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 - 53(2021)
Issue-1
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: 5.84

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- 43 | Issue-1&2 (Jan-Jun) | Year 2011

Impact of Climate and Carbon Dioxide Change on Weeds and their Management–A Review
R. P. Singh, Ramesh K. Singh and M. K. Singh
Review article | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-1 | Volume: 43 Page No:1-11 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Climate change directly affects the geographic range of species, the timing of species life cycle (phenology), the population dynamics of species, the decline and extinction of some species and the invasion of other species. Plants with C3 photosynthetic pathways are expected to benefit more than C4 from CO2 enrichment. However, rising global temperature may give competitive advantage to C4 plants than C3. This differential response of C3 and C4 plants will alter crop weed interaction because of the fact that majority of weeds are C4 and most of the food grain crops are C3. Higher levels of carbon dioxide could stimulate the growth of some weed species and greater production of rhizomes and tubers in perennial weeds making them difficult to control. Warmer temperatures will accelerate the rate at which day degrees accumulate, so the life cycles of some plant species may accelerate. As a result weeds are likely to mature and start to decay earlier.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy Institute of Agricultural Sciences Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221 005 (U. P.), India
Evaluation of Carfentrazone-ethyl+Metsulfuron-methyl against Broadleaf Weeds of Wheat
Samunder Singh, S. S. Punia, Ashok Yadav and V. S. Hooda
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-2 | Volume: 43 Page No:12-22 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Several broadleaf herbicides are available for weed control in wheat, but alone they are not effective against all infesting weeds.  Tank mixture often results in antagonism or crop injury, thus reducing crop yield.  Field experiments were conducted at CCS Haryana Agricultural University during 2009-10 and 2010-11 to evaluate the efficacy of premix of carfentrazone-ethyl+metsulfuron-methyl (17.5 to 50 g/ha) with and without surfactant and compared with alone application of carfentrazone (20 g/ha), metsulfuron (4 g/ha) and 2,4-D amine (500 g/ha) along with weedy check treatment. Premix of carfentrazone+metsulfuron at 25 g/ha+0.2% surfactant provided effective control of Malva parviflora, Lathyrus aphaca, Convolvulus arvensis, Rumex dentatus, Melilotus indica, Medicago denticulata, Anagallis arvensis, Coronopus didymus and Chenopodium album which were not effectively controlled by alone application of these herbicides. A non-ionic surfactant (NIS) was essential to increase the efficacy of carfentrazone+metsulfuron mixture. Premix of carfentrazone+metsulfuron 25 g/ha with 0.2% NIS reduced the population of weeds by 97-99% during 2009-10 and 2010-11, respectively, provided 95% control of infested weeds, reducing their dry weight by 98-99%, increasing tiller numbers by 26%, biological yield by 28% and grain yield of wheat by 31% over untreated control.  Crop injury (5-15%) by the application of carfentrazone+metsulfuron with 0.2% NIS or carfentrazone alone was transient and caused no reduction in crop yield. The premix of carfentrazone+metsulfuron 25 g/ha+0.2% NIS had similar level of control to its higher rates of 30 and 50 g/ha, but was significantly better than alone application of 2,4-D, metsulfuron or carfentrazone. In another field study, where Fumaria parviflora and Rumex spinosus were dominant weeds, tank mix of carfentrazone+metsulfuron 20+4 g with 0.2% NIS provided good control than their alone applications in a wheat field during 2009-10. The effect of tank mix application of carfentrazone+metsulfuron at 20+4 g/ha was similar to 600 g/ha of 2,4-D amine and ester, but better than lower rates of 2,4-D formulations. None of the 2,4-D formulations was effective against R. spinosus, whereas metsulfuron, carfentrazone and their tank mix provided 85, 78 and 92% control of R. spinosus, respectively, and produced 41% higher tillers of wheat over untreated check.  Similarly, tank mix of carfentrazone+metsulfuron 20+4 g/ha provided good control of F. parviflora in a fallow field during 2010-11. Alone application of carfentrazone or metsulfuron was not effective though plants treated with carfentrazone+metsulfuron recovered later on, but at later stages crop can smother it and the effect of tank mixture was similar to 600 g/ha of 2,4-D ester, but better than its amine formulation and lower rates of 2, 4-D against this weed.

