohammad T. Bararpour, Joseph T. Ikley, Douglas J. Spaunhorst, Thomas R. Butts
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 30 / Issue 1 / March 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 67-75
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Palmer amaranth and waterhemp have become increasingly troublesome weeds throughout the United States. Both species are highly adaptable and emerge continuously throughout the summer months, presenting the need for a residual PRE application in soybean. To improve season-long control of Amaranthus spp., 19 PRE treatments were evaluated on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth in 2013 and 2014 at locations in Arkansas, Indiana, Nebraska, Illinois, and Tennessee; and on glyphosate-resistant waterhemp at locations in Illinois, Missouri, and Nebraska. The two Amaranthus species were analyzed separately; data for each species were pooled across site-years, and site-year was included as a random variable in the analyses. The dissipation of weed control throughout the course of the experiments was compared among treatments with the use of regression analysis where percent weed control was described as a function of time (the number of weeks after treatment [WAT]). At the mean (i.e., average) WAT (4.3 and 3.2 WAT for Palmer amaranth and waterhemp, respectively) isoxaflutole + S-metolachlor + metribuzin had the highest predicted control of Palmer amaranth (98%) and waterhemp (99%). Isoxaflutole + S-metolachlor + metribuzin, S-metolachlor + mesotrione, and flumioxazin + pyroxasulfone had a predicted control ≥ 97% and similar model parameter estimates, indicating control declined at similar rates for these treatments. Dicamba and 2,4-D provided some, short-lived residual control of Amaranthus spp. When dicamba was added to metribuzin or S-metolachlor, control increased compared to dicamba alone. Flumioxazin + pyroxasulfone, a currently labeled PRE, performed similarly to treatments containing isoxaflutole or mesotrione. Additional sites of action will provide soybean growers more opportunities to control these weeds and reduce the potential for herbicide resistance.
Efficacy and Economics of Weed Management in Glyphosate-Resistant Corn (Zea mays)1
- William G. Johnson, Pauley R. Bradley, Stephen E. Hart, Michelle L. Buesinger, Raymond E. Massey
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 14 / Issue 1 / March 2000
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 57-65
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments were conducted in 1997 and 1998 near Columbia and Novelty, MO, and Urbana, IL, to evaluate crop injury, weed control, corn yield, and net economic returns provided by weed control programs in glyphosate-resistant corn. The herbicide programs evaluated included acetochlor preemergence (PRE) followed by (fb) glyphosate with or without atrazine postemergence (POST) and total POST programs consisting of single and sequential applications of glyphosate alone and tank-mixed with actochlor, atrazine, or both. Metolachlor PRE fb dicamba plus atrazine POST and metolachlor plus atrazine PRE were included for comparison. In the total POST treatments, mid-post (MPOST) applications provided better control than early-post (EPOST) applications on weeds that germinated throughout the growing season such as shattercane and common cocklebur, but also resulted in yield reductions of up to 23% caused by early-season weed competition. The addition of atrazine to glyphosate POST generally increased control of common cocklebur, morningglory species, and common waterhemp. EPOST or PRE fb EPOST applications generally provided higher yields than MPOST treatments, although MPOST treatments often provided equal or greater weed control at midseason. Treatments including two herbicide applications tended to provide greater weed control, yield, and profit than those with a single application. Input costs for glyphosate-resistant corn are slightly higher than nontransgenic hybrids. However, net economic returns are similar and the use of glyphosate POST allows greater flexibility in POST weed management decisions.
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Amr Abbasy, Mostafa I. Abuzeid, Omar M. Abuzeid, Gautam N. Allahbadia, Sarika Arora, Norman Assad, Awoniyi O. Awonuga, Osama M. Azmy, Shawky Z. A. Badawy, Haitham Badran, Jashoman Banerjee, M. N. Baumgarten, Donna C. Bennett, Josef Blankstein, Joel Brasch, Spyridon Chouliaras, Kathryn H. Clarke, Hans Peter Dietz, Jan Gerris, Harold Henning, Candice P. Holliday, Nicolette Holliday, Sadie Hutson, Kannamannadiar Jayaprakasan, Samuel Johnson, Salem K. Joseph, Asim Kurjak, John LaFleur, David F. Lewis, Kazuo Maeda, Rizwan Malik, Ehab Abu Marar, Rubina Merchant, Luciano G. Nardo, Geeta Nargund, Sheri A. Owens, Sree Durga Patchava, L. T. Polanski, Misty M. Blanchette Porter, Elizabeth E. Puscheck, Nicholas J. Raine-Fenning, Botros R. M. B. Rizk, Valerie Shavell, Osama Shawki, James Shwayder, Bruce Singer, Manvinder Singh, Beverly A. Spirt, Julie Sroga, Bradley J. Van Voorhis, Amr Hassan Wahba, Carrie Warshak, Terri L. Woodard
- Edited by Botros R. M. B. Rizk, University of South Alabama, Elizabeth E. Puscheck, Wayne State University, Detroit
-
- Book:
- Ultrasonography in Gynecology
- Published online:
- 05 February 2015
- Print publication:
- 16 October 2014, pp xiii-xvi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Mohamed Aboulghar, Ahmed Abou-Setta, Mary E. Abusief, G. David Adamson, R. J. Aitken, Hesham Al-Inany, Baris Ata, Hamdy Azab, Adam Balen, David H. Barad, Pedro N. Barri, C. Blockeel, Giuseppe Botta, Mark Bowman, Chris Brewer, Dominique M. Butawan, Sandra A. Carson, Hai Ying Chen, Anne Clark, Buenaventura Coroleu, S. Das, C. Dechanet, H. Déchaud, Cora de Klerk, Sheryl de Lacey, S. Deutsch-Bringer, P. Devroey, Didier Dewailly, Hakan E. Duran, Walid El Sherbiny, Tarek El-Toukhy, Johannes L. H. Evers, Cynthia Farquhar, Rodney D. Franklin, Juan A. Garcia-Velasco, David K. Gardner, Norbert Gleicher, Gedis Grudzinskas, Roger Hart, B Hédon, Colin M. Howles, Jack Yu Jen Huang, N. P. Johnson, Hey-Joo Kang, Gab Kovacs, Ben Kroon, Anver Kuliev, William H. Kutteh, Nick Macklon, Ragaa Mansour, Lamiya Mohiyiddeen, Lisa J. Moran, David Mortimer, Sharon T. Mortimer, Luciano G. Nardo, Robert J. Norman, Willem Ombelet, Luk Rombauts, Zev Rosenwaks, Francisco J. Ruiz Flores, Anthony J. Rutherford, Gavin Sacks, Denny Sakkas, M. W. Seif, Ayse Seyhan, Caroline Smith, Kate Stern, Elizabeth A. Sullivan, Sesh Kamal Sunkara, Seang Lin Tan, Mohamed Taranissi, Kelton P. Tremellen, Wendy S. Vitek, V. Vloeberghs, Bradley J. Van Voorhis, S. F. van Voorst, Amr Wahba, Yueping A. Wang, Klaus E. Wiemer
- Edited by Gab Kovacs, Monash University, Victoria
-
- Book:
- How to Improve your ART Success Rates
- Published online:
- 05 July 2011
- Print publication:
- 30 June 2011, pp viii-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation