| Title |
Yield of glyphosate-resistant sugar beets and efficiency of weed management systems with glyphosate and conventional herbicides under German and Polish crop production
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Transgenic Research, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11248-012-9678-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Henrike Nichterlein, Anja Matzk, Leszek Kordas, Josef Kraus, Carsten Stibbe |
| Abstract |
In sugar beet production, weed control is one of the most important and most expensive practices to ensure yield. Since glyphosate-resistant sugar beets are not yet approved for cultivation in the EU, little commercial experience exists with these sugar beets in Europe. Experimental field trials were conducted at five environments (Germany, Poland, 2010, 2011) to compare the effects of glyphosate with the effects of conventional weed control programs on the development of weeds, weed control efficiency and yield. The results show that the glyphosate weed control programs compared to the conventional methods decreased not only the number of herbicide applications but equally in magnitude decreased the dosage of active ingredients. The results also showed effective weed control with glyphosate when the weed covering was greater and sugar beets had a later growth stage of four true leaves. Glyphosate-resistant sugar beets applied with the glyphosate herbicide two or three times had an increase in white sugar yield from 4 to 18 % in comparison to the high dosage conventional herbicide systems. In summary, under glyphosate management sugar beets can positively contribute to the increasingly demanding requirements regarding efficient sugar beet cultivation and to the demands by society and politics to reduce the use of chemical plant protection products in the environment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 40% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 47% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#4,673,124
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Transgenic Research
#186
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,436
of 280,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transgenic Research
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them