We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Many studies have documented the interaction between 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibiting and photosystem II (PSII)-inhibiting herbicides. Most have focused on the interaction between mesotrione and atrazine, with only a few studies characterizing the nature of the interaction between tolpyralate and atrazine. Therefore, five field experiments were conducted in Ontario, Canada, over a 3-yr period (2019 to 2021) to characterize the interaction between three rates of tolpyralate (15, 30, and 45 g ai ha−1) and three rates of atrazine (140, 280, and 560 g ai ha−1) for the control of seven annual weed species in corn (Zea mays L.). Tolpyralate at 30 or 45 g ha−1 applied with atrazine at 280 or 560 g ha−1 controlled velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik.), redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.), common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.), and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) >90% at 8 wk after application (WAA). Tolpyralate and atrazine were synergistic at each rate combination for the control of A. theophrasti at 8 WAA. In contrast, A. retroflexus and S. arvensis control at 8 WAA was additive with each rate combination. At 8 WAA, C. album control was generally additive, but one rate combination was synergistic. Ambrosia artemisiifolia control at 8 WAA was synergistic with five rate combinations and additive with the other four. Barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.] control at 8 WAA was additive with seven of the rate combinations and synergistic with two. Setaria spp. control at 8 WAA was synergistic with one more rate combination compared with E. crus-galli, but the two weed species shared the same synergistic rate combinations. This study concludes that extrapolation or broad classifications of the interaction between tolpyralate and atrazine would be inappropriate, as the interaction can vary due to herbicide rate, weed species, and the response parameter analyzed.
Tolpyralate is a herbicide that is usually mixed with atrazine for broad-spectrum weed control in corn. Previous research has provided information on the effective dose (ED) of tolpyralate applied alone and in a 1:33.3 mixture with atrazine; however, tolpyralate is commercially applied at a dose of 30-40 g ai ha-1 with a minimum of 560 g ai ha-1 of atrazine. Therefore, five field trials were conducted over three years (2019-2021) to determine the ED of atrazine to complement 30 g ai ha-1 of tolpyralate for 80, 90, and 95% control of seven weed species 2, 4, and 8 weeks after application (WAA). Tolpyralate was applied alone and in a mixture with atrazine doses ranging from 50-2,000 g ai ha-1. At 8 WAA, the ED of atrazine for 95% control of velvetleaf, common ragweed, common lambsquarters, and wild mustard was below the minimum label dose of atrazine on the commercial tolpyralate label, ranging from 430-520 g ai ha-1, which supports the use of the minimum label dose of atrazine. In contrast, redroot pigweed required 1,231 g ai ha-1 of atrazine to complement tolpyralate for 95% control 8 WAA. At 8 WAA, barnyardgrass and a mixture of green foxtail and giant foxtail (Setaria spp.) were not controlled 80, 90, or 95% with tolpyralate applied alone or co-applied with any dose of atrazine evaluated in this study. The results of this study conclude that tolpyralate + atrazine is highly efficacious on several weed species at atrazine doses of 40-130 g ai ha-1 below the label dose of 560 g ai ha-1, but the use of the higher dose of tolpyralate or another herbicide may be required to improve control of redroot pigweed and grass weed species.