Email

sam4884@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Effect of Stage of Phalaris minor on the Efficacy of Accord Plus (Fenoxaprop+ Metsulfuron, Readymix)
Samunder Singh, Kuldeep Singh, S.S. Punia, Ashok Yadav and Rupa S. Dhawan
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-3 | Volume: 43 Page No:23-31 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Screen house and field studies were carried out at CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar during 2009-10 and 2010-11 to evaluate the efficacy of ready-mix formulation of fenoxaprop and metribuzin (Accord Plus) applied at two growth stages of Phalaris minor.  Metribuzin 150, 180 and 210 g/ha and Accord Plus 275 g a.i. /ha were compared with tank mix of pinoxaden+carfentrazone 50+20 g/ha each applied at 38 and 60 days after sowing (DAS) of wheat under field conditions during 2010-11. Delayed application resulted in 33 and 28% reduced efficiency of herbicides against P. minor, respectively, at 3 and 5 weeks after treatment (WAT) (data averaged over treatments). Metribuzin 150 and 180 g/ha was least effective against P. minor when applied 60 DAS, whereas its application at 210 g/ha and Accord Plus resulted in 44 and 16% lower mortality of P. minor, respectively, over their application 38 DAS.  Delayed application also lowered wheat tillers resulting in lower grain yield.  Wheat yield was reduced by 23 and 18% by metribuzin 210 g/ha and Accord Plus 275 g a.i./ha compared to 14% in tank mix of pinoxaden+carfentrazone when applied 60 over 38 DAS.  Under screen house conditions, 19 populations of P. minor were evaluated at two growth stages (2-4 leaf and 4-6 leaf) with three rates of Accord Plus (137.5, 275 and 550 g a.i./ha) during 2009-10 and 2010-11.  Mortality of P. minor populations was 44, 65 and 97% at the 4-6 leaf stage of application compared to 83, 98.5 and 100% when applied at the 2-4 leaf stage, respectively, with three rates of Accord Plus (data averaged over populations).  Accord Plus 275 g a.i./ha applied at the 2-4 leaf stage provided 90-100 % control of all the populations of P. minor, whereas delayed application at 4-6 leaf stage provided 45 to 85% control. P. minor populations, Rasidan, Nangla, Barhi, Suchan Kotli and Uchana were controlled by <50% by 275 g a.i./ha of Accord Plus application at 4-6 leaf stage. P. minor populations, Barhi, Suchan Kotli, Koyal, Jakholi and Chanarthal were not completely knocked down by even 550 g a.i./ha of Accord Plus with delayed application at the 4-6 leaf stage. Some of these populations have already exhibited loss of efficacy against fenoxaprop and clodinafop under field conditions.  Care need to be taken in timely application of Accord Plus where efficacy of one of the mixture partners (fenoxaprop) is questionable.

Email

sam4884@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Effect of Herbicides Fenoxaprop-P-ethyl and 2,4-D Ethyl-ester on Soil Mycoflora Including VAM Fungi in Wheat Crop
Anil Gupta, Ashok Aggarwal, Chhavi Mangla, Aditya Kumar and Anju Tanwar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-4 | Volume: 43 Page No:32-40 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is the major staple food of India and its increased production is essential for food security. Weeds constitute one of the biggest problems in agriculture that not only reduce the yield and quality of wheat crop but also utilize essential nutrients. Hence, weed control is essential for increasing wheat production. Despite of its control on weeds, herbicides also affect beneficial non-targeted soil microbes including VAM fungi. Fenoxaprop-P-ethyl and 2,4-D ethyl-ester are two most widely used herbicides in northern India to control monocot and dicot weeds, respectively. However, their effects on mycorrhizal fungi are seldom highlighted. Therefore, the present investigation was focused on the effect of these herbicides on soil fungi of wheat crop alongwith special emphasis on mycorrhizal fungi. Three doses of each herbicide i. e. fenoxaprop and 2,4-D (recommended dose 0.1 kg/ha; 0.5 kg/ha, half of the recommended dose 0.05 kg/ha; 0.25 kg/ha  and double of the recommended dose 0.2 kg/ha; 1.0 kg/ha), respectively, were applied and their effect on soil fungi was studied at 30th, 60th, 90th and 120th day of treatment. Warcup’s soil plate method, wet sieving and decanting technique and rapid clearing and staining techniques were used for qualitative study, isolation of mycorrhizal spores and root colonization, respectively. Our results indicate that both herbicides had significant deleterious effects on soil fungi, mycorrhizal spore numbers and percentage root colonization and this effect increased with herbicide concentration. In our chemical warfare against weeds, it is necessary to avoid serious injuries to the beneficial soil microbes. Therefore, use of herbicides in high doses should be resorted to carefully and judiciously.

