Mega business
  • Home
  • About ISWS
    • About Society
    • President's Message
    • Executive Board
    • Constitution
    • Weed Information
    • Other Important Links
    • Downloads
  • Publications
    • Indian Journal of Weed Science
    • IJWS MS online submission
    • Publications login
    • Conference Proceedings
    • Meeting Proceedings
    • ISWS Newsletters
    • Weed News
  • Membership
    • Join ISWS Online
    • Directory ISWS
    • Update ISWS Directory
  • Award
  • Contact Us
    • Contact Us
    • Directory ISWS
  • Member Login
Home IJWS
Submit Your Paper
Guide for Authors
Peer Review Policy
View Editorial Board
Abstracting/ Indexing
Current Issue
All Issue

All issues

Volume - 52(2020)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 51(2019)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 50(2018)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 49(2017)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 48(2016)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 47(2015)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 46(2014)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 45(2013)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 44(2012)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 43(2011)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Volume - 42(2010)
Issue-1&2
Issue-1&2 Supplymentary
Issue-3&4
Volume - 41(2009)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Issue-1&2 Supplymentary
Issue-3&4 Supplymentary
Volume - 40(2008)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Issue-1&2 Supplymentary
Issue-3&4 Supplymentary
Volume - 39(2007)
Issue-1&2
Volume - 38(2006)
Issue-1&2
Volume - 37(2005)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Volume - 36(2004)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Volume - 1(1969)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4

Indian Journal of Weed Science


Print ISSN: 0253-8050
Online ISSN: 0974-8164

NAAS rating: 5.17

Chief Editor

J.S. Mishra
Dr. J.S. Mishra
Principal Scientist, Division of Crop Research,
ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region,
Bihar Veterinary College, Patna - 800014 (Bihar)
Mobile - +91 9494240904
Email- editorisws@gmail, jsmishra31@gmail.com

Associate editors

Bhagirath S. Chauhan

Dr. Bhagirath Singh Chauhan
Queensland Alliance for Agricultureand Food Innovation
Level 2, Queensland Bioscience Precinct
The University of Queensland
St Lucia QLD 4069, Australia
Email: b.chauhan@uq.edu.au
A.N. Rao
Dr. A.N. Rao
Hydarabad, INDIA
Mobile Number: +91 9440372165
Email: adusumilli.narayanarao@gmail.com

CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPER

Indian Journal of Weed Science is inviting your articles, review article, Research article and Research note on all topics of weed science. IJWS welcomes quality work that focuses on research, development and review. We are looking forward for strict compliance to the modern age standards in all these fields. Authors across the globe are welcome to submit their research papers in the prestigious journal fulfilling the requisite criterion.

Indian Journal of Weed Science (IJWS) is inviting papers for the VOL-53, ISSUE-1 March-(2021)


Article submission guideline

Enter your login details for IJWS below. If you do not already have an account you will need to.. Register here
Author login
  • Author Instruction
  • Style of Invited paper
  • Style of Research Article
  • Style of Research note

Paper Publication Process –

  • Manuscripts are received online in the editorial office with the certificate that MS has not been sent for consideration in any other journals for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are checked by office for its style and pattern and for plagiarism. If plagiarism is more than 20%, it is not considered and sent back to author for revision and re-submission.
  • If MS is found fit at Editorial office in context to plagiarism and style and pattern, it is sent to Chief Editor for further processing.
  • If chief Editor find the MS suitable for consideration, he shall suggest two name of referees as reviewers either from editorial board or from other institutions of concern discipline for reviewing the MS.
  • Editorial Office shall send the MS for double blind review to the reviewers suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Comments of double -blind reviewers will be sent to corresponding author without disclosing the identity of the reviewers to address the comments and re-submission of MS.
  • In case, one reviewer rejects while other accept the MS, it is sent to third reviewer suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Revised MS is again sent to reviewers to see whether their comments are addressed suitably.
  • On agreeing by the reviewers, the MS is again sent to Chief Editors with comments of reviewers and reply of author to take the final decision.
  • The final decision of Chief Editor is communicated to authors.

CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPER

Indian Journal of Weed Science is inviting your articles, review article, Research article and Research note on all topics of weed science. IJWS welcomes quality work that focuses on research, development and review. We are looking forward for strict compliance to the modern age standards in all these fields. Authors across the globe are welcome to submit their research papers in the prestigious journal fulfilling the requisite criterion.

Indian Journal of Weed Science (IJWS) is inviting papers for the VOL-51, ISSUE-4 December-(2019)


Article submission guideline

Enter your login details for IJWS below. If you do not already have an account you will need to.. Register here
Author login
  • Author Instruction
  • Style of Invited paper
  • Style of Research Article
  • Style of Research note

Paper Publication Process –

  • Manuscripts are received online in the editorial office with the certificate that MS has not been sent for consideration in any other journals for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are checked by office for its style and pattern and for plagiarism. If plagiarism is more than 20%, it is not considered and sent back to author for revision and re-submission.
  • If MS is found fit at Editorial office in context to plagiarism and style and pattern, it is sent to Chief Editor for further processing.
  • If chief Editor find the MS suitable for consideration, he shall suggest two name of referees as reviewers either from editorial board or from other institutions of concern discipline for reviewing the MS.
  • Editorial Office shall send the MS for double blind review to the reviewers suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Comments of double -blind reviewers will be sent to corresponding author without disclosing the identity of the reviewers to address the comments and re-submission of MS.
  • In case, one reviewer rejects while other accept the MS, it is sent to third reviewer suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Revised MS is again sent to reviewers to see whether their comments are addressed suitably.
  • On agreeing by the reviewers, the MS is again sent to Chief Editors with comments of reviewers and reply of author to take the final decision.
  • The final decision of Chief Editor is communicated to authors.
Read More

Guidelines for Authors

Indian Journal of Weed Science is a quarterly journal publishing original research article, research notes, opinion articles and review articles (invited or with prior approval of the title reflecting substantial contributions of the author) covering all areas of weed science research. All contributions must be of a sufficient quality to extend our knowledge in weed science.

The papers submitted should not have been published or communicated elsewhere. Authors will be solely responsible for the factual accuracy of their contribution. Manuscript should not carry any material already published in the same or different forms.