Background: Efficient monitoring of devices to ensure timely removal is an ongoing challenge. There is a need for data visualization products that can aggregate disparate data streams to support device reviews, increase consistency across changes in caregiver teams, and synergize with people and operational processes within and across regional acute-care facilities. Methods: A data display application was developed to provide data from nearly any source in a consistent visual representation that could be used in real time. The infection prevention (IP) overlay combined data related to urinary catheters, central vascular catheters, and femoral vascular catheters from the electronic health record system. Clinical and data experts collaborated to develop data definitions, inclusion criteria, and report components. The application display indicated the current catheter or device status of each patient facility-wide, organized by service unit (Fig. 1). Additional patient information could be accessed from within the application, and a comment feature allowed caregivers to communicate directly through the tool (Fig. 2). Results: Pilot implementation began February 2021, and the NATE IP application was live for all users (unit and facility leaders, providers, infection preventionists, etc) as of July 2021. The tool is currently available for use at 171 acute-care hospitals within the HCA healthcare system, and it accommodated 3 different electronic medical record systems. Usage peaked in August 2021, with an average of 1,700 views per day. Daily utilization maximum ranges from 1,100 to 1,500 views per day, with an average of ~1,300 views per day. The tool is used during daily patient safety rounds, including weekends and holidays. User feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with users reporting an increase in communication, streamlined documentation, improved tracking of reasons to retain, and increased accountability for daily updates. During the proof-of-concept implementation, zero bugs were identified and several feature enhancements were implemented, including addition of port status and device-day reporting counts. Planned enhancements include mupirocin and chlorhexidine bathing use, isolation precaution use, and blood cultures ordered >3 days after admission. Conclusions: The NATE IP tool brings together data related devices into a single view for use by direct caregivers and all levels of leadership. Development of this or similar tools to consolidate various data streams into a central tool facilitates improved communication and consistency between caregiver teams. It also drives operational efficiencies and improves safety. Expansion to incorporate notifications related to potential issue will expand the proactive utility of this tool.
Clinical cases covering the spectrum of upper limb pathology are presented here. In the hand, these include congenital hand deficiencies, Dupuytren’s disease, rheumatoid disease, nerve lesions and tendon transfers. In the elbow, this includes osteoarthritis and in the shoulder, massive cuff tear, scapula winging and painful shoulder arthroplasty. Clinical examination findings for each of the cases are highlighted.
The complementary modes of action of 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) and photosystem II (PSII) inhibitors have been credited for the synergistic weed control improvement of several species. Recent research discovered that reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and subsequent lipid peroxidation is the cause of cell death by the glutamine synthetase inhibitor glufosinate. Therefore, a basis for synergy exists between glufosinate and HPPD inhibitors, but the interaction has not been well reported. Four field experiments were conducted in Ontario, Canada, in 2020 and 2021 to determine the interaction between HPPD-inhibiting (mesotrione and tolpyralate) and ROS-generating (atrazine, bromoxynil, bentazon, and glufosinate) herbicides on control of annual weed species in corn (Zea mays L.). The ROS generators were synergistic with the HPPD inhibitors and provided ≥95% control of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik.), except for tolpyralate + glufosinate, which was additive at 8 wk after application (WAA) and provided 87% control. Tank mixes of HPPD inhibitors plus ROS generators were synergistic for the control of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.), except for tolpyralate + glufosinate, which was antagonistic at 8 WAA. Tolpyralate + glufosinate was antagonistic for the control of barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.] and Setaria spp. at 8 WAA. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) control at 8 WAA was synergistic and ≥95% with mesotrione plus atrazine, bromoxynil, or glufosinate and with tolpyralate plus bromoxynil or bentazon. Herbicide tank mixes were generally additive for the control of wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) at 8 WAA, except for the synergistic tank mixes of tolpyralate plus atrazine or bromoxynil; however, each tank mix provided 97% to 100% control of S. arvensis. Results from this study demonstrate that co-application of ROS generators with mesotrione or tolpyralate controlled all broadleaf weed species >90% at 8 WAA, with the exceptions of A. artemisiifolia and C. album control with tolpyralate + glufosinate. Mesotrione plus PSII inhibitors controlled E. crus-galli and Setaria spp. 48 to 68 percentage points less than tolpyralate plus the respective PSII inhibitor at 8 WAA; however, mesotrione + glufosinate and tolpyralate + glufosinate controlled the grass weed species similarly.
