1. Herbicide stress can set back crop growth during a critical stage of development, even if there is no visible damage to the plants.
2. Active VPR and Active VPR PLUS are foliar fertilizers that reduce herbicide stress and promote early growth in legumes.
3. Field trials have shown that Active VPR PLUS is just as effective as UAN as a tank mix partner for post-emergent herbicides, enhancing their efficacy without causing harm to the crop.
The article titled "What No One Tells You About Herbicide Stress" discusses the impact of herbicides on crop growth and introduces two products, Active VPR and Active VPR PLUS, that claim to reduce herbicide stress and promote early growth in legumes. While the article provides some useful information about herbicide stress and the potential benefits of these products, there are several aspects that need critical analysis.
Firstly, the article mentions that selective herbicides are designed to suppress weeds while leaving the target crop unharmed. However, it fails to mention the potential negative effects of these herbicides on the environment and non-target organisms. Selective herbicides can still have unintended consequences such as soil contamination, water pollution, and harm to beneficial insects or wildlife. This omission suggests a bias towards promoting the use of herbicides without considering their broader impacts.
Secondly, the article claims that Active VPR and Active VPR PLUS can replace nutrients used by crops to metabolize herbicides, thereby improving root growth and stress resistance. However, it does not provide any scientific evidence or studies to support these claims. Without proper research or data, it is difficult to assess the effectiveness of these products in reducing herbicide stress.
Furthermore, the article highlights field trials conducted by New Era Ag Technologies but does not provide any details about the methodology or results of these trials. This lack of transparency raises questions about the validity and reliability of the findings presented.
Additionally, the article heavily promotes Active VPR and Active VPR PLUS as essential tank mix partners for post-emergent herbicides without discussing alternative methods or approaches for managing weeds. This one-sided reporting suggests a promotional bias towards these specific products rather than providing a comprehensive analysis of different weed management strategies.
Moreover, there is no mention of potential risks or side effects associated with using Active VPR or Active VPR PLUS. It is important for farmers and consumers to be aware of any potential hazards or precautions when using these products, but the article fails to address this crucial aspect.
Overall, the article lacks critical analysis, scientific evidence, and balanced reporting. It appears to be more of a promotional piece for Active VPR and Active VPR PLUS rather than an objective examination of herbicide stress and its management.