  • Style of Invited paper
  • Style of Research Article
  • Style of Research note

Format

Full length article should be suitably divided into the following sub-sections; ABSTRACT, Key words, INTRODUCTION, MATERIALS AND METHODS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION and REFERENCES. The heading, introduction need not be mentioned in the text.

Title

The title of article should be informative but concise and should not contain abbreviations. It should indicate the content of the article essential for key word indexing and information retrieval. It should be set in small and bold letters. A good title briefly identifies the subject, indicates the purpose of study and introduces key terms and concepts. Title should not be started with the waste words like 'a study of', 'effect of', 'influence of' , 'some observations on', 'a note of' etc. The title should indicate preferably English name or most popular common name of the crops or organisms studied, wherever relevant. Scientific name can be given in abstract and introduction. Authority for such a name should be given at first mention in the text. A short title should be given for running headlines and should cover the main theme of the article.

Author(s) name(s) and affiliations

The name(s) of the author(s) should be given in small letters with sentence case separated by 'comma' or by 'and'. Institute name where the research was carried out should be given in italics. If authors are of different institutes, these can be mentioned by allotting number like 1, 2 or 3 as superscript over the name of author. The affiliation of such author may be given below of the corresponding author email address. Sometimes authors retire and change frequently and wish to give their current address, this should be given as foot note. Email address of main author or corresponding author should be given at the bottom.

Abstract

The abstract should contain at least one sentence on each of the following: objective of investigation (hypothesis, purpose, collection, result and conclusions). Give complete scientific name for plants or other organisms and full name of any symbol or abbreviations used. There is a need to mention place, name and priod of study in abstract. Emphasis should be given to highlight the results and the conclusion of the study. It should not exceed a total length of 200-250 words. Abstract should not have the words like 'will be explained or will be discussed'.

Key words

(5 6) should be given at the end of the abstract and should be arranged alphabetically. Each key word should be started with capital letter and separated by comma ( , ) from other words.

Introduction

Introduction should be brief and to the point, cover the problem and should justify the work or the hypothesis on which it is based. In introduction, a detail review is not necessary. However, to orient readers, important references about previous concepts and research should be given. It should briefly state the currently available information and should identify the research gap that is expected to be abridged through this investigation. Give preference to recent references from standard research publication unless it is of historical importance or a landmark in that field.

Materials and Methods

This part should begin with information relating to period/season/year and place of study, climate or weather conditions, soil type etc. Treatment details along with techniques and experimental design, replications, plot size etc. should be clearly indicated. Use of symbols for treatments may be avoided and an abbreviation should be fully explained at its first mention. Crop variety, methodology for application and common cultivation practices should be mentioned. Known methods may be just indicated giving reference but new techniques developed and followed should be described in detail. Methods can be divided into suitable sub-headings, typed in bold at first level and in italics at second level, if necessary.

Results and Discussion

Results may be reported and discussed together to avoid duplication. Do not mention and recite the data in the text as such given in the table. Instead interpret it suitably by indicating in terms of per cent, absolute change or any other derivations. Relate results to the objectives with suitable interpretation of the references given in the introduction. If results differ from the previous study, suitable interpretation and justification should be given. Repeated use of statements like 'our results are in agreement’ or ‘similar results were reported’ 'should be avoided. At the end of results and discussion, conclusion of the study should be given in 2-3 sentences along with suggestion for further study, if any. All statistical comparisons among treatments may be made at P=0.05 level of probability.

Acknowledgement

The authors may place on record the help and cooperation or any financial help received from any source, person or organization for this study. This should be very brief.

References

Only relevant and recent references of standard work should be quoted. Preference should be given to quote references of journals over proceedings or reports. In general, not more than 15 references should be quoted in full paper and 5 in short communication. However, in review article, emphasis should be given to quote more references with each valid statement/findings in the text. There is no need to give references for standard procedures of soil and plant analysis, and for routine statistical analysis in practice, only the methodology may be indicated. As a thumb rule, all the references quoted in the text must appear at the end of the article and vice-verse. It has been decided to use full name of the journal after the year 2011 onwards. Therefore, references should include names of all authors, year, full title of the article quoted, full name of the journal in italics (no abbreviations), volume number (in Bold), issue number (in brackets) and pages. For books, monographs, theses etc. full title in italics, publisher or university name, volume no., if any, and relevant page range or total no. of pages should be given. The list of references should be arranged alphabetically on author's names and chronologically per author. Author name should be started with surname and initial letter with capital letter. There is no need to separate author's initials by full stop but it should be given in capital letters without gap. Each author name should be separated by comma (,) and last author name by ‘and’. A few examples of correct citation of references for Indian Journal of Weed Science are given below:

Singh Samunder, Punia SS, Yadav A and Hooda VS. 2011. Evaluation of carfentrazone-ethyl + metsulfuron-methyl against broadleaf weeds of wheat. Indian Journal of Weed Science 43(1&2): 12-22.

Neeser C and Varshney Jay G. 2001. Purple nutsedge; biology and principles for management without herbicides, Indian Journal of Pulses Research 14(1): 10-19.

Naseema A, Praveena R and Salim AM. 2004. Ecofriendly management of water hyacinth with a mycoherbicide and cashew nut shell liquid. Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research 10(1&2): 93-100.

Arya DR, Kapoor RD and Dhirajpant. 2008. Herbicide tolerant crops: a boon to Indian agriculture, pp 23-31. In: Biennial Conference on Weed Management in Modern Agriculture: Emerging Challenges and Opportunities. (Eds. Sharma RS, Sushilkumar, Mishra JS, Barman KK and Sondhia Shobha), 27-28 February 2008, Patna. Indian Society of Weed Science, Jabalpur.

Anonymous. 2006. Long-term herbicide trial in transplanted lowland rice-rice cropping system, pp 62-68. In: Annual Progress Report, AICRP on Weed Control, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.

DWSR. 2010. Annual Report, 2010-11, pp 35-37. Directorate of Weed Science Research, Jabalpur.

Gopal B and Sharma KP. 1981. Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) the most troublesome weeds of the world. Hindasia Publisher, New Delhi, 129 p.