Common bean and azuki bean are poor competitors with weeds and demonstrate sensitivity to herbicides used for weed control in soybean. S-metolachlor, flufenacet, and acetochlor are categorized as Group 15 herbicides and provide control of multiple annual grass and select small-seeded broadleaf weeds. By way of field trials near Exeter and Ridgetown, Ontario, in 2019, 2020, and 2021, four dry bean market classes (azuki, kidney, small red, and white bean) were evaluated for their tolerance to 1× established label rates and 2× rates of S-metolachlor (1,600 and 3,200 g ai ha−1), flufenacet (750 and 1,500 g ai ha−1) and acetochlor (1,700 and 3,400 g ai ha−1) applied preplant incorporated (PPI). Injury was evaluated by assessing visible injury symptoms, density, shoot biomass, height, seed moisture content, and seed yield. Azuki bean was more sensitive to the Group 15 herbicides than other dry bean market classes; the Group 15 herbicides caused a 12% reduction in azuki bean growth at 2 wk after emergence; growth reduction was ≤2% in the other bean classes. Flufenacet (2× rate) was the most injurious treatment, causing a 27% reduction in azuki bean yield. This study concludes that kidney, small red, and white bean have a sufficient margin of crop safety to flufenacet, acetochlor, and S-metolachlor applied PPI. Azuki bean was sensitive to flufenacet; additional research is needed to investigate azuki bean tolerance to acetochlor and S-metolachlor applied PPI.
Tolpyralate is commonly mixed with atrazine for improved control of common annual weed species in corn production systems in the United States and Canada. Weed control efficacy with this mixture is enhanced with the addition of methylated seed oil (MSO) Concentrate®; however, there is little information on the efficacy of tolpyralate + atrazine with other proprietary adjuvants. Therefore, four trials were conducted at field research sites in Ontario, Canada, to evaluate the efficacy of tolpyralate + atrazine when applied with six different commercially available adjuvants on four annual broadleaf and two annual grass weed species in corn. The adjuvants evaluated were MSO Concentrate®, Agral® 90, Assist® Oil Concentrate, Carrier®, LI 700®, and Merge®. A treatment of tolpyralate + atrazine applied with no adjuvant was also included in the study. For the control of velvetleaf and wild mustard, the adjuvants evaluated with tolpyralate + atrazine did not improve control. At 8 wk after application (WAA), the use of Agral® 90, Assist® Oil Concentrate, Carrier®, MSO Concentrate®, or Merge® with tolpyralate + atrazine provided similar or greater control of common ragweed than tolpyralate + atrazine applied with LI 700®. At 8 WAA, the adjuvants performed similarly with tolpyralate + atrazine for the control of common lambsquarters; however, LI 700® was the only adjuvant that did not improve control compared to tolpyralate + atrazine applied without an adjuvant. At 8 WAA, MSO Concentrate®, Carrier®, and Merge® improved control of barnyardgrass and foxtail species with tolpyralate + atrazine to a similar or greater level than Assist® Oil Concentrate, Agral® 90, and LI 700®. Overall, MSO Concentrate®, Carrier®, or Merge® should be added to tolpyralate + atrazine for control of the myriad of weed species interfering with corn production.
The objectives of this study were to determine if the level and consistency of glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed control prior to soybean planting can be improved by (i) adding halauxifen-methyl, 2,4-D ester, saflufenacil, metribuzin, or dicamba to glufosinate, (ii) increasing the rate of glufosinate from 500 to 1,000 g ai ha–1, and (iii) adding 28% urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) as the carrier solution. During a 2-yr period (2020–2021), four field trials were conducted on commercial farms located in southwestern Ontario, Canada, with confirmed GR horseweed. Glufosinate controlled GR horseweed 65%, 66%, and 63% at 2, 4, and 8 wk after application (WAA), respectively, and reduced density and biomass 46% and 33% at 8 WAA, respectively. There was no improvement in GR horseweed control from the addition of halauxifen-methyl, 2,4-D ester or saflufenacil to glufosinate and no decrease in density and biomass, with the exception that the addition of saflufenacil to glufosinate reduced density 30% compared to glufosinate alone. The addition of metribuzin to glufosinate improved GR horseweed control by 22%, 22%, and 28% at 2, 4, and 8 WAA, respectively, and further reduced density and biomass 50% and 47%, respectively, at 8 WAA, respectively. The addition of dicamba to glufosinate improved GR horseweed control by 19%, 26%, and 30% at 2, 4, and 8 WAA, respectively, and further reduced density and biomass 54% and 60%, respectively, at 8 WAA. There was no improvement in GR horseweed control by increasing the rate of glufosinate from 500 to 1,000 g ai ha–1 or when using 28% UAN as the carrier solution. The addition of all herbicides to glufosinate, increasing the rate of glufosinate, or using 28% UAN as the carrier solution improved the consistency of GR horseweed control.