Email

.

Address

Department of Botany Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra (Haryana)
Performance of Ready Mix Formulation of Fenoxaprop+Metribuzin for the Control of Grass and Broadleaf Weeds in Wheat
U. S. Walia, Tarundeep Kaur, Shelly Nayyar and Rupinder Kaur
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-5 | Volume: 43 Page No:41-43 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

An experiment was conducted for three years at the Research Farm of Department of Agronomy, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana during rabi seasons of 2007-08 to 2009-10. The experimental field was heavily infested with Phalaris minor and broadleaf weeds. A new herbicide i. e. AEF 04 6360-8%+DIC 1468-14%-22% EC (fenoxaprop-P-ethyl+metribuzin) was applied at 165, 220, 275, 330 and 550 g/ha as post-emergence (30-35 DAS). The results of three years revealed that application of this herbicide at 275 and 330 g/ha provided effective control of P. minor and broadleaf weeds in wheat crop and were found statistically at par with Atlantis 3.6 WDG (mesosulfuron 3.0%+iodosulfuron 0.6% at 12+2.24 g) on dry matter accumulation by P. minor and broadleaf weeds. On an average of three years, post-emergence application of AEF 046360-8%+DIC 1468-14%-22% EC at 275 and 330 g/ha as well as Atlantis 3.6 WDG at 14.4 g/ha increased wheat grain yield by 58.8, 64.2 and 67.3% as compared to unweeded (control) treatment, respectively.

Email

waliaus@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141 004 (Punjab)
Influence of Integrated Nutrient Management on Weed Emergence and Productivity in Pearl Millet (Pennisetum glaucum)-Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Cropping System
Pawan Kumar, S. K. Yadav and Manoj Kumar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-6 | Volume: 43 Page No:44-47 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field investigations conducted at CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India during  2007-08 and 2008-09 revealed that both the doses and sources of nutrients increased weed emergence in pearl millet-wheat cropping system. The increase in fertilizer dose decreased weed emergence and manures as source of nutrients increased weed emergence during both the crops. The increase in fertilizer dose increased pearl millet, wheat and wheat equivalent yield and highest yield was recorded with the application of 50% recommended NPK dose through fertilizers+50% N through farm yard manure in kharif and 100% recommended NPK dose through fertilizers in rabi season during both the years and it was closely followed by the treatment where recommended dose during both the years was applied through chemical fertilizers. Among the organic sources, the increase in yield was highest with farm yard manure (FYM) and it was followed by green manure and wheat straw in descending order of magnitude.

