29 results
23 - Wolf–Beaver Dynamics in the Greater Voyageurs Ecosystem, Minnesota
- Edited by Ian Convery, University of Cumbria, Owen T. Nevin, Central Queensland University and University of Cumbria, Erwin van Maanen, Peter Davis, Newcastle University, Karen Lloyd, Lancaster University
-
- Book:
- The Wolf
- Published by:
- Boydell & Brewer
- Published online:
- 10 January 2024
- Print publication:
- 18 July 2023, pp 259-272
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In the heart of the boreal forest in 1949, trappers gathered at a spring meeting in Wabowden, Manitoba, to discuss many items of business, including wolf predation on beavers. Recent debate and disagreement had broken out among the trappers regarding whether wolves actually killed beavers. One trapper stated wolves ‘harassed’ a beaver colony so extensively that he had to fell trees into the water to ensure the colony's survival. Some trappers remained sceptical and unconvinced. The debate was put to a lively and emphatic end when a trapper walked into the spring meeting and presented a bushel sack stuffed with wolf scats containing beaver fur (Nash 1951). The proof was in the poop!
Surprisingly, our understanding of wolf predation on beavers has progressed relatively little since 1949. Most attempts to study wolf predation on beavers followed an approach akin to the Manitoba trappers: collecting and examining wolf scats. By doing this, researchers in many areas across North America and Eurasia concluded, like the trappers, that beavers were important prey for wolves during the ice-free season. However, wolf–beaver dynamics received little attention beyond this, largely because (1) most wolf predation research was focused on wolf–ungulate interactions and predation on smaller alternate prey was not a priority (Gable et al 2018c), and (2) rigorously studying wolf predation during spring to autumn in forested ecosystems with dense vegetation was a monumental, and often impossible, task prior to GPS collar technology. Of course, many researchers and biologists had interesting ideas or hypotheses about wolf–beaver interactions, but most were based on anecdotal observations, indirect evidence or conjecture (Gable et al 2018c). None the less, these ideas were compelling and relevant. Some suggested dense beaver populations increased wolf pup survival (Benson et al 2013) and, in turn, wolf pack and population size (Andersone 1999; Barber-Meyer et al 2016). Others posited that dense beaver populations reduced wolf predation on ungulate prey (Forbes and Theberge 1996) while some claimed it increased predation (Andersone and Ozoliņš 2004; Latham et al 2013). Still others suspected wolves changed ecosystems by altering the ecosystem engineering behaviour of beavers (Peterson et al 2014). Clearly, wolf–beaver dynamics needed to be studied in more detail.
16 - Computational Models of Decision Making
- from Part III - Computational Modeling of Basic Cognitive Functionalities
- Edited by Ron Sun, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, New York
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Cognitive Sciences
- Published online:
- 21 April 2023
- Print publication:
- 11 May 2023, pp 499-526
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter introduces computational models of decision making as worthy successors to the traditional, algebraic utility framework that has dominated the field. It provides an overview of several different computational modeling approaches before providing a detailed example of perhaps the most well-established of these, based on sequential sampling of information and evidence accumulation. It is shown how this approach can account for common paradoxes in decision behavior, and how it can be extended to a variety of tasks and response modes while retaining the same basic cognitive principles. The chapter concludes with an illustration of how process-tracing methods that capture the information acquisition and response processes can help to evaluate computational models of decision making and discriminate among them.