Tolpyralate is a 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase–inhibiting herbicide that is applied postemergence for control of annual broadleaf and grass weeds in corn. Current Canadian label recommendations for tolpyralate specify the addition of a methylated seed oil (MSO) adjuvant (MSO Concentrate®) for improved weed control. The efficacy of tolpyralate applied with other proprietary adjuvants has not been widely reported in the peer-reviewed literature. Therefore, four field trials were conducted in corn over 2020 and 2021 in Ontario, Canada, to evaluate MSO Concentrate®, Agral® 90 (nonionic surfactant), Assist® Oil Concentrate (blended surfactant), Carrier® (blended surfactant), LI 700® (nonionic surfactant), and Merge® (blended surfactant) as adjuvants with tolpyralate for the control of annual broadleaf and grass weeds. At 8 wk after application (WAA), tolpyralate applied with MSO Concentrate®, Agral® 90, Assist® Oil Concentrate, Carrier®, or Merge® controlled velvetleaf, wild mustard, barnyardgrass, and foxtail species similarly. These adjuvants also enhanced the efficacy of tolpyralate similarly for the control of common ragweed at 8 WAA with the exception that Agral® 90 was inferior to Merge®. At 8 WAA, tolpyralate controlled common lambsquarters the greatest when applied with MSO Concentrate®, Agral® 90, Carrier®, or Merge®; these adjuvants with the exception of Agral® 90 were superior to Assist® Oil Concentrate. At 8 WAA, tolpyralate applied with LI 700® controlled common ragweed, barnyardgrass, and foxtail species less than when tolpyralate was applied with the other adjuvants tested; control of these weed species with tolpyralate was not improved with LI 700® when compared to tolpyralate applied without an adjuvant. Overall, tolpyralate applied with either MSO Concentrate®, Carrier®, or Merge® controlled all annual broadleaf and grass weed species similarly or greater than tolpyralate applied without an adjuvant or tolpyralate with Agral® 90, Assist® Oil Concentrate, or LI 700® at 8 WAA.
Glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed interference in soybean can reduce soybean yield up to 93%. Glyphosate plus dicamba, 2,4-D ester, halauxifen-methyl or pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D applied preplant (PP) provide variable GR horseweed control in soybean. The objective of this study was to determine if the addition of saflufenacil or metribuzin to glyphosate plus dicamba, 2,4-D ester, halauxifen-methyl, or pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D will improve the level and consistency of GR horseweed control. Four trials were conducted over the 2020 and 2021 field seasons in fields with GR horseweed populations. Glyphosate plus dicamba, 2,4-D ester, halauxifen-methyl, or pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D controlled GR horseweed 96%, 77%, 71%, and 52%, respectively, at 8 wk after application (WAA). When saflufenacil or metribuzin was added to glyphosate plus dicamba or 2,4-D ester, GR horseweed control was not improved at 8 WAA. When saflufenacil or metribuzin was added to glyphosate plus halauxifen-methyl, GR horseweed control improved by 27% and 25%, respectively, at 8 WAA. When saflufenacil or metribuzin was added to glyphosate plus pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D, GR horseweed control was improved by 47% and 37%, respectively, at 8 WAA. The consistency of GR horseweed control was improved when saflufenacil or metribuzin was added to glyphosate plus dicamba, 2,4-D ester, halauxifen-methyl, or pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D compared to each herbicide applied alone. Synergism was observed when metribuzin was added to glyphosate plus halauxifen-methyl and when saflufenacil or metribuzin was added to glyphosate plus pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D at 8 WAA. Though GR horseweed control was improved with the addition of saflufenacil or metribuzin to glyphosate plus halauxifen-methyl or pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D, all treatments including saflufenacil resulted in the highest level and most consistent control.