Email

pawan.kumar@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Bioefficacy of Imazethapyr and Chlorimuron-ethyl in Clusterbean and their Residual Effect on Succeeding Rabi Crops
S. S. Punia, Samunder Singh and Dharambir Yadav
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-7 | Volume: 43 Page No:48-53 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Bioefficacy and phytotoxicity of imazethapyr and chlorimuron in clusterbean and its carryover effect on succeeding rabi crops was studied in field experiments at CCSHAU, Hisar during kharif 2006-07 and 2007-08. Weed flora of the experimental field was dominated by Digera arvensis, Trianthema portulacastrum, Physallis minima, Corchorus olitorius, Solanum nigrum and Cyperus rotundus. Post-emergence application of chlorimuron at 6 and 8 g/ha although provided good (90-92%) control of weeds but caused 20-30% injury to clusterbean resulting in severe yield reductions. PPI (pre-plant incorporation), PRE (pre-emergence) and POE (post- emergence) application at 21-28 DAS at 80-100 g/ha of imazethapyr provided season long control (85-95%) of clusterbean weeds. POE application of imazethapyr at 80 and 100 g/ha although caused mild injury to clusterbean in terms of yellowing of leaves and stunted crop growth upto 7 DAT, but it diminished within three weeks without any yield reduction. Maximum seed yield (1424 kg/ha) of clusterbean was obtained with imazethapyr at 100 g/ha PRE which was at par with weed free check, but during 2007, PRE application of imazethapyr at 80 g/ha gave maximum seed yield (1720 kg/ha) which was at par with its application at 80 and 100 g/ha as PRE, PPI or post-emergence 21 DAS. Chlorimuron and imazethapyr, irrespective of their dose and time of application, did not cause any injury to wheat, barely and chickpea planted as succeeding crop after harvest of clusterbean, but both these herbicides caused severe injury to mustard.

Email

puniasatbir@gmail.com

Address

CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Effect of Irrigation Schedule, Weed Management and Nitrogen Levels on Weed Growth in Rice (Oryza sativa) under Aerobic Conditions
Md. Latheef Pasha, M. D. Reddy, M. G. Reddy and M. Uma Devi
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-8 | Volume: 43 Page No:54-60 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was conducted at Agricultural Research Station, Kampasagar, Nalgonda district of Andhra Pradesh during the kharif seasons of 2008 and 2009 to find out the effect of irrigation schedules, weed management practices and nitrogen levels on weed growth, nutrient depletion and yield of aerobic rice. The major weed flora observed in the experimental plot was Echinochloa colona L., Cynodon dactylon Pers., Dactyloctenium aegyptium Beauv., Cyperus rotundus L. (Monocots), Eclipta alba Hassk., Trianthema portulacastrum L. and Amaranthus viridis L. (Dicots) during both the years. Irrigation scheduled at seven days interval during vegetative stage and four days interval during reproductive stage resulted in significantly higher weed density, weed dry matter production and NPK removal by weeds and higher panicle number and weight, filled spikelets per panicle grain yield and NPK uptake at harvest than that of irrigation scheduled once in two days. Pre-emergence application of pendimethalin @ 1 kg/ha fb cono weeding at 30 DAS and one HW at 45 DAS recorded significantly lower weed density, weed dry matter production and NPK uptake by weeds and significantly higher panicle number and weight, filled spikelets per panicle, NPK uptake at harvest and grain yield than that of pre-emergence application of pendimethalin @ 1 kg/ha fb 2, 4-D Na salt @ 1 kg/ha at 40 DAS and HW at 20 and 45 DAS. Among latter treatments, significantly lower values of above said weed parameters and significantly higher crop parameters were observed with pre-emergence application of pendimethalin @ 1 kg/ha fb 2, 4-D Na salt @ 1 kg/ha at 40 DAS as compared to HW at 20 and 45 DAS. Weed density, weed dry matter production and NPK removal by weeds and panicle number, length and weight, filled spikelets per panicle, grain yield and NPK uptake at harvest were significantly higher at 180 kg N/ha during both the years.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad-500 030 (A. P.)
Effect of Brown Manuring on Grain Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency in Dry Direct Seeded Kharif Rice (Oryza sativa L.)
Swapan Kumar Maity and P. K. Mukherjee
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-9 | Volume: 43 Page No:61-66 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was carried out during kharif seasons of 2006 and 2007 at university research farm for generating information on weed flora and to work out integrated weed management practices with its economics in dry direct seeded kharif rice. Among the weed flora, emergence of grasses like Cynodon dactylon and Echinochloa colona, sedges like Cyperus rotundus, Cyperus iria and Fimbristylis miliacea and broad-leaved weeds like Ludwigia parviflora, Ageratum conyzoides, Spilanthes paniculata, Eclipta alba and Enhydra fluctuans were recorded during experimentation. Among the integrated weed management practices, butachlor 1.5 kg/ha as pre-plant surface application followed by practices of brown manuring and post-emergence application of 2,4-D 0.50 kg/ha at 40 days after sowing recorded highest grain yield (3.0 and 3.88 t/ha), highest net returns (Rs.11889 and 19029/ha) and benefit : cost ratio (0.74 and 1.19) during both the years of investigation. The grain yield was statistically at par with the grain yield (3.14 and 3.98 t/ha) obtained from season long weed free condition. There has been considerable improvement in nutrient use efficiency due to adoption of weed control practices coupled with nitrogen management and among the integrated weed management practices highest nutrient use efficiency of N (50.00 and 64.67 kg grain yield/kg nutrient applied), P (229.36 and 296.64 kg grain yield/kg nutrient applied) and K (90.36 and 116.87 kg grain yield/kg nutrient applied) were highest with butachlor 1.5 kg/ha + brown manuring + 2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha in both the years.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Pundibari, Cooch Behar-736 165 (West Bengal)
Efficacy of Different Herbicides on Growth and Yield of Direct Wet Seeded Rice Sown through Drum Seeder
Dileep Kachroo and B. R. Bazaya
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-10 | Volume: 43 Page No:67-69 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