Sushilkumar, Sondhia S and Vishwakarma K. 2003. Role of insects in suppression of problematic alligator weed (Altemanthera philoxeroides) and testing of herbicides for its integrated management. Final Report of ICAR Adhoc Project, 39 p.

For Web references: the full URL should be given and the date when the reference was last accessed. e.g. http://www.faostat.fao.org (accessed 21 May 2019)

Length

Paper TypeMaximum Length (including tables and figures)
Research Article6000 words
Research note4000 words
Review8000 words
Mini-Review5000 words

Units, abbreviations and nomenclature

For physical units, unit names and symbols, the SI system should be employed. Biological names should be given according to the latest international nomenclature. Upon its first use in the title, abstract and text, the common name of a weed should be followed by the scientific name (genus, species and authority) in parentheses. If no common name exists in English, the scientific name should be used only. At the first mention of an herbicide or other chemical substance, give its generic name only. Trade names should not be used. Biological and zoological names, gene designations and gene symbols should be italicized. Yield data should be reported in kg/ha or t/ha. All such letters such as viz., et al., in situ, ex situ, Rabi, Kharif, i.e., etc. should be italicized.

Tables and figures

Tables and figures should be concise and limited to the necessary minimum. We encourage the authors to set tables and figures at the appropriate places in the article but if it is not possible, the same may be given separately. The title should fully describe the contents of the table and explain any symbol or abbreviations used in it. The standard abbreviations of the units of different parameters should be indicated in parentheses. Vertical lines should not be given in the tables and horizontal lines should be used to separate parameters and end of the table.

Figures may be preferred in place of table. In no case the same data should be presented by both tables and figures. While presenting data through line graphs, vertical bars, cylinders, pie charts etc, the same should be preferred with black lines or bars having different clear symbols and shades. The graphs chosen with colours reproduce poorly and should not be given unless it became necessary.

Some useful tips

Avoid numerals and abbreviations at the beginning of a sentence. Don't use superscript for per hectare, ton or meter (kg ha-1 or t ha-1) instead use kg/ha or g/m2, t/ha, mg/g, ml/l etc. Prefer to mention yield data in t/ha only. If it becomes necessary, give yield in kg/ha but not in quintal. Don't use lakh, crores or arabs in text, instead give such figures in million. Only standard abbreviations should be used and invariably be explained at first mention. Avoid use of self-made abbreviations like iso., buta., rizo., etc. Don't use first letter capital for names of plant protection chemicals but it should be used for trade names. Use of treatment symbols like T1 T2 T3 etc. should be avoided. All weights and measurements must be in SI or metric units. Use % after double digit figures, not per cent, for example 10% not 10 per cent. In a series of range of measurement, mention the units only at the end, e.g. 3,4,5 kg/ha instead of 3 kg/ha, 4 kg/ha and 5 kg/ha. Nutrient doses as well as concentration in soil and plant should be given in elemental form only, i.e. P and K should not be given as P2O5 K2O. A variety may be mentioned within single quotes in italic such as 'Pusa Basmai', 'Kufri Sinduri' etc. Statistical data should be given in LSD (P=0.05) instead CD (P=0.05).

Authors are requested to see the recent issue of the journal to prepare the manuscript as per the journal's format.

Manuscript submission

Manuscripts must conform to the journal style (see the latest issue). Correct language is the responsibility of the author. After having received a contribution, there will be a review process, before the Chief Editor makes the definitive decision upon the acceptance for publication. Referee's comments along with editors comments will be communicated to authors as scanned copy/soft copy through email. After revision, author should send back the copy of revised manuscripts to the Chief Editor, ISWS by e-mail only.

Editorial Board reserves the right to suitably modify, accept or reject the MS in view on the reviewer's advice.

We encourage submission of paper only by electronically via E-mail as one complete word document file. When preparing your file, please use only Times New Roman font for text (title 16, all heads 14 and text of 12 point, double spacing with 1.5" margin all the sides) and Symbol font for Greek letters to avoid inadvertent character substitutions.

All manuscripts should be submitted Online (http://www.isws.org.in/login_IJWS.aspx). For authors unable to submit their manuscript online

To see sample copy to prepare the manuscript, please Log on: http://www.isws.org.in/IJWSn/Journal.aspx

Peer Review Policy

All published articles in Indian Journal of Weed Science (IJWS) are subjected to rigorous peer review processes based on initial editor screening and anonymized refereeing by two referees. The ultimate purpose of peer review is to sustain the originality and quality of research work and filtration of poor quality and plagiarized articles. Peer review assures research quality.

Paper Publication Process –

  • Manuscripts are received online in the editorial office with the certificate that MS has not been sent for consideration in any other journals for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are checked by office for its style and pattern and for plagiarism. If plagiarism is more than 20%, it is not considered and sent back to author for revision and re-submission.
  • If MS is found fit at Editorial office in context to plagiarism and style and pattern, it is sent to Chief Editor for further processing.
  • If chief Editor find the MS suitable for consideration, he shall suggest two name of referees as reviewers either from editorial board or from other institutions of concern discipline for reviewing the MS.
  • Editorial Office shall send the MS for double blind review to the reviewers suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Comments of double -blind reviewers will be sent to corresponding author without disclosing the identity of the reviewers to address the comments and re-submission of MS.
  • In case, one reviewer rejects while other accept the MS, it is sent to third reviewer suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Revised MS is again sent to reviewers to see whether their comments are addressed suitably.
  • On agreeing by the reviewers, the MS is again sent to Chief Editors with comments of reviewers and reply of author to take the final decision.
  • The final decision of Chief Editor is communicated to authors.

Peer Review Policy

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our reviewers therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the (Indian Journal of Weed Science) Journal of Management and Research and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. In some circumstances it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.

Type of Peer Review

The (Indian Journal of Weed Science) employs double blind review, where the reviewer remains anonymous to the authors throughout the process.

How the reviewer is selected

Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our reviewer database contains reviewer contact details together with their subject areas of interest, and this is constantly being updated.

Reviewer reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
  • Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work

Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. Reviewers are requested to refrain from giving their personal opinion in the "Reviewer blind comments to Author" section of their review on whether or not the paper should be published. Personal opinions can be expressed in the "Reviewer confidential comments to Editor" section.

How long does the peer review process take?

Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 2-8 weeks. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the Editors within 3 weeks and the Editors may request further advice from the reviewers at this time. The Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript.

Final report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers, and may include verbatim comments by the reviewers.
Chief Editor's Decision is final
Reviewers advise the Editors, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Special Issues / Conference Proceedings

Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.

Becoming a Reviewer for the (Indian Journal of Weed Science)

If you are not currently a reviewer for the (Indian Journal of Weed Science) but would like to be considered as a reviewer for this Journal, please contact the editorial office by e-mail at (editorisws@gmail.com), and provide your contact details. If your request is approved and you are added to the online reviewer database you will receive a confirmatory email, asking you to add details on your field of expertise, in the format of subject classifications.

Editorial Board

Editorial office:

Office Manager, Indian Society of Weed Science, ICAR-Directorate of Weed Research, Maharajpur, Jabalpur, India 482 004

Publisher Address:

Secretary, Indian Society of Weed Science, ICAR-Directorate of Weed Research, Maharajpur, Jabalpur, India 482 004

Principal Scientist
Division of Crop Research
ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region
Bihar Veterinary College, Patna - 800014 (Bihar)

Chief Editor J.S. Mishra 9494240904 jsmishra31@gmail.com

The University of Queensland
St Lucia QLD 4069, Australia

Associate Editor Bhagirath Singh Chauhan b.chauhan@uq.edu.au

Consultant,
ICRISAT,
International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics
Patancheru, Hyderabad

Associate Editor A.N. Rao 9440372165 adusumilli.narayanarao@gmail.com

Editors

Professor,
Department of Agronomy, CCSHAU,
Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)

Ashok Kumar Yadav 9416995523 aky444@gmail.com

Professor & Head,
Division of Agronomy
FoA, Main Campus,
Chatha, SKUAST-Jammu (J&K)

B.C. Sharma 9419152428 drbhagwati@gmail.com

Principal
Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture
Affiliated to TNAU)
Manakkadavu, Pollachi-642103 (Tamil Nadu)

C. Chinnusamy 9443721575 chinnusamyc@gmail.com

Scientist,
ICAR - Directorate of Weed Research,
Jabalpur (Madhya Padesh)

Dibakar Ghosh 8989190213 dghoshagro@gmail.com

Principal Scientist
Department of Agronomy,
Assam Agricultural University
Jorhat - 785013 (Assam)

I.C. Barua 9435094326 iswar_barua@yahoo.co.in

Principal Scientist
PJTSAU, Hyderabad-30 (Telangana)

M. Madhavi 9491021999 molluru_m@yahoo.com

Assistant Agronomist
Directorate of Agriculture (Govt. of WB)
Kolkata 700001, West Bengal

Malay Kumar Bhowmick 9434239688 bhowmick_malay@rediffmail.com

Associate Professor
(Soil Science & Agrl. Chemistry)
Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College & Research Institute (TNAU),
Trichy (Tamil Nadu)

P. Janaki 9443936160 janakibalamurugan@rediffmail.com

Assistant Chemist (Residue),
Department of Agronomy,
Punjab Agricultural University
Ludhina-141 004 (Punjab)

Pervinder Kaur 9646105418 pervi_7@yahoo.co.in

Sr. Agronomist, Directorate of Extension Education
Punjab Agricultural University
Ludhiana – 141004 (Punjab)

Simerjeet Kaur 9814081108 simer@pau.edu

College of Horticulture,
Vellanikkara. Thrissur – 680 656, (Kerala)

T. Girija 9447004940 girijavijai@gmail.com

Principal Scientist,
Directorate of Maize Research,
Pusa Campus, New Delhi-110012

C.M. Parihar 9013172214 pariharcm@gmail.com

Indexing Indexing & Abstracting Services


1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Volume- 45 | Issue-2 (Apr-Jun) | Year 2013

Evaluation of cultivars and herbicides for control of barnyard grass and nutsedge in boro rice
Pramod Kumar, Yashwant Singh and U.P. Singh
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-1 | Volume: 45 Page No:76-79 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted to test the efficacy of different herbicides and cultivars during boro seasons of 2009 and 2010 on clay loam soils at BHU, Varanasi. The herbicides used were butachlor 1500 g/ha (pre-emergence) fb 2,4–D 500 g/ha + NIS (0.25%) at 20-25 DAT, pretilachlor 750 g/ha (pre-emergence) fb azimsulfuron 35 g/ha + NIS (0.2%) at 15 DAT, penoxsulam 22.5 g/ha + NIS (0.25%) at 15 DAT, ethoxysulfuron 18 g/ha + fenoxaprop + safner 56 g/ha + (NIS 0.25%) at 15 DAT, propanil 3000 g/ha + trichlorpyr 500 g/ha + NIS (0.25%) at 20-25 DAT and pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha (pre-emergence) fb bispyribac 25 g/ha + NIS (0.25%) at 25 DAT under ‘Gautam’, ‘Prabhat’ and ‘Krishna Hamsa’ cultivars. Weed count and its dry matter under ‘Prabhat’ cultivar were lower than that with other two cultivars for both Echinochola and Cyperus spp. resulting in higher weed control efficiency with Prabhat as compared to other two cultivars whereas, significantly highest grain yield of 4.15 t/ha was obtained in Gautam cultivar due to higher growth and yield attributes. The application of ethoxysulfuron + fenoxaprop was most effective in minimizing population of Cyperus spp. and its dry matter with highest WCE. ‘Gautam’ cultivar with highest net return of Rs. 24,898/ha and benefit cost ratio of 1.19 and pretilachlor fb azimsulfuron with net return of Rs. 27,461/ha  and benefit: cost ratio of 1.32 were found most profitable among the cultivars and herbicidal treatments, respectively.