361 WDR5 represents a therapeutically exploitable target for cancer stem cells in glioblastoma
- Part of
- Christopher Hubert, Kelly Mitchell, Samuel Sprowls, Sajina Shakya, Sonali Arora, Daniel J. Silver, Christopher M. Goins, Lisa Wallace, Gustavo Roversi, Rachel Schafer, Kristen Kay, Tyler E. Miller, Adam Lauko, John Bassett, Anjali Kashyap, J. D’Amato Kass, Erin E. Mulkearns-Hubert, Sadie Johnson, Joseph Alvarado, Jeremy N. Rich, Patrick J. Paddison, Anoop P. Patel, Shaun R. Stauffer, Christopher G. Hubert, Justin D. Lathia
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 7 / Issue s1 / April 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 April 2023, p. 107
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Glioblastomas (GBMs) are heterogeneous, treatment-resistant tumors that are driven by populations of cancer stem cells (CSCs). In this study, we perform an epigenetic-focused functional genomics screen in GBM organoids and identify WDR5 as an essential epigenetic regulator in the SOX2-enriched, therapy resistant cancer stem cell niche. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Despite their importance for tumor growth, few molecular mechanisms critical for CSC population maintenance have been exploited for therapeutic development. We developed a spatially resolved loss-of-function screen in GBM patient-derived organoids to identify essential epigenetic regulators in the SOX2-enriched, therapy resistant niche. Our niche-specific screens identified WDR5, an H3K4 histone methyltransferase responsible for activating specific gene expression, as indispensable for GBM CSC growth and survival. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In GBM CSC models, WDR5 inhibitors blocked WRAD complex assembly and reduced H3K4 trimethylation and expression of genes involved in CSC-relevant oncogenic pathways. H3K4me3 peaks lost with WDR5 inhibitor treatment occurred disproportionally on POU transcription factor motifs, required for stem cell maintenance and including the POU5F1(OCT4)::SOX2 motif. We incorporated a SOX2/OCT4 motif driven GFP reporter system into our CSC cell models and found that WDR5 inhibitor treatment resulted in dose-dependent silencing of stem cell reporter activity. Further, WDR5 inhibitor treatment altered the stem cell state, disrupting CSC in vitro growth and self-renewal as well as in vivo tumor growth. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results unveiled the role of WDR5 in maintaining the CSC state in GBM and provide a rationale for therapeutic development of WDR5 inhibitors for GBM and other advanced cancers. This conceptual and experimental framework can be applied to many cancers, and can unmask unique microenvironmental biology and rationally designed combination therapies.
Procedural and economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to minimize financial losses
- Daniel A. DeCaro, Marci S. DeCaro, Jared M. Hotaling, Joseph G. Johnson
-
- Journal:
- Judgment and Decision Making / Volume 15 / Issue 4 / July 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 01 January 2023, pp. 517-533
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Work on procedural utility suggests that decision makers derive more value from outcomes earned with freedom of choice. We experimentally tested tradeoffs between procedural and outcome utility, examining financial losses as an important boundary condition. Participants completed a simulated consumer sales task (Exp. 1) or card task (Exp. 2) with or without choice. Participants reported their satisfaction with monetary outcomes. When given choice, participants reported greater self-determination. Participants also reported higher outcome satisfaction, but only for gains. Choice did not influence satisfaction for losses. In Experiment 2, Participants also preferred choice when selecting between financial gains. However, when choice was costly (large disparity in pay) or posed losses, most participants sacrificed choice for better payoffs. Results are consistent with a cognitive model in which participants shift their attention from procedural utilities to financial outcomes when faced with losses. Financial outcomes may take precedence over choice when financial outcomes are threatened.
Response dynamics: A new window on the decision process
- Gregory J. Koop, Joseph G. Johnson
-
- Journal:
- Judgment and Decision Making / Volume 6 / Issue 8 / December 2011
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 01 January 2023, pp. 750-758
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
The history of judgment and decision making is defined by a trend toward increasingly nuanced explanations of the decision making process. Recently, process models have become incredibly sophisticated, yet the tools available to directly test these models have not kept pace. These increasingly complex process models require increasingly complex process data by which they can be adequately tested. We propose a new class of data collection that will facilitate evaluation of sophisticated process models. Tracking mouse paths during a continuous response provides an implicit measure of the growth of preference that produces a choice—rather than the current practice of recording just the button press that indicates that choice itself. Recent research in cognitive science (Spivey & Dale, 2006) has shown that cognitive processing can be revealed in these dynamic motor responses. Unlike current process methodologies, these response dynamics studies can demonstrate continuous competition between choice options and even online preference reversals. Here, in order to demonstrate the mechanics and utility of the methodology, we present an example response dynamics experiment utilizing a common multi-alternative decision task.
