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/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

There are a limited number of herbicide options available for durum wheat production in Ontario, Canada. Four field studies were conducted in Ontario, Canada over a three year period (2008, 2009 and 2010) to evaluate the sensitivity of spring planted durum wheat to post-emergence (POST) applications of dichlorprop/2,4-D, dicamba/ MCPA/mecoprop, clopyralid, bromoxynil/MCPA, pyrasulfotole/bromoxynil, thifensulfuron/tribenuron + MCPA amine, fluroxypyr + MCPA ester, tralkoxydim and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl/safener at the manufacturers’ recommended dose and twice that dose. Visible injury in durum wheat were 0 to 2.4% with dichlorprop/2,4-D, 0 to 6% with dicamba/MCPA/mecoprop, 0 to 0.4% injury with clopyralid, 0 to 1.4% injury with bromoxynil/MCPA, 0 to 3.5% with pyrasulfotole/bromoxynil, 0 to 5% with thifensulfuron/tribenuron + MCPA amine, 0 to 2.6% with fluroxypyr + MCPA ester, 0 to 5% with tralkoxydim and 0.4% to 8% with fenoxaprop-pethyl/safener at various evaluation dates (1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks after treatment). Durum wheat height was decreased as much as 5% with dicamba/ MCPA/mecoprop, 4% with pyrasulfotole/bromoxynil and 6% with fenoxaprop-pethyl/safener but was not affected with other herbicides evaluated. There was no decrease in durum wheat yield with the herbicides evaluated

Sensitivity of durum wheat (Triticum turgidum) to various postemergence herbicides