Email

pramod.ran.bhu@gmail.com

Address

Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221 005
Saline tolerant plant growth promoting diazotrophs from rhizosphere of bermuda grass and their effect on rice
C. Sarathambal and K. Ilamurugu
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-2 | Volume: 45 Page No:80-85 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

In this study, beneficial effects of multifaceted growth promoting isolates for rice were investigated under two different salt concentrations in pot culture conditions. Two most salt tolerant isolates (TRY2) Serratia sp. and Bacillus sp. (TRY4) were selected and their growth promoting characters were studied under slight and moderate NaCl concentration. Isolates Serratia sp. and Bacillus sp. were able to fix the nitrogen and solubilise phosphate, synthesise IAA, acc deaminase regardless of NaCl concentration in most cases, under conditions of salinity. In pot experiments, plant growth (plant height, dry weight, and chlorophyll content) was promoted by bacterial inoculation with 2.9 and 5.8 g NaCl/kg soil. In this study, uptake nutrients (N+, P+, and K+) were increased regardless of NaCl concentration with inoculation of Serratia sp. and Bacillus sp. and uptake of Na+ was reduced with treatments receiving 5.8 NaCl/kg soil with Serratia sp. and Bacillus sp. isolates used as inoculants as compared to control. The present observations showed that strains Serratia sp. and Bacillus sp. partially alleviated the saline stress in rice, likely through the integration of several mechanisms that improve the plant response.

Email

saratha6@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agricultural Microbiology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003
Efficacy of clodinafop, isoproturon and their sequential application on durum wheat as influenced by fertilizer application
Tayyeb Farag Hessain
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-3 | Volume: 45 Page No:86-89 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiments were conducted in Safsaf area in Libya during growing season of 2009-10 and 2010-11.  The field infested with many weeds of mixed flora was used to investigate the efficacy of clodinafop, isoproturon and their sequential application in ‘Zorda’ cultivar of durum wheat during different crop growth stages that is seedling, tillering and elongation in the presence or absence of diammonium phosphate (DAP) at 2.5 t/ha. Results revealed that all weed control treatments reduced weed density and dry weight recorded at 60 days of sowing.  The least weed density was recorded from sequential application of clodinafop and isoproturon compared to weedy check.  Herbicide application at seedling stage of crop growth in the absence of DAP was more effective in reducing weeds density and their dry weight.  Crop height, effective tillers, biological yield, grain and straw yield, seed and harvest index increased due to sequential application of clodinafop and isoproturon during seedling stage in the presence of DAP compared to weedy check and elongation stage in the absence of DAP.

Email

proftayyebfarag@gmail.com

Address

Crop Sciences Department, Omar Mokhtar University, Libya
Bioefficacy of pinoxaden in combination with other herbicides against complex weed flora in wheat
Suman Shoeran, S.S. Punia, Ashok Yadav and Samunder Singh
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-4 | Volume: 45 Page No:90-92 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

An experiment to evaluate the bioefficacy of pinoxaden in combination with broad-leaved herbicides 2,4-D, metsulfuron and carfentrazone  in wheat was conducted at  Hisar during 2006-07 and 2007-08. Dominant weed flora of the experimental fields were Phalaris minor among grassy weeds and Chenopodium album, Melilotus indicia and Rumex dentatus among broad-leaved weeds. The tank mix application of pinoxaden with broad-leaved herbicides proved significantly effective in reducing density and dry weight of weeds and gave 85-100 % control of broad-leaved and 100% control of P. minor. Tank mixing of carfentrazone with pinoxaden although caused injury in terms of yellowing of tips but injury symptoms disappeared within 15 days after spray and did not result in any detrimental effect on grain yield of wheat. Application of broad-leaved herbicides 7 days earlier than pinoxaden or 7 days after application of pinoxaden also proved effective in controlling P. minor and broad-leaved weeds. Tank mixture of 2,4-D with pinoxaden did not result any antagonistic effect as anticipated as is evident by number of spikes, plant height, and number of grains per panicle and grain yield with use of 2,4-D were at par with weed free check.

Email

puniasatbir@gmail com

Address

Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana 125 004
Resource conservation techniques and pendimethalin for control of weeds in durum wheat cultivars
R.K. Jat, R.S. Banga and Ashok Yadav
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-5 | Volume: 45 Page No:93-98 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted on durum wheat during 2005-06 and 2006-07 to study the effect of resource conservation techniques (RCTs), cultivars and pendimethalin herbicide on weeds and yield of durum wheat. Zero tillage (ZT) significantly reduced the population of Phalaris minor and dry matter of grassy weeds as compared to conventional tillage (CT) and furrow irrigated raised bed system (FIRBS), however, density and dry matter of broad-leaved weeds was higher under ZT that under CT and FIRBS. Grasses were predominant under FIRBS as compared to CT. Cultivar ‘PDW 291’ had less density and dry weight of weeds having superior yield attributes and produced significantly higher grain yield over ‘WH 896’ and ‘WH 912’. Pre-emergence application of pendimethalin (1.5 kg/ha) reduced the density and dry matter accumulation by grassy as well as broad-leaved weeds effectively and increased the wheat grain yield by 25% over weedy check.

Email

aky444@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana 125 004
Nutrient removal by weeds and crops as affected by herbicide combinations in soybean-wheat cropping system
Navell Chander, Suresh Kumar, Ramesh and Surinder Singh Rana
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-6 | Volume: 45 Page No:99-105 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Eight weed control treatments in soybean and three in wheat were evaluated in soybean-wheat cropping system during 2009-10 and 2010-11 at Palampur. Commelina benghalensis followed by Echinochloa colona were the most competitive weeds in soybean. In wheat, Phalaris minor and Avena ludoviciana were the most predominant weeds. Pendimethalin fb chlorimuron reduced dry weight of Aeschynomene, Ageratum, Cyperus, Echinochloa and Panicum significantly over the unweeded check. Isoproturon 1000 g/ha + 2, 4-D 500 g/ha reduced dry weight of Phalaris minor over the weedy check. In soybean, application of pendimethalin fb chlorimuron-ethyl allowed weeds to remove 89.2, 89.1 and 88.9% less N, P and K, respectively as compared to the unweeded check. Application of isoproturon 1000 g/ha + 2,4-D 500 g/ha reduced N, P and K depletion by weeds by more than 24% over the unweeded check. Application of pendimethalin fb chlorimuron-ethyl resulted in 187.5% higher N and 166.3% higher K uptake by soybean over weedy check. Unchecked weed growth reduced P uptake by 62.4% as compared to pendimethalin fb chlorimuron ethyl. Isoproturon 1000 g/ha + 2,4-D 500 g/ha and isoproturon 750 g/ha + 2,4-D 500 g/ha resulted in significantly higher N, P and K uptake by wheat over unweeded check. Weedy check reduced soybean equivalent yield by 37.4 and 28.8% during 2009 and 2010, respectively. Imazethapyr fb imazethapyr produced higher soybean equivalent yield (3.34 t/ha) during 2009, whereas, pendimethalin fb chlorimuron (3.16 t/ha) was better during 2010. Isoproturon 1000 g/ha + 2,4-D 500 g/ha ( Rs. 1,17,736) and isoproturon 750 g/ha + 2,4-D 500 g/ha ( Rs. 1,16,861) resulted in higher net returns and  net per  invested as compared to weedy check.