Applying the decision moving window to risky choice: Comparison of eye-tracking and mouse-tracing methods
- Ana M. Franco-Watkins, Joseph G. Johnson
-
- Journal:
- Judgment and Decision Making / Volume 6 / Issue 8 / December 2011
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 01 January 2023, pp. 740-749
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Currently, a disparity exists between the process-level models decision researchers use to describe and predict decision behavior and the methods implemented and metrics collected to test these models. The current work seeks to remedy this disparity by combining the advantages of work in decision research (mouse-tracing paradigms with contingent information display) and cognitive psychology (eye-tracking paradigms from reading and scene perception). In particular, we introduce a new decision moving-window paradigm that presents stimulus information contingent on eye fixations. We provide data from the first application of this method to risky decision making, and show how it compares to basic eye-tracking and mouse-tracing methods. We also enumerate the practical, theoretical, and analytic advantages this method offers above and beyond both mouse-tracing with occlusion and basic eye tracking of information without occlusion. We include the use of new metrics that offer more precision than those typically calculated on mouse-tracing data as well as those not possible or feasible within the mouse-tracing paradigm.
Effects of Paraquat and Alachlor on Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) Growth, Maturity, and Yield
- W. Carroll Johnson III, Joseph R. Chamberlin, Timothy B. Brenneman, James W. Todd, Benjamin G. Mullinix, Jr., John Cardina
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 7 / Issue 4 / December 1993
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 12 June 2017, pp. 855-859
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Studies were conducted in 1988, 1989, and 1992 in Plains, GA to measure effects of paraquat and alachlor on ‘Florunner’ peanut. Peanut treated with paraquat (0.14 kg ai/ha) plus alachlor (3.4 kg ai/ha) applied at vegetative emergence (VE), or paraquat plus alachlor VE followed by paraquat 28 days after emergence (DAE) were compared with a nontreated control. Both herbicide treatments reduced peanut foliage biomass at 65 DAE in 1989 and 1992. Herbicide treatments did not affect foliage biomass 90 DAE in 1988 and 122 DAE in 1989, but paraquat plus alachlor followed by paraquat reduced foliage biomass at 122 DAE in 1992. Pod biomass, measured at 90 and 65 DAE in 1988 and 1992, respectively, was reduced by herbicides. However, pod biomass did not differ among treatments 122 DAE in 1989 and 1992. Percent reflectance from the peanut canopy measured no effects from herbicides in 1988. However, in 1989 and 1992 herbicides applied sequentially reduced peanut canopy development. Peanut treated with a single herbicide and sequentially took longer to mature. Once optimum maturity was reached, peanut yields were not reduced.
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.
Late-Emerging Common Waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) Interference in Conventional Tillage Corn
- Joseph C. Cordes, William G. Johnson, Peter Scharf, Reid J. Smeda
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 18 / Issue 4 / December 2004
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 999-1005
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Waterhemp has emerged as one of the most problematic weeds in agronomic crops in the Midwest because of an extended germination period and widespread occurrence of biotypes resistant to atrazine and sulfonylurea herbicides. However, the competitive effects of late-emerging cohorts on corn yield are not known. Field studies were conducted in 2001 and 2002 at Columbia, Novelty, and Albany, MO, to determine the effects of late-emerging waterhemp interference on corn growth, nitrogen (N) accumulation, and yield. Waterhemp emerged approximately 20 d after planting (DAP) and was treated at heights of 8, 15, 23, 31, 38, or 46 cm with directed applications of dicamba + diflufenzopyr followed by hand hoeing. Soil water status, corn leaf chlorophyll content, and corn and common waterhemp height were recorded at the time of waterhemp removal. N stress was detected with a chlorophyll meter at four of six removal timings at high waterhemp densities (362 or more plants/m2) but only at one of six removal timings at lower densities (82 or less plants/m2). Water stress was observed at five of the six removal timings at high densities but at none of the removal timings at low densities. High waterhemp densities reduced corn yield when allowed to reach 15 cm before removal, and yields were reduced 36% when not controlled. At low densities, yield losses did not occur unless waterhemp was allowed to remain with corn season long. Our research suggests that waterhemp is less competitive with corn than redroot pigweed, smooth pigweed, and Palmer amaranth. In addition, low densities of late-emerging waterhemp would not warrant removal to protect corn yield.
