Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Influence of Planting Date, Preplanting Weed Control, Irrigation, and Conservation Tillage Practices on Efficacy of Planting Time Insecticide Applications for Control of Lesser Cornstalk Borer in Field Corn12

Authors: John N. All; M. D. Jellum; R. N. Gallaher;

Influence of Planting Date, Preplanting Weed Control, Irrigation, and Conservation Tillage Practices on Efficacy of Planting Time Insecticide Applications for Control of Lesser Cornstalk Borer in Field Corn12

Abstract

Experiments during 1974–78 demonstrated that banded applications of chlorpyrifos and fonofos at a rate of 0.22 kg AI/1000 m row had most consistent control of lesser cornstalk borer (LCB), Elasmopalpus lignoselius (Zeller), infestations in corn, Zea mays L., at various planting dates, in different soil types, in fields of conservation tillage and conventional tillage, under conditions of preplanting weed control, and in irrigated fields. Carbofuran, Isazofas®, (chemical definition unavailable) and terbufos also controlled infestations but consistency of control was low. At 0.11 kg AI/1000 m row, only seed furrow applications of carbofuran were effective. Efficacy of banded applications of carbofuran, diazinon, and fensulfothion was not greatly increased at rates up to 0.7 kg AI/1000 m row, whereas higher rates of chlorpyrifos, terbufos, and parathion were more effective. Infestations were substantially lower in early season plantings and in fields of conservation tillage and preplanting weed control. Interaction of insecticide treatment and of these cropping practices provided an effective integrated control system for LCB. Normal irrigation practices had little effect on LCB infestations. Regression models of LCB damage and yield indicated a 2.824 and 2.472% increase in yield for grain and silage, respectively, for each 1% control of LCB infestations.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    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).
    12
    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.
    Average
    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
citations
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!
12
Average
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!