Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process
Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicideresistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Weed technology 2018-08, Vol.32 (4), p.489-497 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 497 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 489 |
container_title | Weed technology |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Schroeder, Jill Barrett, Michael Shaw, David R Asmus, Amy B Coble, Harold Ervin, David Jussaume, Raymond A Owen, Micheal D. K Burke, Ian Creech, Cody F Culpepper, A. Stanley Curran, William S Dodds, Darrin M Gaines, Todd A Gunsolus, Jeffrey L Hanson, Bradley D Jha, Prashant Klodd, Annie E Kniss, Andrew R Leon, Ramon G McDonald, Sandra Morishita, Don W Schutte, Brian J Sprague, Christy L Stahlman, Phillip W Steckel, Larry E VanGessel, Mark J |
description | Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicideresistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges and recommendations for addressing herbicide resistance. The coordinating team hired Strategic Conservation Solutions, LLC, to facilitate all the sessions. They and the coordinating team used in-person meetings, teleconferences, and email to communicate and coordinate the activities leading up to each regional listening session. The agenda was the same across all sessions and included small-group discussions followed by reporting to the full group for discussion. The planning process was the same across all the sessions, although the selection of venue, time of day, and stakeholder participants differed to accommodate the differences among regions. The listening-session format required a great deal of work and flexibility on the part of the coordinating team and regional coordinators. Overall, the participant evaluations from the sessions were positive, with participants expressing appreciation that they were asked for their thoughts on the subject of herbicide resistance. This paper details the methods and processes used to conduct these regional listening sessions and provides an assessment of the strengths and limitations of those processes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/wet.2018.53 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2085461447</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26567611</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26567611</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b354t-1c474bbd128fb0560c1308b8f263f1f1a8269ab76168516226e7b78d13df575c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKsr10LAlciMSWby0J2UaoWKxQe4G5JMUqfUSU0yFf-LP9aMFd25CMnlnHz33gPAIUY5RpifvZuYE4RFTostMMCUoozwEm2DARLnKEMFf94FeyEsEMKMEDQAn7eylfOmncOJ8arRTW3gvQlNiLLV5gJO08u0vR4djC8GzowPK6NjszYBOgtnXqYiNq5NQp5Kp03d-SRa5-HItXWX9PT_j_RgQkj-AGVbpwPHa7nsZI_ogd9NekoI-2DHymUwBz_3EDxdjR9Hk2x6d30zupxmqqBlzLAuealUjYmwClGGNC6QUMISVlhssRSEnUvFGWaC9nszwxUXNS5qSznVxRAcb7gr7946E2K1cJ1vU8uKIEFLhsuSJ9fpxqW9C8EbW6188yr9R4VR1cdfpfirPv6KFsl9tHEvQnT-10oYZWkQnPSTja4al7L7l_UF8v6RjQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2085461447</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Cambridge Core</source><creator>Schroeder, Jill ; Barrett, Michael ; Shaw, David R ; Asmus, Amy B ; Coble, Harold ; Ervin, David ; Jussaume, Raymond A ; Owen, Micheal D. K ; Burke, Ian ; Creech, Cody F ; Culpepper, A. Stanley ; Curran, William S ; Dodds, Darrin M ; Gaines, Todd A ; Gunsolus, Jeffrey L ; Hanson, Bradley D ; Jha, Prashant ; Klodd, Annie E ; Kniss, Andrew R ; Leon, Ramon G ; McDonald, Sandra ; Morishita, Don W ; Schutte, Brian J ; Sprague, Christy L ; Stahlman, Phillip W ; Steckel, Larry E ; VanGessel, Mark J</creator><creatorcontrib>Schroeder, Jill ; Barrett, Michael ; Shaw, David R ; Asmus, Amy B ; Coble, Harold ; Ervin, David ; Jussaume, Raymond A ; Owen, Micheal D. K ; Burke, Ian ; Creech, Cody F ; Culpepper, A. Stanley ; Curran, William S ; Dodds, Darrin M ; Gaines, Todd A ; Gunsolus, Jeffrey L ; Hanson, Bradley D ; Jha, Prashant ; Klodd, Annie E ; Kniss, Andrew R ; Leon, Ramon G ; McDonald, Sandra ; Morishita, Don W ; Schutte, Brian J ; Sprague, Christy L ; Stahlman, Phillip W ; Steckel, Larry E ; VanGessel, Mark J</creatorcontrib><description>Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicideresistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges and recommendations for addressing herbicide resistance. The coordinating team hired Strategic Conservation Solutions, LLC, to facilitate all the sessions. They and the coordinating team used in-person meetings, teleconferences, and email to communicate and coordinate the activities leading up to each regional listening session. The agenda was the same across all sessions and included small-group discussions followed by reporting to the full group for discussion. The planning process was the same across all the sessions, although the selection of venue, time of day, and stakeholder participants differed to accommodate the differences among regions. The listening-session format required a great deal of work and flexibility on the part of the coordinating team and regional coordinators. Overall, the participant evaluations from the sessions were positive, with participants expressing appreciation that they were asked for their thoughts on the subject of herbicide resistance. This paper details the methods and processes used to conduct these regional listening sessions and provides an assessment of the strengths and limitations of those processes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-037X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2740</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/wet.2018.53</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Agriculture ; EDUCATION/EXTENSION ; Farmers ; Herbicide resistance ; Herbicides ; Listening ; listening sessions process ; Regional analysis ; Scientists ; Time of use</subject><ispartof>Weed technology, 2018-08, Vol.32 (4), p.489-497</ispartof><rights>Weed Science Society of America, 2018. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</rights><rights>Weed Science Society of America, 2018</rights><rights>Weed Science Society of America, 2018 This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (the “License”) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b354t-1c474bbd128fb0560c1308b8f263f1f1a8269ab76168516226e7b78d13df575c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b354t-1c474bbd128fb0560c1308b8f263f1f1a8269ab76168516226e7b78d13df575c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2551-4959 ; 0000-0003-4462-5339 ; 0000-0002-1924-3331 ; 0000-0003-1485-7665</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26567611$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26567611$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schroeder, Jill</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barrett, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaw, David R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Asmus, Amy B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coble, Harold</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ervin, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jussaume, Raymond A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owen, Micheal D. K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burke, Ian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Creech, Cody F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Culpepper, A. Stanley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Curran, William S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dodds, Darrin M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaines, Todd A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gunsolus, Jeffrey L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanson, Bradley D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jha, Prashant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klodd, Annie E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kniss, Andrew R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leon, Ramon G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDonald, Sandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morishita, Don W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schutte, Brian J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sprague, Christy L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stahlman, Phillip W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steckel, Larry E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanGessel, Mark J</creatorcontrib><title>Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process</title><title>Weed technology</title><addtitle>Weed Technol</addtitle><description>Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicideresistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges and recommendations for addressing herbicide resistance. The coordinating team hired Strategic Conservation Solutions, LLC, to facilitate all the sessions. They and the coordinating team used in-person meetings, teleconferences, and email to communicate and coordinate the activities leading up to each regional listening session. The agenda was the same across all sessions and included small-group discussions followed by reporting to the full group for discussion. The planning process was the same across all the sessions, although the selection of venue, time of day, and stakeholder participants differed to accommodate the differences among regions. The listening-session format required a great deal of work and flexibility on the part of the coordinating team and regional coordinators. Overall, the participant evaluations from the sessions were positive, with participants expressing appreciation that they were asked for their thoughts on the subject of herbicide resistance. This paper details the methods and processes used to conduct these regional listening sessions and provides an assessment of the strengths and limitations of those processes.</description><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>EDUCATION/EXTENSION</subject><subject>Farmers</subject><subject>Herbicide resistance</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>Listening</subject><subject>listening sessions process</subject><subject>Regional analysis</subject><subject>Scientists</subject><subject>Time of use</subject><issn>0890-037X</issn><issn>1550-2740</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKsr10LAlciMSWby0J2UaoWKxQe4G5JMUqfUSU0yFf-LP9aMFd25CMnlnHz33gPAIUY5RpifvZuYE4RFTostMMCUoozwEm2DARLnKEMFf94FeyEsEMKMEDQAn7eylfOmncOJ8arRTW3gvQlNiLLV5gJO08u0vR4djC8GzowPK6NjszYBOgtnXqYiNq5NQp5Kp03d-SRa5-HItXWX9PT_j_RgQkj-AGVbpwPHa7nsZI_ogd9NekoI-2DHymUwBz_3EDxdjR9Hk2x6d30zupxmqqBlzLAuealUjYmwClGGNC6QUMISVlhssRSEnUvFGWaC9nszwxUXNS5qSznVxRAcb7gr7946E2K1cJ1vU8uKIEFLhsuSJ9fpxqW9C8EbW6188yr9R4VR1cdfpfirPv6KFsl9tHEvQnT-10oYZWkQnPSTja4al7L7l_UF8v6RjQ</recordid><startdate>20180801</startdate><enddate>20180801</enddate><creator>Schroeder, Jill</creator><creator>Barrett, Michael</creator><creator>Shaw, David R</creator><creator>Asmus, Amy B</creator><creator>Coble, Harold</creator><creator>Ervin, David</creator><creator>Jussaume, Raymond A</creator><creator>Owen, Micheal D. K</creator><creator>Burke, Ian</creator><creator>Creech, Cody F</creator><creator>Culpepper, A. Stanley</creator><creator>Curran, William S</creator><creator>Dodds, Darrin M</creator><creator>Gaines, Todd A</creator><creator>Gunsolus, Jeffrey L</creator><creator>Hanson, Bradley D</creator><creator>Jha, Prashant</creator><creator>Klodd, Annie E</creator><creator>Kniss, Andrew R</creator><creator>Leon, Ramon G</creator><creator>McDonald, Sandra</creator><creator>Morishita, Don W</creator><creator>Schutte, Brian J</creator><creator>Sprague, Christy L</creator><creator>Stahlman, Phillip W</creator><creator>Steckel, Larry E</creator><creator>VanGessel, Mark J</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2551-4959</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4462-5339</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1924-3331</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1485-7665</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180801</creationdate><title>Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process</title><author>Schroeder, Jill ; Barrett, Michael ; Shaw, David R ; Asmus, Amy B ; Coble, Harold ; Ervin, David ; Jussaume, Raymond A ; Owen, Micheal D. K ; Burke, Ian ; Creech, Cody F ; Culpepper, A. Stanley ; Curran, William S ; Dodds, Darrin M ; Gaines, Todd A ; Gunsolus, Jeffrey L ; Hanson, Bradley D ; Jha, Prashant ; Klodd, Annie