Six field experiments were conducted to investigate any interaction between pyroxasulfone and flumioxazin on soybean tolerance and control of multiple-herbicide-resistant (MHR) waterhemp in soybean during 2016 and 2017 in Ontario, Canada. There was a synergistic increase in soybean injury with the co-application of pyroxasulfone and flumioxazin at all rates evaluated at 2 wk after emergence (WAE), the two highest rates evaluated (134/106 and 268/211 g ai ha–1) at 4 WAE, and the highest rate (268/211 g ai ha–1) evaluated at 8 WAE. Soybean injury with all pyroxasulfone and flumioxazin treatments was transient and had no adverse effect on soybean grain yield. Pyroxasulfone applied preemergence at 45, 89, 134, and 268 g ai ha–1 controlled MHR waterhemp up to 72%, 89%, 92%, and 95%, respectively. Flumioxazin applied preemergence at 35, 70, 106, and 211 g ai ha–1 controlled MHR waterhemp up to 78%, 90%, 93%, and 96%, respectively. Pyroxasulfone/flumioxazin applied preemergence at 45/35, 89/70, 134/106, and 268/211 g ai ha–1 controlled MHR waterhemp up to 92%, 96%, 98%, and 100%, respectively. There were no significant antagonistic or synergistic interactions for the control of MHR waterhemp with pyroxasulfone/flumioxazin at rates evaluated except at 268/211 g ai ha–1, which provided a synergistic increase in MHR waterhemp control at 4 WAE. The MHR waterhemp biomass and density reductions followed a trend similar trend to visible control. Pyroxasulfone/flumioxazin at 268/211 g ai ha–1 caused a synergistic response in biomass reduction (9% difference). Based on these results, there is an additive increase in MHR waterhemp control and potential for a synergistic increase in soybean injury with the co-application of pyroxasulfone plus flumioxazin.
Recent research reported synergism between glufosinate plus very low rates of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)–inhibiting herbicides on select broadleaf weeds. Two field studies, each consisting of four trials, were conducted in 2020 and 2021 in commercial fields with glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed in Ontario, Canada. Study 1 evaluated GR horseweed control with glufosinate plus five PPO inhibitors at 5% of the label rate; study 2 evaluated what dose of saflufenacil is needed when co-applied with glufosinate to improve GR horseweed control. In study 1, glufosinate plus very low rates of PPO-inhibiting herbicides provided low GR horseweed control. At site 1, despite the synergistic increase in GR horseweed control with saflufenacil (1.25 g ai ha–1) plus glufosinate (300 g ai ha–1), the level of control did not exceed 42% at 2 and 4 wk after application (WAA); the interaction was additive at 8 WAA. The co-application of glufosinate (300 g ai ha–1) with pyraflufen-ethyl (0.34 g ai ha–1), pyraflufen-ethyl/2,4-D (26.4 g ai ha–1), flumioxazin (5.35 g ai ha–1), fomesafen (12 g ai ha–1), or sulfentrazone (7 g ai ha–1) resulted in an additive interaction for GR horseweed control at 2, 4, and 8 WAA. However, glufosinate plus pyraflufen-ethyl or sulfentrazone was antagonistic at 8 WAA. In study 2, similar doses of saflufenacil were required for 50%, 80%, and 95% GR horseweed control whether glufosinate was included in the mixture or not. Interactions between glufosinate (300 g ai ha–1) plus saflufenacil at 1.56, 3.13, 6.25, and 12.5 g ai ha–1 were antagonistic at 2, 4, and 8 WAA at sites 1, 2, and 3; all other interactions were additive. The results of this research indicate there was little to no benefit of adding very low rates of PPO-inhibiting herbicides to glufosinate to improve GR horseweed control under field conditions.
Glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed [Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist; syn.: Erigeron canadensis L.] interference can substantially reduce corn (Zea mays L.) yield. The complementary activity of 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) and photosystem II (PSII) inhibitors has been investigated for the control of several weed species, and in many cases has been synergistic; however, there is little information on the interaction of HPPD- and PSII-inhibiting herbicides for postemergence control of GR C. canadensis in corn. Four field trials were studied over 2 yr (2019, 2020) in Ontario, Canada, in commercial corn fields with natural infestations of GR C. canadensis to evaluate the level of GR C. canadensis control with three HPPD-inhibiting herbicides (mesotrione, tolpyralate, and topramezone) and three PSII-inhibiting herbicides (atrazine, bromoxynil, and bentazon) applied individually and in tank-mix combinations, and to document the interaction of the three HPPD inhibitors tank mixed with the three PSII inhibitors. Mesotrione, tolpyralate, and topramezone controlled GR C. canadensis 83%, 84%, and 72%, respectively, at 8 wk after application (WAA). Bromoxynil and bentazon controlled GR C. canadensis 71% and 79%, respectively, while atrazine provided only 31% control at 8 WAA. The joint application of atrazine, bromoxynil, or bentazon with mesotrione increased GR C. canadensis control from 83% to 100% at 8 WAA. Tolpyralate tank mixed with atrazine, bromoxynil, or bentazon controlled GR C. canadensis 96%, 98%, and 98%, respectively, which was comparable to the mesotrione tank mixes at 8 WAA. Topramezone plus atrazine, bromoxynil, or bentazon controlled GR C. canadensis 91%, 93%, and 95%, respectively, at 8 WAA. Interactions between HPPD and PSII inhibitors were synergistic for all combinations of mesotrione or tolpyralate with atrazine, bromoxynil, or bentazon. The interaction between topramezone and PSII inhibitors was additive. All nine tank mixes controlled GR C. canadensis >90%. This study concludes that bromoxynil or bentazon, instead of atrazine, can be co-applied with mesotrione, tolpyralate, or topramezone without compromising GR C. canadensis control in corn.
From 2014 to 2020, we compiled radiocarbon ages from the lower 48 states, creating a database of more than 100,000 archaeological, geological, and paleontological ages that will be freely available to researchers through the Canadian Archaeological Radiocarbon Database. Here, we discuss the process used to compile ages, general characteristics of the database, and lessons learned from this exercise in “big data” compilation.
Two studies were conducted to ascertain the biologically effective dose (BED) of flumioxazin and pyroxasulfone for multiple herbicide–resistant (MHR) waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer] control in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] in southwestern Ontario, Canada, during 2016 and 2017. In the flumioxazin study, the predicted flumioxazin doses for 50%, 80%, and 90% MHR A. tuberculatus control were 19, 37, and 59 g ai ha−1 at 2 wk after application (WAA) and 31, 83, and 151 g ai ha−1, respectively, at 12 WAA. The predicted flumioxazin doses to cause 5% and 10% soybean injury were 129 and 404 g ai ha−1, respectively, at 2 wk after emergence (WAE), and the predicted flumioxazin doses to obtain 50%, 80%, and 95% of the weed-free control plot’s yield were determined to be 3, 14, and 65 g ai ha−1, respectively. In the pyroxasulfone study, the predicted pyroxasulfone doses that provided 50%, 80%, and 90% MHR A. tuberculatus visible control were 25, 50, and 88 g ai ha−1 at 2 WAA and 41, 109, and 274 g ai ha−1 at 12 WAA, respectively. The dose of pyroxasulfone predicted for 80% reduction in MHR A. tuberculatus density was 117 g ai ha−1, and the doses of pyroxasulfone predicted for 80% and 90% reduction in A. tuberculatus biomass were 204 and 382 g ai ha−1, respectively. The predicted doses of pyroxasulfone that caused 5% and 10% injury in soybean at 2 WAE were 585 and 698 g ai ha−1, respectively. The predicted doses of pyroxasulfone required to obtain 50%, 80%, and 95% yield relative to the weed-free plots were 6, 24, and 112 g ai ha−1, respectively. Flumioxazin and pyroxasulfone applied preemergence at the appropriate doses provided early-season MHR A. tuberculatus control in soybean.
