English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

A combination of field, field enclosure, and germination chamber studies was used to evaluate the effects of methiocarb [3,5-dimethyl-4-(methylthio)pheno! methylcarbamate] and thiram (tetramethylthiuram disulfide) repellent seed treatments on early corn performance. The thiram treatments used (0.08, 0.4,0.8,0.5,1.25, and 2.5% active ingredient by corn seed weight) had negligible effects on germination/emergence time or on com plant heights. The thiram treatments never reduced stand counts in comparison to controls, but apparently increased stand counts in some trials, particularly under wet conditions. The methiocarb treatments evaluated (0.5, 1.25, 2.5, and 5.0% active ingredient by corn seed weight) had only occasional effects on early corn performance. However, certain methiocarb treatments advanced or retarded germination in some trials and increased plant heights in three trials. Methiocarb treatments did not affect corn stand counts in most trials, but increased or reduced stand counts in some. The reduced stand counts appear related to wet conditions and possibly to other field effects. The techniques used have application in studies of both plant and rodent responses to seed-treatment repellents. KEY WORDS; vertebrate pest control, wildlife damage control, bird, rodent, chemical repellent, technique, field enclosure, germination chamber, methiocarb, Mesurol, thiram, plant growth, seed germination, sprout emergence, corn Linehan [/] presented a field-enclosure technique for evaluating bird-repellent seed treatments applied to com seed and suggested that the technique might be adaptable to rodent studies. He demonstrated that the technique allowed greater control of several variables that often cause problems in field evaluations of repellents. Advantages included the capability of testing several treatments in a single test, ability to control feeding pressure, more uniform conditions in tests, ability to distinguish wildlife damage from disease and insect damage, and ability to accurately measure effects on plant performance in addition to repellency effectiveness. However, for use with rodents, modifications were needed to prevent rodent escape and to 'Graduate research assistant. Department of Forestry, Fisheries, and Wildlife, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0819; presently graduate student in Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616. ^Extension wildlife specialist and associate professor. Department of Forestry, Fisheries, and Wildlife, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0819. ^Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915; presently head, Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, St. Paul, MN 55108. "IAssociate professor. Biometrics and Information Systems Center, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0712; presently assistant director, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546-0091. ^Published as Journal Series No. 7436, Agricultural Research Division, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Evaluation of Repellent Seed Treatments and Effects on Early Corn Performance