E ; Kniss, Andrew R ; Leon, Ramon G ; McDonald, Sandra ; Morishita, Don W ; Schutte, Brian J ; Sprague, Christy L ; Stahlman, Phillip W ; Steckel, Larry E ; VanGessel, Mark J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b354t-1c474bbd128fb0560c1308b8f263f1f1a8269ab76168516226e7b78d13df575c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>EDUCATION/EXTENSION</topic><topic>Farmers</topic><topic>Herbicide resistance</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>Listening</topic><topic>listening sessions process</topic><topic>Regional analysis</topic><topic>Scientists</topic><topic>Time of use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schroeder, Jill</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barrett, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaw, David R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Asmus, Amy B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coble, Harold</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ervin, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jussaume, Raymond A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owen, Micheal D. K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burke, Ian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Creech, Cody F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Culpepper, A. Stanley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Curran, William S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dodds, Darrin M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaines, Todd A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gunsolus, Jeffrey L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanson, Bradley D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jha, Prashant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klodd, Annie E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kniss, Andrew R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leon, Ramon G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDonald, Sandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morishita, Don W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schutte, Brian J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sprague, Christy L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stahlman, Phillip W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steckel, Larry E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanGessel, Mark J</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Agriculture & Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schroeder, Jill</au><au>Barrett, Michael</au><au>Shaw, David R</au><au>Asmus, Amy B</au><au>Coble, Harold</au><au>Ervin, David</au><au>Jussaume, Raymond A</au><au>Owen, Micheal D. K</au><au>Burke, Ian</au><au>Creech, Cody F</au><au>Culpepper, A. Stanley</au><au>Curran, William S</au><au>Dodds, Darrin M</au><au>Gaines, Todd A</au><au>Gunsolus, Jeffrey L</au><au>Hanson, Bradley D</au><au>Jha, Prashant</au><au>Klodd, Annie E</au><au>Kniss, Andrew R</au><au>Leon, Ramon G</au><au>McDonald, Sandra</au><au>Morishita, Don W</au><au>Schutte, Brian J</au><au>Sprague, Christy L</au><au>Stahlman, Phillip W</au><au>Steckel, Larry E</au><au>VanGessel, Mark J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process</atitle><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle><stitle>Weed Technol</stitle><date>2018-08-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>489</spage><epage>497</epage><pages>489-497</pages><issn>0890-037X</issn><eissn>1550-2740</eissn><abstract>Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicideresistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges and recommendations for addressing herbicide resistance. The coordinating team hired Strategic Conservation Solutions, LLC, to facilitate all the sessions. They and the coordinating team used in-person meetings, teleconferences, and email to communicate and coordinate the activities leading up to each regional listening session. The agenda was the same across all sessions and included small-group discussions followed by reporting to the full group for discussion. The planning process was the same across all the sessions, although the selection of venue, time of day, and stakeholder participants differed to accommodate the differences among regions. The listening-session format required a great deal of work and flexibility on the part of the coordinating team and regional coordinators. Overall, the participant evaluations from the sessions were positive, with participants expressing appreciation that they were asked for their thoughts on the subject of herbicide resistance. This paper details the methods and processes used to conduct these regional listening sessions and provides an assessment of the strengths and limitations of those processes.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/wet.2018.53</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2551-4959</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4462-5339</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1924-3331</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1485-7665</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0890-037X |
ispartof | Weed technology, 2018-08, Vol.32 (4), p.489-497 |
issn | 0890-037X 1550-2740 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2085461447 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Cambridge Core |
subjects | Agriculture EDUCATION/EXTENSION Farmers Herbicide resistance Herbicides Listening listening sessions process Regional analysis Scientists Time of use |
title | Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T10%3A45%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Managing%20Herbicide%20Resistance:%20Listening%20to%20the%20Perspectives%20of%20Practitioners.%20Procedures%20for%20Conducting%20Listening%20Sessions%20and%20an%20Evaluation%20of%20the%20Process&rft.jtitle=Weed%20technology&rft.au=Schroeder,%20Jill&rft.date=2018-08-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=489&rft.epage=497&rft.pages=489-497&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/wet.2018.53&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26567611%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2085461447&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26567611&rfr_iscdi=true |