Timing of Soil-Residual Herbicide Applications for Control of Giant Ragweed (Ambrosia trifida)
- R. Joseph Wuerffel, Julie M. Young, Joseph L. Matthews, Vince M. Davis, William G. Johnson, Bryan G. Young
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 29 / Issue 4 / December 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 771-781
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Fall-applied residual and spring preplant burn-down herbicide applications are typically used to control winter annual weeds and may also provide early-season residual control of summer annual weed species such as giant ragweed. Field experiments were conducted from 2006 to 2008 in southern Illinois to (1) assess the emergence pattern of giant ragweed, (2) evaluate the efficacy of several herbicides commonly used for soil-residual control of giant ragweed, and (3) investigate the optimal application timing of soil-residual herbicides for control of giant ragweed. Six herbicide treatments were applied at four application timings: early fall, late fall, early spring, and late spring. Giant ragweed first emerged in mid- and late-March in 2007 and 2008, respectively. The duration of emergence varied by year, with 95% of emergence complete in late May of 2008, but not until early July in 2007. Giant ragweed emergence occurred more quickly in plots that received a fall application of glyphosate + 2,4-D compared with the nontreated. Fall-applied residual herbicides did not reduce giant ragweed emergence in 2007 when compared with the nontreated, with the exception of chlorimuron + tribenuron applied in late fall. Giant ragweed control from early- and late-spring herbicide applications was variable by year. In 2007, saflufenacil (50 and 100 g ai ha−1) and simazine applied in early spring reduced giant ragweed densities by 95% or greater through mid-May; however, in 2008, early-spring applications failed to reduce giant ragweed emergence in mid-April. The only treatments that reduced giant ragweed densities by > 80% through early July were late-spring applications of chlorimuron + tribenuron or saflufenacil at 100 g ha−1. Thus, the emergence patterns of giant ragweed in southern Illinois dictates that best management with herbicides would include late-spring applications of soil-residual herbicides just before crop planting and most likely requires subsequent control with foliar or soil-residual herbicides after crop emergence.
Annual Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense), and Large Crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) are Alternative Hosts for Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. nebraskensis, Causal Agent of Goss's Wilt of Corn
- Joseph T. Ikley, Kiersten A. Wise, William G. Johnson
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 63 / Issue 4 / December 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 901-909
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Goss's bacterial wilt and leaf blight of corn is caused by the bacterium Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. nebraskensis (Cmn). This disease has recently re-emerged as an important disease in the Midwestern United States (US) and continues to spread. Cultural practices are currently the only methods available for controlling the disease. Weedy species in the genera Echinochloa, Setaria, and Sorghum have previously been described as alternative hosts of Cmn. The objective of this research was to use an isolate of Cmn from the eastern Midwest to examine the host status of previously confirmed hosts, as well as test whether additional weedy or cover crop species are alternative hosts of the bacterium. Plants were inoculated with a suspension of 1 × 108 colony-forming units of Cmn per milliliter in a greenhouse experiment. Leaves were observed for typical symptoms of Goss's wilt 7 d after inoculation. Pathogen presence was determined by observing bacterial streaming microscopically, and isolating Cmn from symptomatic plants. Putative colonies of Cmn were confirmed with the use of morphological and molecular methods. Koch's Postulates were completed on populations of new plant species that showed symptoms. Results revealed three new hosts of Cmn: annual ryegrass, johnsongrass, and large crabgrass. In contradiction to previous reports, barnyardgrass was not a host of Cmn in this study. Results also confirm that giant foxtail, green foxtail, shattercane, and yellow foxtail are hosts of Cmn. These results redefine the known host range of Cmn and are important in identifying additional sources of inoculum to improve our understanding of the epidemiology of Goss's wilt.
