Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Peanut Sciencearrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Peanut Science
Article . 2003 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

Assessment of Six Peanut Cultivars for Control of Rhizoctonia Pod Rot When Sprayed with Azoxystrobin or Tebuconazole1

Authors: B. A. Besler; W. J. Grichar; K. D. Brewer; M. R. Baring;

Assessment of Six Peanut Cultivars for Control of Rhizoctonia Pod Rot When Sprayed with Azoxystrobin or Tebuconazole1

Abstract

Abstract Field studies were established in 1996 and 1997 in Atascosa Co. in south Texas to evaluate the response of six peanut cultivars to Rhizoctonia pod rot when sprayed with the fungicides azoxystrobin and tebuconazole. Compared to unsprayed plots, significant disease reduction occurred when cultivars were sprayed with either fungicide. Disease reductions were similar with both fungicides. Tamrun 96 displayed the lowest disease incidence both years with and without a fungicide application. Yields were significantly enhanced both years when either azoxystrobin or tebuconazole was applied to all six cultivars. Tamrun 96 was the highest yielding cultivar in 1996 when sprayed with azoxystrobin and in 1997 when sprayed with tebuconazole. Both fungicides improved grade (%TSMK) when compared to the unsprayed checks.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    11
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
11
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average
gold