Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Damage to non-dicamba-resistant soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] has been frequent in geographies where dicamba-resistant (DR) soybean and cotton have been grown and sprayed with the herbicide in recent years. Off-target movement field trials were conducted in northwest Arkansas to determine the relationship between dicamba concentration in the air and the extent of symptomology on non-DR soybean. Additionally, the frequency and concentration of dicamba in air samples at two locations in eastern Arkansas and environmental conditions that impacted the detection of the herbicide in air samples were evaluated. Treatment applications included dicamba at 560 g ae ha-1 (1X rate), glyphosate at 860 g ae ha-1, and particle drift retardant at 1% v/v applied to 0.37 ha fields with varying degrees of vegetation. The relationship between dicamba concentration in air samples and non-DR soybean response to the herbicide was more predictive with visible injury (Generalized R2 = 0.82) than height reduction (Generalized R2 = 0.43). The predicted dicamba air concentration resulted in 10% injury to soybean was 1.60 ng m-3 d-1 for a single exposure. The predicted concentration from a single exposure to dicamba resulting in a 10% height reduction, was 3.78 ng m-3 d-1. Dicamba was frequently detected in eastern Arkansas, and daily detections above 1.60 ng m-3 occurred 17 times in the period sampled. The maximum concentration of dicamba recorded was 7.96 ng m-3 d-1, while dicamba concentrations at Marianna and Keiser, AR, were ≥ 1 ng m-3 d-1 in six samples collected in 2020 and 22 samples in 2021. Dicamba was detected consistently in air samples collected, indicating high usage in the region and the potential for soybean damage over an extended period. More research is needed to quantify the plant absorption rate of volatile dicamba and to evaluate the impact of multiple exposures of gaseous dicamba on nontargeted plant species.
Damage to non-dicamba-resistant soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] has been frequent in geographies where dicamba-resistant (DR) soybean and cotton have been grown and sprayed with the herbicide in recent years. Off-target movement field trials were conducted in northwest Arkansas to determine the relationship between dicamba concentration in the air and the extent of symptomology on non-DR soybean. Additionally, the frequency and concentration of dicamba in air samples at two locations in eastern Arkansas and environmental conditions that impacted the detection of the herbicide in air samples were evaluated. Treatment applications included dicamba at 560 g ae ha-1 (1X rate), glyphosate at 860 g ae ha-1, and particle drift retardant at 1% v/v applied to 0.37 ha fields with varying degrees of vegetation. The relationship between dicamba concentration in air samples and non-DR soybean response to the herbicide was more predictive with visible injury (Generalized R2 = 0.82) than height reduction (Generalized R2 = 0.43). The predicted dicamba air concentration resulted in 10% injury to soybean was 1.60 ng m-3 d-1 for a single exposure. The predicted concentration from a single exposure to dicamba resulting in a 10% height reduction, was 3.78 ng m-3 d-1. Dicamba was frequently detected in eastern Arkansas, and daily detections above 1.60 ng m-3 occurred 17 times in the period sampled. The maximum concentration of dicamba recorded was 7.96 ng m-3 d-1, while dicamba concentrations at Marianna and Keiser, AR, were ≥ 1 ng m-3 d-1 in six samples collected in 2020 and 22 samples in 2021. Dicamba was detected consistently in air samples collected, indicating high usage in the region and the potential for soybean damage over an extended period. More research is needed to quantify the plant absorption rate of volatile dicamba and to evaluate the impact of multiple exposures of gaseous dicamba on nontargeted plant species.
This article deals with the technologies and apps that asylum seekers need to navigate as forced hindered techno-users in order to get access to asylum and financial support. With a focus on the Greek refugee system, it discusses the multiple technological intermediations that asylum seekers face when dealing with the cash assistance programme and how asylum seekers are obstructed in accessing asylum and financial support. It explores the widespread disorientation that asylum seekers experience as they navigate un-legible techno-scripts that change over time. The article critically engages with the literature on the securitization and victimization of refugees, and it argues that asylum seekers are not treated exclusively as potential threats or as victims, but also as forced hindered subjects; that is, they are kept in a condition of protracted uncertainty during which they must find out the multiple technological and bureaucratic steps they are requested to comply with. In the final section, the article illustrates how forced technological mediations actually reinforce asylum seekers’ dependence on humanitarian actors and enhance socio-legal precarity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.