Email

skg_63@yahoo.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh 176 062
Effect of nitrogen and weed control on productivity of wheat
R.R. Upasani, R. Thakur, A.N. Puran and M.K. Singh
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-7 | Volume: 45 Page No:106-108 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during winter season of 2005-06 and 2006-07 to evaluate the effect of nitrogen levels and weed control on weed growth, productivity and economics of wheat. The treatments comprised of 4 levels of nitrogen, viz. 0, 40, 80, and 120 kg/ha in main plots and 5 weed control methods, viz. weedy control, 2,4-D Na 0.75 kg/ha as post-emergence, isoproturon 1.0 kg/ha as post-emergence, isoproturon 1.0 kg/ha + 2,4-D Na 0.75 kg/ha as post-emergence and weeding by Dutch hoe at 15, 30 and 45 days after sowing. Maximum density and dry weight were recorded with 120 kg N/ha and minimum under N0. Increasing levels of nitrogen from 0 to 40, 40 to 80 and 80 to 120 kg/ha increased weed density by 33.7, 39.9 and 47.3% and weed dry matter by 35.2, 24.9 and 13.5%, respectively while N up take by 68.8, 56.7 and 18.7% phosphorus 13.2, 4.6 and 4.4% and potassium 16.2, 7.0 and 8.7% over preceding lower levels. 120 kg N/ha recorded significantly higher grain (2.90 t/ha) and straw (4.6 t/ha) yield, net return ( 26,616/ha) and B:C ratio (1.52).

Email

upasani.ravikant@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi, Jharkhand 834 006
Efficacy of herbicides on wheat and their terminal residues in soil, grain and straw
Asha Arora, S.S. Tomar and Shobha Sondhia
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-7 | Volume: 45 Page No:109-112 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during Rabi season of 2006-07 and 2007-08 at Gwalior (M.P.) to evaluate the effect of herbicides on weed control and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivatum L.) and residues of herbicides in post harvest soil, grain and straw of wheat. Ten treatments consisting of post emergence application of two doses of isoproturon (1.0 and 2.0 kg/ha), clodinafop- propargyl (60 and 120 g/ha),  fenoxaprop -p-ethyl (60 and 120 g/ha) and sulfosulfuron (25 and 50 g/ha)  along with two hand weeding and weedy control were evaluated in randomized block design with four replications. Samples of post harvest soil, grain and straw of wheat with higher dose of herbicides were analysed for herbicide residues by HPLC using PDA detector. Lowest weed population and weed dry weight at 60 days after sowing was recorded in isoproturon at both concentrations while lowest weed biomass at harvest and weed control efficiency was recorded in sulfosulfuron 25 g/ha followed by two hand weeding. Highest wheat yield (5.4 t/ha) was recorded in two hand weeding which was at par with sulfosulfuron 50 g/ha. clodinafop 60 g/ha, sulfosulfuron 25 g/ha and isoproturon 2.0 kg/ha. A reduction of 55.4% in wheat yield in weedy check was observed as compared to two hand weeding. A residue of 0.006, 0.041 and 0.022 µg/g isoproturon was in post harvest soil, wheat grain and straw while residues of 0.021 and 0.096 (µg g/g) clodinafop was present in soil and grain at higher level of application.  

Email

ashaaroragwl@gmail.com

Address

RVS Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, College of Agriculture, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh 474 002
Weed management in lentil
R.B. Yadav, Vivek, R.V. Singh and K.G. Yadav
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-8 | Volume: 45 Page No:113-115 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted to explore the feasibility of growing lentil with integration of weed management practices using   herbicide, increased plant population and manual weeding at Meerut during 2008-09 and 2009-10. The experiment was laid out in randomized block design with four replications and ten treatments. The major weeds in experimental field were Chenopodium album, Phalaris minor, Anagalis arvensis and Convolvulus arvensis were recorded with some other minor weed species. Lowest weed density (4 m2) and dry weight (2.64 g/m2) was recorded where pendimethalin  was applied 0.75 kg/ha as PE plus one hand weeding, which was statistically on par with pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha. Whereas, the highest grain yield of 1662 kg/ha was recorded by pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha plus one hand weeding, which was statistically at par with weed free as well as pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha. Increased seed rate of 25% significantly decreased the weed dry weight (32.0%) and increased seed yield (22.8%) in comparison to their respective treatments. On an average of 37.7% yield reduction was recorded due to weed infestation. The highest gross returns of  Rs. 23,268, net returns of  15,918 and B:C was recorded by pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha PE + one hand weeding.

Email

raghvendra61@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, S.V. Patel University of Agriculture & Technology, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 250 110
Integration of chemical and cultural methods for weed management in groundnut
A.H. Kalhapure, B.T. Shete and P.S. Bodake
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-10 | Volume: 45 Page No:116-119 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted to study the integrated weed management in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) for consecutive two Kharif seasons in 2010 and 2011 at Rahuri with combination of 12 weed management treatments in three replications. Weed free check (two hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAS and manually uprooting of weeds at 60 DAS) was found more effective to control weeds in groundnut and recorded lowest weed density, wed dry matter and weed index and highest weed control efficiency. It was also recorded significantly highest growth and yield attributes in groundnut over all the other treatments viz. plant height, dry matter weight of plant, number of pods/plant and pod yield/hectare. Though highest gross monetary returns (Rs. 1,09,845/ha) was recorded in treatment weed free check, maximum net monetary returns (Rs.  61,460/ha) and B:C ratio (2.42) were recorded in the treatment application of pendimethalin 1.5 kg/ha as pre-emergence  + imazethapyr  0.150 kg/ha as post-emergence + one hand weeding  at 40 DAS which was found most economically feasible weed management practice for groundnut.