Glyphosate’s efficacy is influenced by the amount absorbed and translocated throughout the plant to inhibit 5-enolpyruvyl shikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS). Glyphosate resistance can be due to target-site (TS) or non–target site (NTS) resistance mechanisms. TS resistance includes an altered target site and gene overexpression, while NTS resistance includes reduced absorption, reduced translocation, enhanced metabolism, and exclusion/sequestration. The goal of this research was to elucidate the mechanism(s) of glyphosate resistance in common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) from Ontario, Canada. The resistance factor for this glyphosate-resistant (GR) A. artemisiifolia biotype is 5.1. No amino acid substitutions were found at positions 102 or 106 of the EPSPS enzyme in this A. artemisiifolia biotype. Based on [14C]glyphosate studies, there was no difference in glyphosate absorption or translocation between glyphosate-susceptible (GS) and GR A. artemisiifolia biotypes. Radio-labeled glyphosate metabolites were similar for GS and GR A. artemisiifolia 96 h after application. Glyphosate resistance in this A. artemisiifolia biotype is not due to an altered target site due to amino acid substitutions at positions 102 and 106 in the EPSPS and is not due to the NTS mechanisms of reduced absorption, reduced translocation, or enhanced metabolism.
Minority and older adult patients remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCTs). The current study sought to examine sociodemographic inequities in CCT interest, eligibility, enrollment, decline motivation, and attrition across two psychosocial CCTs for gynecologic, gastrointestinal, and thoracic cancers.
Methods:
Patients were approached for recruitment to one of two interventions: (1) a randomized control trial (RCT) examining effects of a cognitive-behavioral intervention targeting sleep, pain, mood, cytokines, and cortisol following surgery, or (2) a yoga intervention to determine its feasibility, acceptability, and effects on mitigating distress. Prospective RCT participants were queried about interest and screened for eligibility. All eligible patients across trials were offered enrollment. Patients who declined yoga intervention enrollment provided reasons for decline. Sociodemographic predictors of enrollment decisions and attrition were explored.
Results:
No sociodemographic differences in RCT interest were observed, and older patients were more likely to be ineligible. Eligible Hispanic patients across trials were significantly more likely to enroll than non-Hispanic patients. Sociodemographic factors predicted differences in decline motivation. In one trial, individuals originating from more urban areas were more likely to prematurely discontinue participation.
Discussion:
These results corroborate evidence of no significant differences in CCT interest across minority groups, with older adults less likely to fulfill eligibility criteria. While absolute Hispanic enrollment was modest, Hispanic patients were more likely to enroll relative to non-Hispanic patients. Additional sociodemographic trends were noted in decline motivation and geographical prediction of attrition. Further investigation is necessary to better understand inequities, barriers, and best recruitment practices for representative CCTs.
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted the need for rapid creation and management of ICU field hospitals with effective remote monitoring which is dependent on the rapid deployment and integration of an Electronic Health Record (EHR). We describe the use of simulation to evaluate a rapidly scalable hub-and-spoke model for EHR deployment and monitoring using asynchronous training.
Methods:
We adapted existing commercial EHR products to serve as the point of entry from a simulated hospital and a separate system for tele-ICU support and monitoring of the interfaced data. To train our users we created a modular video-based curriculum to facilitate asynchronous training. Effectiveness of the curriculum was assessed through completion of common ICU documentation tasks in a high-fidelity simulation. Additional endpoints include assessment of EHR navigation, user satisfaction (Net Promoter), system usability (System Usability Scale-SUS), and cognitive load (NASA-TLX).
Results:
A total of 5 participants achieved a 100% task completion on all domains except ventilator data (91%). Systems demonstrated high degrees of satisfaction (Net Promoter = 65.2), acceptable usability (SUS = 66.5), and acceptable cognitive load (NASA-TLX = 41.5); with higher levels of cognitive load correlating with the number of screens employed.
Conclusions:
Clinical usability of a comprehensive and rapidly deployable EHR was acceptable in an intensive care simulation which was preceded by < 1 hour of video education about the EHR. This model should be considered in plans for integrated clinical response with remote and accessory facilities.
As the US faced its lowest levels of reported trust in government, the COVID-19 crisis revealed the essential service that various federal agencies provide as sources of information. This Element explores variations in trust across various levels of government and government agencies based on a nationally-representative survey conducted in March of 2020. First, it examines trust in agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services, state health departments, and local health care providers. This includes variation across key characteristics including party identification, age, and race. Second, the Element explores the evolution of trust in health-related organizations throughout 2020 as the pandemic continued. The Element concludes with a discussion of the implications for agency-specific assessments of trust and their importance as we address historically low levels of trust in government. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.