Summary of the Snowmastodon Project Special Volume A high-elevation, multi-proxy biotic and environmental record of MIS 6–4 from the Ziegler Reservoir fossil site, Snowmass Village, Colorado, USA
- Ian M. Miller, Jeffrey S. Pigati, R. Scott Anderson, Kirk R. Johnson, Shannon A. Mahan, Thomas A. Ager, Richard G. Baker, Maarten Blaauw, Jordon Bright, Peter M. Brown, Bruce Bryant, Zachary T. Calamari, Paul E. Carrara, Michael D. Cherney, John R. Demboski, Scott A. Elias, Daniel C. Fisher, Harrison J. Gray, Danielle R. Haskett, Jeffrey S. Honke, Stephen T. Jackson, Gonzalo Jiménez-Moreno, Douglas Kline, Eric M. Leonard, Nathaniel A. Lifton, Carol Lucking, H. Gregory McDonald, Dane M. Miller, Daniel R. Muhs, Stephen E. Nash, Cody Newton, James B. Paces, Lesley Petrie, Mitchell A. Plummer, David F. Porinchu, Adam N. Rountrey, Eric Scott, Joseph J.W. Sertich, Saxon E. Sharpe, Gary L. Skipp, Laura E. Strickland, Richard K. Stucky, Robert S. Thompson, Jim Wilson
-
- Journal:
- Quaternary Research / Volume 82 / Issue 3 / November 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 618-634
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
In North America, terrestrial records of biodiversity and climate change that span Marine Oxygen Isotope Stage (MIS) 5 are rare. Where found, they provide insight into how the coupling of the ocean–atmosphere system is manifested in biotic and environmental records and how the biosphere responds to climate change. In 2010–2011, construction at Ziegler Reservoir near Snowmass Village, Colorado (USA) revealed a nearly continuous, lacustrine/wetland sedimentary sequence that preserved evidence of past plant communities between ~140 and 55 ka, including all of MIS 5. At an elevation of 2705 m, the Ziegler Reservoir fossil site also contained thousands of well-preserved bones of late Pleistocene megafauna, including mastodons, mammoths, ground sloths, horses, camels, deer, bison, black bear, coyotes, and bighorn sheep. In addition, the site contained more than 26,000 bones from at least 30 species of small animals including salamanders, otters, muskrats, minks, rabbits, beavers, frogs, lizards, snakes, fish, and birds. The combination of macro- and micro-vertebrates, invertebrates, terrestrial and aquatic plant macrofossils, a detailed pollen record, and a robust, directly dated stratigraphic framework shows that high-elevation ecosystems in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado are climatically sensitive and varied dramatically throughout MIS 5.
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.
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.
The Growth and Development of Five Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Populations in a Common Garden
- Joseph M. Heneghan, William G. Johnson
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 65 / Issue 2 / March 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 12 January 2017, pp. 247-255
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Waterhemp is a weed indigenous to the midwestern United States and is problematic in agronomic crop production. This weed is well suited to inhabit minimally tilled environments and is increasing in prevalence across many agricultural production areas and systems. A common garden experiment was established in Indiana in 2014 and 2015 with waterhemp populations from Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, and Nebraska to compare the growth and development of waterhemp from these regions. Three establishment dates (May, June, and July) were used each year to simulate discontinuous germination. Mean biomass accumulations from the May (1,120 g plant−1) and June (1,069 g plant−1) establishment dates were higher than from the July (266 g plant−1) establishment date. There were no differences in biomass accumulations between the five populations in the May and June establishments, but biomass accumulations ranged from 195 to 338 g plant−1 in the July establishment. Mean seed yields were higher from the May (926,629 seeds plant−1) and June (828,905 seeds plant−1) establishment dates compared with the July (276,258 seeds plant−1) establishment. In the May and June establishments, seed yields ranged from 469,939 seeds plant−1 to 1,285,556 seeds plant−1. The Illinois population flowered the latest of all the populations yet also grew the tallest. The July establishment flowered the most rapidly after establishment, accumulated less biomass, and also had the largest seeds. This study demonstrated differences among waterhemp populations when grown in a common environment and the effect of establishment timing on waterhemp growth and development.