An investigation was conducted at Chatha Farm of Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu during kharif seasons of 2006 and 2007 on the efficacy of different herbicides on growth and yield of direct wet seeded rice (DWSR) sown through drum seeder. Fourteen weed control treatments were tested in randomized block design replicated thrice. All the weed control treatments significantly reduced the population and dry weight of weeds which resulted in significantly higher growth and yield of rice over weedy check.  Though the weed free treatment yielded significantly higher than other treatments, but it was not economical (1.55 B : C ratio).  Among the herbicides pretilachlor @ 0.5 kg/ha at  6 DAS fb rotary hoe at 20 DAS not only significantly reduced population and dry weight of weeds but also increased the grain yield of rice with the concomitant increase in the yield attributes and also resulted in highest net returns (Rs. 25918/ha) and benefit : cost ratio (2.25).

Email

.

Address

Farming System Research Centre Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Jammu-180 009
Integrated Weed Management in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)
M. Ratnam, A. S. Rao and T. Y. Reddy
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-11 | Volume: 43 Page No:70-72 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during rabi 2006-07 to 2008-09 at RARS, Lam Farm, Guntur to find out most suitable integrated weed management practice for control of weeds in chickpea. Results indicated that weed control treatments significantly reduced the density and dry weight of weeds in chickpea. Post-emergence application of imazethapyr 63 g/ha caused 20% crop injury among the herbicides under study. Integrated treatments were found to be superior (83-89% WCE) to alone application of herbicides. Among the treatments, pre-emergence application of oxyfluorfen 100 g/ha fb hand weeding at 30 DAS recorded maximum (2272 kg/ha) and was on par with all other integrated treatments and also with hand weeding at 15 and 30 DAS. Among the individual herbicides, pre-emergence application of pendimethalin 1.5 kg /ha recorded maximum grain yield and was on par with other individual herbicides.

Email

.

Address

Regional Agricultural Research Station, Lam Farm, Guntur (A. P.)
Integrated Weed Management in Indian Mustard and its Residual Effect on  Succeeding Fodder Pearl Millet
M. L. Degra, B. L. Pareek, R. K. Shivran and R. D. Jat
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-12 | Volume: 43 Page No:73-76 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted at the Agronomy Farm, ARS, Durgapura, Jaipur during 2003-05 on loamy sand soils analyzing low in available N and S and medium in available P and K. The increasing rates of S did not influence the weed density by markedly increasing the dry matter of weeds. Hand weeding twice showed the maximum control of weeds, which was significantly superior to other treatments. The successive rates of S nutrition upto 60 kg S/ha markedly enhanced the dry matter, siliquae, seeds/siliqua and seed yield plant in both the years. However, plant height and 1000-seed weight showed significant response only upto 40 kg S/ha and remained at par with higher levels of S nutrition. The yield of succeeding fodder pearl millet was highest (370.0 q/ha) weed control measures  brought about measurable improvement in growth and yield attributes, and yield of mustard compared with the weedy check. The two HW being at par with the herbicides coupled with HW increased the pooled mean seed yield of mustard significantly by 46.3% over weedy check. The application of 60 kg S/ha recorded significantly highest (Rs. 21077/ha) pooled mean, net return and B : C ratio (2.51) of mustard over lower levels. Two HW being at par with both the herbicides coupled with HW gave highest net return (Rs. 20050/ha), whereas B : C ratio was significantly higher under isoproturon @ 0.50 kg/ha with 60 kg S/ha.

Email

.

Address

Agricultural Research Station, Durgapura, Jaipur-203 012 (Rajasthan)
Weed Management in Summer and Kharif Season Blackgram [Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper]
Guriqbal Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-13 | Volume: 43 Page No:77-80 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiments conducted during summer seasons for four years (2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005) and during kharif seasons for three years (2002, 2003 and 2005) showed that unchecked weeds caused a reduction of 41.2 and 41.6% in blackgram yield during the two respective seasons. In summer season, pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha, pendimethalin 0.45 kg/ha+hand weeding (HW) 25 days after sowing (DAS), fluchloralin 0.675 kg/ha, two HW 25 & 40 DAS and weedy check recorded weed dry matter of 4.87, 3.45, 5.87, 3.40 and 23.6 q/ha and grain yield of 11.47, 11.75, 10.72, 11.95 and 7.02 q/ha with net returns of Rs. 10033, 10035, 9401, 9330 and 4828/ha, respectively. In kharif season, the respective treatments had weed dry matter of 4.16, 4.26, 4.93, 2.90 and 20.9 q/ha and grain yield of 10.43, 10.76, 10.60, 11.76 and 6.86 q/ha with net returns of Rs. 8577, 8649, 9233, 9064 and 4604/ha.

Email

singhguriqbal@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141 004 (Punjab)
Effect of Weed Control Practices on Weed Dry Weight, Nutrient Uptake and Yield of Clusterbean [Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) Taub.] under Rainfed Condition
S. L. Yadav, M. K. Kaushik and S. L. Mundra
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-14 | Volume: 43 Page No:81-84 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Imazethapyr, quizalofop-P-ethyl, pendimethalin and alachlor at 0.1, 0.06, 1.0 and 2.0 kg/ha, respectively, alone and with hand weeding 40 DAS were compared with one and two hand weedings against mixed weed flora in clusterbean. All the weed control treatments significantly reduced the dry weight of complex weed flora, although they differed in their effect on monocot and dicot weeds. Imazethapyr alone and with hand weeding 40 DAS effectively controlled both monocot and dicot weeds, while quizalofop-ethyl controlled only monocot weeds. Uninterrupted weed growth depleted 108.5 kg N, 15.8 kg P and 151.6 kg K/ha, while such losses were lowest with two hand weedings 20 and 40 DAS. Highest grain yield was obtained with weed free check (1840 kg/ha) followed by two hand weedings (1720 kg/ha) and imazethapyr 100 g/ha+hand weeding 40 DAS (1711 kg/ha) and it was significantly higher than all other treatments. Maximum uptake of N (133.8 kg/ha), P (32.5 kg/ha) and K (135.1 kg/ha) by clusterbean was recorded in two hand weedings (20 and 40 DAS), while in weedy check plots N, P and K uptake by crop was 40.6, 9.8 and 41.1 kg/ha, respectively.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture & Technology, Udaipur-313 001 (Rajasthan)
Influence of Surfactants and Ammonium Sulfate on the Efficacy of Glyphosate
M. Singh, Shiv D. Sharma and Samar Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-15 | Volume: 43 Page No:85-89 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A study was conducted to examine the effect of ammonium sulfate (AMS) applied with and without surfactants (Induce, Silwet L-77 and Methylated seed oil) on the efficacy of glyphosate. Herbicide treatments were applied to broadleaf weeds–Brazil pusley (Richardia brasiliensis), Spanish needles (Bidens pilosa), Florida beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum) and Pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and grassy weeds–Guineagrass (Panicum maximum), Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) and Crowfoot grass (Dactyloctenium aegyptium). The per cent control of both weed types was significantly higher with the application of AMS or the surfactant individually, or the surfactant plus AMS to glyphosate at 370 g/ha over no surfactant or AMS. Per cent control of grass weeds was 100 with the addition of any one of the surfactant except with glyphosate+L-77, where per cent control of Guinea grass and Johnson grass was only 82 and 85, respectively, two weeks after treatment (WAT). Per cent control of Brazil pusley and Spanish needles with glyphosate at 370 g/ha was low (20-38) 1 WAT. Addition of AMS improved efficacy of glyphosate in Brazil pusley 1 and 2 WAT. This effect, however, could not be observed 3 WAT. Effect of addition of AMS was apparent in Spanish needles and Florida beggarweed 2 WAT. Glyphosate alone, however, provided 93-100% control of Spanish needles, Florida beggarweed and pigweed 3 WAT. Per cent control of grassy weeds was complete 2 WAT with glyphosate at 370 g/ha with or without surfactants except with L-77 where it showed antagonistic effect.

Email

.

Address

Department of Horticultural Sciences University of Florida/IFAS, Citrus Research and Education Center 700 Experiment Station Road, Lake Alfred, FL 33850
Scenario of Herbicide Use in Wheat in Rice-Wheat Cropping System
O. P. Lathwal and K. S. Ahlawat
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-16 | Volume: 43 Page No:90-91 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kurukshetra-136 118 (Haryana)
Evaluation of Post-emergence Herbicides in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum)
Dinesh Khope, Satish Kumar and R. K. Pannu
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-17 | Volume: 43 Page No:92-93 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Diversity of Weed Species in Wheat Fields of Block Nowshera District Rajouri (J & K)
L. R. Dangwal, Amandeep Singh, Antima Sharma and Tajinder Singh
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-18 | Volume: 43 Page No:94-96 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Herbarium and Plant Systematic Lab. H. N. B. Garhwal Central University, S. R. T. Campus, Badshahi Thaul, Tehri Garhwal, Uttarakhand-249 199
Effect of Planting Density and Weed Management Options on Weed Dry Weight and Cane Yield of Spaced Transplanted Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) after Wheat Harvest in Sub-tropical India
Wazeer Singh, Ravindra Singh, R. P. Malik and Rajiv Mehta
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-19 | Volume: 43 Page No:97-100 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Regional Centre, Karnal-132 001 (Haryana)
Weed Dynamics and Yield of Sunflower as Influenced by Varied Planting Patterns and Weed Management Practices
C. Nagamani, S. M. Muneendra Naidu and D. Subramanyam
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-120 | Volume: 43 Page No:101-104 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy S. V. Agricultural College, Tirupati (A. P.)
Weed Flora and Yield of Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) as Influenced by Pre- and Post-emergence Application of Herbicides
K. Siva Sankar and D. Subramanyam
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-21 | Volume: 43 Page No:105-109 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Tirupati- 517 502 (A. P.)
Effect of Integrated Weed Management with Low Volume Herbicides in Sweet Corn (Zea mays)
B. Sandhya Rani, G. Karuna Sagar and P. Maheswara Reddy
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-22 | Volume: 43 Page No:110-112 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Department of Agronomy S. V. Agricultural College, Tirupati-517 502 (Andhra Pradesh)
Adsorption, Desorption and Quantity-Intensity Relationship of Pre-emergence Herbicides on Inceptisol
A. D. Kadlag, A. B. Pawar and M. V. Nagmote
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-23 | Volume: 43 Page No:113-115 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

.

Address

Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri-413 722 (M. S.)
Weed Survey of Aquatic Water Bodies in Haryana
S. S. Punia, Samunder Singh, Dharambir Yadav and Kuldeep Singh
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2011-43-1&2-24 | Volume: 43 Page No:116-117 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

.

Email

puniasatbir@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)

CONTACT Us

Dr. Shobha Sondhia, Secretary, ISWS
ICAR-Directorate of Wed Research
Jabalpur -482 004
  • iswsjbp@gmail.com
  • (+91) 8269253534
website counter

Designed, Developed & Maintained by

by Gyanendra Pratap Singh



©Copyright 2020 Indian Society of Weed Science (ISWS). All Rights Reserved.