Email

aniketmpkv@gmail.com

Address

Breeder Seed Production Farm, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Maharashtra 413 722
Yield and quality analysis of spring–planted sugarcane as influenced by nutrient and weed management
Sandeep Kumar, Vachin Kumar, Avesh Kumar, Sanjay Kumar and Naresh Kumar
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-211 | Volume: 45 Page No:120-125 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was conducted during spring season in 2007-08 and 2008-09 at Muzaffarnagar to evaluate the influence of nutrient and weed management practices on yield attributes, yield, quality, nutrient uptake and economics of sugarcane. Results showed that application of 125% of recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) enhanced the cane yield to the tune of 15.52 and 3.60% over 75 and 100% RDF owing to remarkable improvement in cane length, cane girth, cane weight and NMC. Sucrose, available sugar and commercial cane sugar (CCS) yield were also improved by 17.3, 23.4 and 42.6% over 75% RDF while 2.73, 3.15 and 6.84% over 100% RDF, respectively under application of 25% higher RDF. The values of juice extraction and purity per cent were remained statistically unchanged under 100 and 125% RDF but significantly improved over 75% RDF. The uptake of NPK in cane, green tops, trash as well as in total produce along with net return and B:C ratio were also noticed higher under fertility enrichment with 125% in comparison to lower ones. Weed free treatment produced maximum values of cane and CCS yield, yield components, juice extraction and nutrient uptake which was followed by application of glyphosate  1.0 kg/ha at 25 days after planting followed by one hand weeding at 60 DAP and performing of three hand weeding at intervals of  30, 60 and 90 days after planting (DAP).  Although, the higher B:C ratio was registered  under application of glyphosate  1.0 kg/ha, at 25 DAP followed by one hand weeding at 60 DAP owing to lower cost of cultivation. Consequently, application of 125% recommended dose of N: P2O5 :K2O  along with glyphosate applied 1.0 kg/ha at 25 DAP followed by one hand weeding at 60 DAP proved valuable in enhancing the yield, quality and economics of spring planted sugarcane.

Email

sankumar91@rediffmail.com

Address

Chaudhary Chhotu Ram Post-Graduate College, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh 251 001
Integrated weed management in garlic
Suresh Kumar, S.S. Rana, Navell Chander and Neelam Sharma
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-12 | Volume: 45 Page No:126-130 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Four herbicides (oxyflurofen 0.25 kg/ha, pendimethalin 1.50 kg/ha, trifluralin 1.50 kg/ha and metachlor 1.50 kg/ha) at recommended rates alone and at half of the recommended rates integrated with one hand weeding were compared with hand weeding 30, 60, 90 days after planting (DAP) and untreated check in silty clay loam soil during Rabi 2008-09 and 2009-10 at Palampur. Phalaris minor followed by Avena ludoviciana were the predominant associated weeds. All treatments resulted in significantly lower density of Phalais minor, Alopecurous myosuroides and Coronopus didymus. Metolachlor 1.50 kg/ha effectively reduced the density of Poa annua.  Metolachlor + hand weeding, pendimethalin and pendimethalin + hand weeding effectively reduced the density of Stellaria media. Integration of hand weeding with half dose of oxyflourfen, pendimethalin and metolachlor resulted in significantly higher yield of garlic than their respective higher dose alone. Weed index was lowest and weed management index (WMI), agronomic management index (AMI) and integrated weed management index (IWMI) were highest under pendimethalin + hand weeding. Herbicide efficiency index (HEI) was highest with oxyflourfen + hand weeding. Pendimethalin + hand weeding gave highest net return due to weed control (NRwc) and was followed by pendimethalin and metolachlor + hand weeding. Pendimethalin gave highest marginal benefit cost ratio (MBCR) of 40.7 followed by pendimethalin + hand weeding and metolachlor + hand weeding. Weeds reduced the garlic bulb yield by 72.5% over the best treatment pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha + HW.

Email

skg_63@yahoo.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh 176 062
Evaluation of toxins of phytopathogenic fungus for eco-friendly management of Parthenium
Jaya Singh, Saurabh Gupta, Suraj Singh Chauhan and Deepak Mishra
Full length articles | DOI: 2013-45-2-13 | Volume: 45 Page No:131-134 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Herbicidal potential of CFCF (cell free culture filtrate) of Phoma herbarum (FGCCPH#27) against Parthenium hysterophorus was determined by shoot cut, seedling and detached leaf   bioassays. Maximum mortality was shown by the inoculum formulated with sucrose + Tween-20 followed by Tween-80. Triton-X was found to be highly inhibiting in its action. Maximum average leaf area damage (LAD) of 85% on the seventh day and 65% of leaf damage by fourth day was observed when treated with CFCF obtained from 14 day’s old fermented broth at 50% concentration followed by 75 and 100%. Maximum phytotoxicity was obtained from 14 day’s old fermented broth with sucrose + tween 20  0.5% as formulating agent. Chlorophyll and protein contents were also significantly affected when treated with CFCF. The contents were gradually decreased with increased incubation. Maximum reduction was recorded in shoots treated with CFCF obtained from 14 days old fermented broth at 50% concentration followed by 75% and 100 % (Table 4). 14 days old fermented broth showed the maximum biological activity as depicted by the significant reduction in the chlorophyll and protein content of the host leaves. While extract obtained from 7 days old broth failed to show any remarkable reduction in these contents at similar concentration. The effect was comparatively more on chlorophyll-a and total chlorophyll while chlorophyll-b and protein contents were less affected.

Email

dr.jayasingh@yahoo.com

Address

Research Institute of Biodiversity Conservation & Rural Biotechnology Centre, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh 482 002
Efficacy of chlorimuron-ethyl against weeds in transplanted rice
Pooran Singh Chauhan, A.K. Jha and Monika Soni
Short communications | DOI: 2013-45-2-14 | Volume: 45 Page No:135-136 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Chlorimuron-ethyl was found very effective to control broad-leaved weeds and sedges, however it was less effective on grassy weeds. Chlorimuron-ethyl 12 g/ha was found much effective than lower dose for controlling the existing weed flora with higher crop yield and benefit: cost ratio.

Email

amitagcrewa@rediffmail.com

Address

Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh 482 004
Pre- and post-emergence herbicides for integrated weed management in summer greengram
S.K. Chhodavadia, R.K Mathukiya and V.K. Dobariya
Short communications | DOI: 2013-45-2-15 | Volume: 45 Page No:137-139 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was carried out on the medium black soil of Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh (Gujarat) during summer season of 2011. The relative efficacy of pendimethalin, oxyfluorfen, fenoxaprop-p-ethyl, quizalofop-ethyl was tested applied alone or in combination with hand weeding and intercultural 30 days after sowing (DAS) to control weeds in summer green-gram. Two hand weeding with two interculturing at 20 DAS and 40 DAS proved its superiority over rest of the weed management in summer green gram.  Among herbicidal treatment, application of quizalofop-ethyl at 20 DAS and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl at 20 DAS was found to be relatively more effective in controlling weeds than their sole application.

Email

sunilchhodavadia@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh, Gujarat 362 001
Early post-emergence herbicides for weed control in soybean
C. Sangeetha, C. Chinnusamy and N.K. Prabhakaran
Short communications | DOI: 2013-45-2-16 | Volume: 45 Page No:140-142 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during Kharif 2009 to evaluate the economic feasibility of weed management practices in soybean (Glycine max) grown in red loamy soils of western zone of Tamil Nadu. Early post- emergence (EPOE) application of imazethapyr reduced the density and dry biomass of broad-leaved weeds as well as grasses significantly as compared to pre-emergence herbicide under study. The lowest weed density and biomass were recorded with hand weedings twice on 30 days after sowing (DAS) followed by imazethapyr at 200 and 100 g/ha. Imazethapyr at 100 g/ha was found to be the economic method of weed management by giving higher net returns with grain yield.

Email

chandrusan2007@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003
Weed management in irrigated organic finger millet
Basavaraj Patil, V.C. Reddy, T.V. Ramachandra Prasad, B.C. Shankaralingappa, R. Devendra and K.N. Kalyanamurthy
Short communications | DOI: 2013-45-2-17 | Volume: 45 Page No:143-145 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during Kharif season 2012 at the Main Research Station, Hebbal, Bengaluru, to know the effect of weed management practices on weed flora and weed growth in irrigated organic finger millet. All weed management treatments had significantly lower total weed density and weed dry weight as compared to unweeded control. Stale seed bed technique + inter cultivation twice at 20 and 35 DAP (23.9/m2 and 10.3 g/m2) significantly lowered the total weed density as well as weed dry weight and was at par with hand weeding twice at 20 and 30 DAP (22.6/m2 and 9.4 g/m2, respectively). Higher total weed density and weed dry weight was found in unweeded check (245.9/m2 and 105.1 g/m2). Highest weed control efficiency was found in manual weeding (93.2%) followed by stale seedbed combined with inter cultivation twice (91.6%) and passing wheel hoe twice with one manual weeding (88.7%). Grain yield was significantly higher in hand weeding twice (5.46 t/ha) followed by stale seedbed combined with inter cultivation twice (5.36 t/ha).

Email

bspatil4504@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Acience GKVK, Bangalore, Karnataka 560 065
Field demonstration of integrated weed managment in sorghum
A.S. Jadhav
Short communications | DOI: 2013-45-2-18 | Volume: 45 Page No:146-147 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Fifteen demonstrations on integrated weed managment technology were laid out during Kharif  2010 to 2012 in sorghum at randomly selected farmers field from various districts of Marathwada region of Maharashtra with an objective to show the performance of IWM in sorghum. The IWM was found effective in increasing grain yield of sorghum from 18-50% over farmers practice depending upon weed intensity. 

Email

asjadhav31@rediffmail.com

Address

AICRP on Weed Control, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, Maharashtra 431 402
Integrated weed management in berseem
S.H. Pathan, A.B. Kamble and M.G. Gavit
Short communications | DOI: 2013-45-2-19 | Volume: 45 Page No:148-150 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Weed-free check treatment recorded significantly lowest total weed count/m2 and its dry weight at harvest      followed by oxyflourfen pre-emergence 0.10 kg/ha  fb imazethapyr post-emergence 0.10 kg/ha (immediate after harvest of Ist cut) and one hoeing at 3 week after sowing and one hand weeding at 5 week after sowing which were at par with each other. The weed control efficiency was highest in weed free check and significantly superior to all the treatments. Significantly minimum weed index of berseem, green forage yield and seed yield were  observed in treatment oxyflourfen  pre-emergence 0.10 kg/ha  fb imazethapyr post-emergence 0.10 kg/ha and it was at par with treatment one hoeing at 3 week after sowing and one hand weeding at 5 week after sowing and imazethapyr post-emergence 0.10 kg/ha. The economic studies indicatesed that oxyflourfen pre- emergence 0.10 kg/ha fb as post-emergence imazethapyr 0.10 kg/ha immediate after harvest of Ist cut was most cost effective and remunerative. The maximum net monitory returns of  Rs. 64,658/- with B:C ratio of 2.01 was fetched by the treatment oxyflourfen pre-emergence 0.10 kg/ha followed by imazethapyr as a post- emergence application 0.10 kg/ha immediate after harvest of Ist cut was found effective and remunerative followed by treatment  one hoeing at 3 week after sowing and one hand weeding at 5 week after sowing.

Email

pathansarfraj85@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Maharashtra 413 722

CONTACT Us

123 Main Street, St. NW Ste, 1 Washington, DC,USA.
  • business@support.com
  • +56 (0) 012 345 6789

Links

  • About Us
  • Services
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms & condition

Latest Blog

Image

Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation

On 10 Feb, 2016
Image

Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation

On 10 Feb, 2016

NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Subscribe to Our Newsletter to get Important News, Amazing Offers & Inside Scoops:

© 2018 Garden HTML5 Template. All Rights Reserved.