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 Cecil S. Ash, Paul Barach, Ulrike Buehner, M. Ross Bullock, Leonardo Canale, Henry G. Chou, Jeffrey A. Claridge, John J. Como, Armagan Dagal, Martin Dauber, James S. Davis, Shalini Dhir, François Donati, Roman Dudaryk, Richard P. Dutton, Talmage D. Egan, Yashar Eshraghi, John R. Fisgus, Jeff Gadsden, Sugantha Ganapathy, Mark A. Gerhardt, Inderjit Gill, Joseph F. Golob, Glenn P. Gravlee, Marcello Guglielmi, Jana Hambley, Peter Hebbard, Elena J. Holak, Khadil Hosein, Ken Johnson, Matthew A. Joy, George W. Kanellakos, Olga Kaslow, Arthur M. Lam, Vanetta Levesque, Jessica Anne Lovich-Sapola, M. Jocelyn Loy, Peter F. Mahoney, Donn Marciniak, Maureen McCunn, Craig C. McFarland, Maroun J. Mhanna, Timothy Moore, Cynthia Nguyen, Maxim Novikov, E. Orestes O’Brien, Ketan P. Parekh, Claire L. Park, Michael J. A. Parr, Elie Rizkala, Steven Roth, Alistair Royse, Colin Royse, Kasia Petelenz Rubin, David Ryan, Claire Sandstrom, Carl I. Schulman, Rishad Shaikh, Ranjita Sharma, Jeffrey H. Silverstein, Peter Slinger, Charles E. Smith, Christopher Smith, Paul Soeding, Rakesh V. Sondekoppam, P. David Soran, Eldar Søreide, Elizabeth A. Steele, Kristian Strand, Dennis M. Super, Kutaiba Tabbaa, Nicholas T. Tarmey, Joshua M. Tobin, Kalpana Tyagaraj, Heather A. Vallier, Sandra Werner, Earl Willis Weyers, William C. Wilson, Shoji Yokobori, Charles J. Yowler
- Edited by Charles E. Smith
-
- Book:
- Trauma Anesthesia
- Published online:
- 05 April 2015
- Print publication:
- 09 April 2015, pp vii-x
-
- 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 Ra‘anan Boustan, Jonathan P. Conant, Brian Croke, Susanna Elm, Hugh Elton, Geoffrey Greatrex, Peter J. Heather, Kenneth G. Holum, Caroline Humfress, Scott F. Johnson, Christopher Kelly, Étienne De La Vaissière, Noel Lenski, Michael Maas, Maya Maskarinec, Andy Merrills, Richard Payne, Walter Pohl, Michele Renee Salzman, Joseph E. Sanzo, Peter Sarris, Raymond Van Dam, Edward Watts, Susan Wessel
- Edited by Michael Maas, Rice University, Houston
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Attila
- Published online:
- 05 October 2014
- Print publication:
- 29 September 2014, pp xiii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
About the Contributors
-
- By Bill Barnhart, Rosalee A. Clawson, Richard Davis, Valerie Hoekstra, Tyler Johnson, Nicholas LaRowe, Dahlia Lithwick, Phil Marcin, Laura Moyer, David G. Savage, Rorie Spill Solberg, Seth Stern, Vincent James Strickler, Matthew Thornton, Terri L. Towner, Joseph Daniel Ura, Richard L. Vining, Eric N. Waltenburg
- Edited by Richard Davis
-
- Book:
- Covering the United States Supreme Court in the Digital Age
- Published online:
- 05 August 2014
- Print publication:
- 11 August 2014, pp ix-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation