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- 41 | Issue-1&2 (Jan-Jun) | Year 2009

Biology and Management of Cuscuta species
J. S. Mishra
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-1 | Volume: 41 Page No:1-11 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field dodder (Cuscuta campestris) is an annual obligate stem parasite belonging to family Cuscutaceae. The genus Cuscuta is comprised of about 175 species worldwide. Out of 12 species reported from India, C. campestris and C. reflexa are more common. It is a major problem in pulses, oilseeds and fodder crops in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Orissa, West Bengal and parts of Madhya Pradesh under rainfed as well as in irrigated conditions. It reproduces mainly by seeds and unlike root parasites, Cuscuta seeds do not require a specific stimulant to induce germination. The yield reductions due to Cuscuta are reported to the tune of 60-65% in chillies, 31-34% in greengram/blackgram, 60-65% in niger, 87% in lentil, 86% in chickpea, 72% in tomatao and 60-70% in alfalfa depending upon its intensity of infestation. Cuscuta can be controlled by using Cuscuta free crop seeds, harrowing in crop rows before it parasitizes the host, cultural practices like tillage, planting time, crop rotation and intercropping, selection of Cuscuta tolerant varieties and use of selective herbicides like pendimethalin, fluchloralin and pronamide. If the infestation is in patches, it can be easily controlled by spraying non-selective herbicides such as glyphosate and paraquat. In this paper, an attempt has been made to review the research work done on biology and management of Cuscuta in India and elsewhere.

Email

jsmishra31@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science Maharajpur, Adhartal, Jabalpur-482 004 (M. P.)
Interactions of Basil (Ocimum sanctum L.) with Some Weed Species– Competition or Allelopathy?
Samunder Singh and Megh Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-2 | Volume: 41 Page No:12-22 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Effect of basil leachate on the emergence of 10 weed species, beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum), crabgrass (Digitaria ciliaris), guineagrass (Panicum maximum), Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense), milkweed strangler vine (Morrenia odorata), pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia), Spanish needles (Bidens pilosa), teaweed or prickly sida (Sida spinosa) and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) alongwith basil (Ocimum sanctum) was studied in Petridish and under pot conditions. In another study, intra- and interspecific competition between basil and 10 weed species (guineagrass) substituted with crowfoot grass (Dactyloctenium aegyptium) was carried out in pots under greenhouse conditions in a replacement series with four plants per pot. Effect of weed : basil mixture on fresh weight and plant height was observed. Relative crowding coefficients (RCC), relative yield total (RYT) and agressivity index (AI) was calculated. Basil leachate collected from soil influenced weed emergence (both inhibitory and stimulatory), but the differences between leachate or water used for irrigation in pots and Petri dish studies were not large enough except on some species, indicating any significant role of allelochemicals. Basil leachate inhibited the emergence of basil itself. Similarly, soil incorporation of basil root/shoot matter in 1 : 12 ratio (basil : soil) had no inhibitory effect on the emergence of D. tortuosum, S. halepense, M. odorata, A. retroflexus, S. obtusifolia, B. pilosa and C. esculentus. Basil suppressed the growth of all weed species, except yellow nutsedge, but plant height of basil was unaffected by weeds (when data averaged over weed species and plant ratio). Plant height of basil increased when growing with weed species compared to monoculture due to inter-specific competition. Even single plant of basil (with three of weeds) was competitive enough to reduce the plant height of D. aegyptium, S. spinosa, A. retroflexus and M. odorata; plant height increased significantly when weeds were growing in monoculture. RYT values of 1.04 in 1 : 3 mixture of basil with weeds compared to 0.83 in 3 : 1 or 2 : 2 ratio indicated some degree of resource complimentarity. Highest RYT value of 1.64 was derived for D. aegyptium followed by D. tortuosum (1.22), S. spinosa (1.14) and C. esculentus (1.06) when growing in 1 : 3 ratio with basil. RCC (basil on weeds and weeds on basil) values were significantly different for C. esculentus compared to other weed species when growing in 2 : 2 ratio. The aggressivity index of basil significantly decreased when one plant of basil was growing with three of weed species compared to 2 : 2 or 3 : 1 ratio (basil : weeds); lowest being with C. esculentus. The results suggest that insignificant effect on weed seed emergence with basil leachate may not be due to any allelopathic effect as the growth inhibition (plant height and fresh weight) does not support this hypothesis, but suggests dominant role of competition when weeds and basil were growing in different plant ratio.

Email

sam4884@gmail.com

Address

Citrus Research and Education Center University of Florida, Lake Alfred, FL-33850, USA
Evaluation of Bispyribac-sodium for Weed Control in Transplanted Rice
D. B. Yadav, Ashok Yadav1 and S. S. Punia
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-3 | Volume: 41 Page No:23-27 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Bispyribac-sodium was evaluated against mixed weed flora in transplanted rice at Karnal, Haryana. Major associated weeds were Echinochloa glabrescens and E. colona (L.) Link among grasses, Ammannia baccifera L. and Euphorbia sp. among broad-leaved weeds and Fimbristylis miliacea (L.) Vahl, Cyperus iria L., C. rotundus L. and C. difformis L. among sedges. Weeds allowed to grow throughout crop season caused 68 and 27% yield reduction during 2006 and 2007, respectively. Bispyribac applied at 15 or 25 DAT was found equally effective against grassy weeds, but control of broad-leaved weeds and sedges was comparatively more when applied at 15 DAT. Bispyribac 25 g/ha applied at 15 or 25 DAT was adjudged the most suitable herbicidal treatment resulting in 174-199% and 37-41% increase in the rice grain yield over weedy check during 2006 and 2007, respectively. There was no phyto-toxicity of bispyribac on rice and no residual toxicity on succeeding crop of wheat during both the

 

years of study.

Email


Address

CCSHAU Regional Research Station, Karnal (Haryana)
Bioefficacy of Penoxsulam on Transplanted Rice Weeds
V. P. Singh, S. P. Singh, Neeta Tripathi, M. K. Singh and Abnish Kumar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-4 | Volume: 41 Page No:28-32 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Penoxsulam was found effective especially against Echinochloa species and Cyperus difformis as compared to butachlor and pretilachlor and it recorded lower weed dry matter. Highest grain yield was obtained with penoxsulam at 22.5 and 25 g/ha at 3 DAT during 2005 and 2006, respectively. Penoxsulam at 22.5 and 20.0 g/ha was found better against weeds than butachlor and pretilachlor. Weedy plot recorded 41.0 and 34.3% lower grain yield as compared to the treatment having highest grain yield during both the years. Based on two-season studies, it can be concluded that penoxsulam at 20-25 g/ha applied as pre-emergence (3 DAT) as well as early post-emergence (10 DAT) effectively controlled weeds in transplanted rice and it had no phytotoxicity effect on rice crop upto 25 g/ha dose.

Email

vpratapsingh@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy G. B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar- 263 145 (Uttarakhand)
Role of Seed Rate and Herbicides on the Growth and Development of Direct Dry-seeded Rice
U. S. Walia, M. S. Bhullar, Shelly Nayyar and Amandeep Singh Sidhu
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-5 | Volume: 41 Page No:33-36 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiments were conducted on loamy sand soils of Department of Agronomy, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana during kharif season of 2006 and on sandy loam soil of the seed farms of Ladhowal and Kapurthala during 2007 to find out optimum seed rate and weed management practices in irrigated direct dry-seeded rice. A seed rate of 37.5 to 45 kg/ha depending upon varieties was found optimum for successful cultivation of direct-seeded rice (DSR). Weeds in DSR can be controlled effectively with the integration of post-emergence (25-30 DAS) application of bispyribac 25 g/ha or azimsulfuron 20 g/hawith pre-emergence application of pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha. Application of pendimethalin alone was found inadequate for controlling complex weed flora of DSR. Integration of pre-emergence application of pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha with post-emergence application of bispyribac 25 g/ha or azimsulfuron 20 g/ha produced 61.7 and 42.1% higher yield, respectively, than alone application of pendimethalin 0.75 kg/ha.

Email

waliaus@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy Punjab Agricultural Univerisity, Ludhiana -141 004 (Punjab)
Herbicide Efficacy in Seeded Rice with Different Methods under Wet and Dry Conditions
Bhagat Singh, R. K. Malik, Ashok Yadav and D. P. Nandal
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-6 | Volume: 41 Page No:37-40 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiment was conducted at CCS HAU College of Agriculture Farm, Kaul, Haryana during kharif 2005 and 2006 to find out effective and viable system of controlling complex flora of weeds in direct seeded rice. Among different herbicidal treatments, pendimethalin at 1.5 kg/ha (PE) and cyhalofop butyl at 90 g/ha controlled Echinocloa very effectively but failed to check Cyperus, whereas pretilachlor+safener at 0.5 kg/ha provided excellent control of Cyperus. The grain yield was almost similar under the treatment of pendimethalin at 1.5 kg/ha fb HW at 30 DAS in all the sowing methods. Under wet seeding methods, pre-emergence application of pretilachlor+safener resulted in significantly higher grain yield of rice, whereas under dry seeding methods higher grain yield was recorded in the treatment of pre-emergence application of pendimethalin

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Effect of Atrazine on Weed Management in Winter Maize-greengram Cropping System in Central Plain Zone of Uttar Pradesh
V. K. Verma, A. N. Tewari and S. Dhemri
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-7 | Volume: 41 Page No:41-45 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field investigation was carried out during two consecutive years (2005-06 and 2006-07) at Kanpur to find out direct and residual effects of atrazine application with regard to weed growth and crop growth of maizegreengram cropping system. Manual weeding followed by earthing operation done at 20 days after sowing (DAS) prevented weed competition (85.98% WCE) resulting in higher values of growth attributes viz., plant height 30.99%, culm girth 36.81%, leaf area index 76.19%, dry weight of plant 41.55% and crop growth rate 37.63% than weedy check which recorded lowest values of growth characters. Atrazine 0.50 kg/ha showed at par results with two manual weedings done at 20 and 40 DAS. Atrazine applied in maize had no residual effect on weed emergence and crop stand of succeeding greengram

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy C. S. Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur (U. P.)
Weed Management in Zero-till Sown Maize
A. S. Rao, M. Ratnam and T. Y. Reddy
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-8 | Volume: 41 Page No:46-49 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiments were conducted during rabi 2005-06 and 2006-07 at the Regional Agricultural Research Station, Lam, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh to find out the most effective weed management practice in zero-till sown maize crop grown after rice. Uncontrolled weed growth throughout the crop growing period caused 43% reduction in grain yield. All the weed control treatments significantly reduced the weed growth and increased maize yield by 22 to 62% over weedy check without any crop injury. Highest maize grain yield was recorded with two hand weedings and pre-emergence application of atrazine 1.5 kg/ha followed by (fb) hand weeding at 30 days after sowing (DAS). Maize grain yield did not differ significantly among the treatments with hand weeding and herbicide integration. Highest gross and net monetary returns and benefit : cost ratio were recorded with two hand weedings and with pre-emergence application of atrazine 1.5 kg/ha followed by (fb) hand weeding at 30 DAS.

Email


Address

Integrated Weed Management Unit Regional Agricultural Research Station, Lam Farm, Guntur-522 034 (A. P.)
Impact of Long Term Use of Clodinafop in Wheat on Soil Microbes
Babita Saini, Sunita Suneja and Kamlesh Kukreja
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-9 | Volume: 41 Page No:50-53 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A long term experiment of rice-wheat rotation system sprayed in wheat with clodinafop continuously and as a component of herbicide rotations has been conducted on a permanent plot at Regional Research Station, Karnal since 1999. During the rabi season of 2005-06, wheat rhizosphere soil samples of above experiment were analyzed for total bacterial, free living diazotrophs and nitrifying bacterial populations in green manured plots (GM) and in plots without green manuring (WGM). Total bacterial and free living diazotroph populations were more in GM plots than in WGM plots. At early stages after the application of clodinafop, bacterial population was significantly less in plots sprayed with clodinafop as a component of herbicide rotations than in plots sprayed with clodinafop continuously and weedy control. At 30 days after the clodinafop treatment (DAT), free living diazotroph count was less in clodinafop treated GM plots than controls (weedy and weed free). The nitrifying population was inhibited at early stages after the application of clodinafop under GM conditions.

Email


Address

Department of Microbiology CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Application Timing Affects S-metolachlor Bioavailability in Soil
Bhagirath Singh Chauhan and Gurjeet Gill
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-10 | Volume: 41 Page No:54-57 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A bioassay, based on the response of wheat roots, was used to quantify the concentrations of bioavailable S-metolachlor when applied at different timings. The application timings of S-metolachlor (0.48 kg/ha) were 20 days before crop sowing (DBS), at crop sowing (AS) applied either post-sowing pre-emergence (PSPE) or incorporated by sowing (IBS). The upper 0 to 5 cm soil layer was sampled from all treatments at 0, 8, 14, 23 and 33 days after crop sowing (DAS). The concentration of bioavailable S-metolachlor was similar between the application timings AS (IBS) and AS (PSPE) at both 0 DAS (94 to 96%) and 8 DAS (86 to 89%). After this period, herbicide bioavailability was significantly greater in the AS (IBS) than AS (PSPE). The bioavailabity of S-metolachlor was always greater for the herbicide applied AS (IBS) than applied at 20 DBS. The bioavailability of the herbicide applied at 20 DBS was 55% of the original applied herbicide at seeding. On the last sampling time (33 DAS) the bioavailability of S-metolachlor was 45, 27 and 28% of the original amount applied for application timings of AS (IBS), AS (PSPE) and 20 DBS, respectively. The implications of this information for weed management strategies are discussed.

Email


Address

Crop and Environmental Sciences Division International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines
Efficacy of Weed Control Practices in Soybean Crop Production
Gowri Priya, Thomas George, B. Rajkannan and R. Jayakumar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-11 | Volume: 41 Page No:58-64 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

The effect of different weed control methods on weed population, yield and yield attributes of soybean was studied at TNAU, Coimbatore, using pre-emergence application of pendimethalin, fluchloralin and alachlor each @ 1.0 kg/ha as well as integrated application of pre-emergence herbicide+one hand weeding at 35 DAS, and two hand weedings at 20 and 35 DAS. Alachlor @ 1.0 kg/ha+one hand weeding at 35 DAS was found to be the best treatment followed by pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha+one hand weeding at 35 DAS and two hand weedings at 20 and 35 DAS treatments. The quality parameters of soybean seeds were not affected by weed control practices.

Email


Address

Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry Kerala Agricultural University, Vellayani (Kerala)
Effect of Planting Pattern and Weed Management on Nutrient Uptake and Economics of Rabi Sunflower and its Associated Weeds
V. Sumathi, D. S. Koteswara Rao1, D. Subramanyam and D. S. Reddy
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-12 | Volume: 41 Page No:65-70 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

The uptake of nutrients by sunflower crop and its associated weeds was studied under two planting patterns (45 x 30 cm and 60 x 22.5 cm) and six weed management practices (fluchloralin 1.0 kg/ha, pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha, fluchloralin 0.5 kg/ha+pendimethalin 0.5 kg/ha, fluchloralin 0.5 kg/ha+pendimethalin 0.5 kg/ha supplemented with one HW at 40 DAS and HW twice at 20 and 40 DAS including unweeded check). Planting pattern of 45 x 30 cm significantly reduced the nutrient removal by weeds and consequently nutrient uptake by crop was increased. Among the weed management practices tried, the nutrient uptake by weeds was significantly lower with HW twice and it was at par with fluchloralin 0.5 kg/ha+pendimethalin 0.5 kg/ha supplemented with HW at 40 DAS. On an average, weeds under unweeded check removed 42.0 kg N, 15.5 kg P and 45.4 kg K/ha and monetary loss in terms of nutrient removal by weeds was maximum in unweeded check with an amount of Rs.1133/ha, besides reducing the seed yield by 62% than the best weed management practice, HW twice.

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy S. V. Agricultural College, Tirupati-517 502 (A. P.)
Effect of Integrated Weed and Nutrient Management on Weed Density, Productivity and Economics of Coriander (Coriandrum sativum)
R. K. Nagar, B. S. Meena and R. C. Dadheech
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-13 | Volume: 41 Page No:71-75 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during the winter season of 2003-04 and 2004-05 at Udaipur to study the effect of integrated weed and nutrient management on weed density and productivity of coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.). Among the weed management practices, hand weeding twice (HW) at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS) and preemergence application of pendimethalin at 1.0 kg/ha+hand weeding at 45 DAS were at par. These treatments significantly reduced the density and dry weight of weeds over other treatments and significantly increased yield attributes of coriander resulting in higher seed yield (1.58 and 1.57 t/ha) and net return (Rs. 23,930 and 24,072 /ha) as a result of higher weed control efficiency (88.50 and 88.14%) and lower weed index (0.63% of pendimethalin+HW), respectively. Chenopodium murale Spergula arvensis and Melilotus indica were the most pre-dominant weeds. Nutrient management did not significantly influence weed density. Application of 60 kg N+30 kg P+30 kg K+30 kg S/ha significantly increased yield attributes, seed yield, net returns and B : C ratio in comparison to N+P and N+P+K fertilization owing to lower weed index and registered higher seed yield by 18.0 and 8.36%, respectively.

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur-313 001 (Rajasthan)
Comparative Efficacy of Pendimethalin and Oxyflourfen for Controlling Weeds in Onion (Allium cepa L.) Nursery
S. P. Sharma, G. S. Buttar, Sudeep Singh and D. S. Khurana
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-14 | Volume: 41 Page No:76-79 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was conducted at Punjab Agricultural University Regional Station, Bathinda during 2005-06 and 2006-07 to evaluate the effect of different weed control treatments on germination, growth of onion seedlings and weed spectrum in onion nursery. All the treatments reduced weed growth significantly over the unweeded control except plastic mulching and oxyfluorfen at 0.062 kg/ha. Pendimethalin at all the three levels significantly reduced weed population but adversely affected the germination of onion seedlings. The most adverse effect of pendimethalin was observed at 1.0 kg/ha. However, partial control of weed was observed in case of oxyfluorfen. There was significant reduction in weight of 100 seedlings at all the oxyflourfen levels. So, pendimethalin at 0.5 kg/ha and oxyfluorfen at 0.125 kg/ha can be used for better weed control and higher seedling production in onion nursery

Email


Address

PAU Regional Station, Bathinda-151 001 (Punjab)
Influence of Graded Levels of Nutrients, Time of N Application and Weed Management Practices on Weed Dynamics, Yield Attributes and Bulb Yield of Onion (Allium cepa L.)
V. Chandrika, D. Srinivasulu Reddy, G. Karuna Sagar and G. Prabhakara Reddy
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-15 | Volume: 41 Page No:80-84 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiments were conducted at S. V. Agricultural College, Tirupati for two consecutive rabi seasons of 2005-06 and 2006-07 to study the influence of graded levels of nutrients, time of N application and weed management practices on bulb yield of onion. Yield attributes and bulb yield were highest with the higher nutrient level i. e. 120-60-50 kg N, P, K over the other nutrient levels. Time of N application did not exert any significant influence on bulb yield, economic returns and weed dynamics of onion. Among the weed management practices, hand weeding twice at 20 and 40 DAT significantly reduced the density and dry weight of weeds, resulting in improved weed control efficiency, elevated stature of yield attributes and higher bulb yield and it was comparable to other weed management practices. Higher bulb yield was realized even at lower level of nutrients with weed management practices.

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Tirupati-517 502 (A. P.)
Seed Biology of an Invasive Weed–Euphorbia geniculata Ortega from Northwest Himalaya (India)
Mohd. Araf, Satish Kumar, Jyoti Parihar and I. A. Hamal
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-16 | Volume: 41 Page No:85-87 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Explosive seed dispersal, viability and germination in Euphorbia geniculata have been determined. Plant disperse seeds explosively upto 6 m but dispersal was affected by temperature, humidity and radiation load. Seed viability was not affected by dry storage (X±SE=93.6±0.67) and low temperature (X±SE= 9I.6±0.7). Seeds lacked primary dormancy, however, low temperature enforced secondary dormancy. Seed dispersal began at 1100 h and finished at 1500 h with peak at 1300 h (52.3%) during September. During November when temperature drops, dispersal began at 1100 h and finished at 1400 h with peak at 1200 h (40.7%). However, there was no significant correlation between temperature and seed dispersal. The distance peak of explosively dispersed seeds was observed between 100-200 cm (26%) and tail of distribution reached upto 677 (X±SD=243.6±148.8) cm and dispersal distance was not dependent on seed weight.

Email


Address

Department of Botany University of Jammu-180 006 (J & K)
Synergy of Tank Mix Application of Herbicides on Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) under Non-cropped Situations
Samunder Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-17 | Volume: 41 Page No:88-95 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field studies were carried out under non-cropped situations using tank mix applications of some herbicides against Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) during 2007-08 and 2008-09. Tank mix applications of carfentrazone 20 g/ha with glyphosate 1.0% (0.75% repeat year) plus 0.25% non-ionic surfactant (NIS) provided 95 (95) and 87% (82) control of Canada thistle compared to 95 (97) and 83% (82) control by glyphosate alone at 2.0+0.25% NIS, 8 and 13 weeks after treatment (WAT), respectively. Carfentrazone alone was not effective. In another experiment, tank mix applications of carfentrazone 20 g/ha+glyphosate 0.75+0.25% NIS+2,4-D amine 500 g/ha provided 98, 99, 96 and 89% control of Canada thistle compared to 85, 95, 92 and 79% control by tank mixing of 2,4-D 500 g/ha+glyphosate 1.0+0.25% NIS and 89, 92, 88 and 78% control by glyphosate alone 2.0+0.25% NIS, respectively, at 21, 42, 56 and 75 DAT. The mortality of Canada thistle was similar when glyphosate 1.0 or 1.5% was tank mixed with 20 or 40 g/ha of carfentrazone. Effect of 2, 4-D amine was significantly lower when used alone or tank mixed with carfentrazone compared to their mixture with glyphosate. The effect of herbicides was significantly higher in the second year compared to first year of spraying. Tribenuron alone at 25 g/ha+0.25% NIS or its tank mixture at 20 g/ha with 2,4-D ester 250 g/ha, metsulfuron 4 g/ha or carfentrazone 20 g/ha was not effective against Canada thistle. Similarly, tank mix applications of metsulfuron 2 or 4 g/ha with 2,4-D 250 or 500 g/ha failed to satisfactorily control Canada thistle. Glyphosate 1.0% alone or with metsulfuron 4 g/ha provided similar control of Canada thistle, but effect was significantly lower than alone application of glyphosate at 2.0+0.25% NIS

Email

sam4884@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Evaluation of Some Graminicides Against Polypogon monspeliensis (L.) Desf.
Samunder Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-18 | Volume: 41 Page No:96-98 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Weed Flora of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in Haryana
S. S. Punia, Samunder Singh, Dharambir Yadav and Ranveer Singh
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-19 | Volume: 41 Page No:99-100 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Email

puniasatbir@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)
Studies on Biological Control of Cuscuta chinensis Lamk–A Parasitic Weed by Euphorbia hirta L.
A. Rama Krishna and P. K. Durga Valli
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-20 | Volume: 41 Page No:101-102 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Email


Address

Department of Botany V. K. R. College, Buddhavaram, Krishna District (A. P.)
Weed Management and Soil Micro-organisms Studies in Irrigated Summer Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)
Harpreet Singh and Surjit Singh
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-21 | Volume: 41 Page No:103-107 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141 004 (Punjab)
Impact of Individual Weed Species on Growth and Yield of Winter Maize in Central Plain Zone of Uttar Pradesh
V. K. Verma, A. N. Tewari, V. P. N. Singh and D. D. Yadav
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-22 | Volume: 41 Page No:108-109 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Email


Address

Department of Agronomy Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur (U. P.)
Efficacy of Herbicides, Mulching and Sod Cover on Control of Weeds in Plum Orchards
Kirandeep Kaur and G. S. Kaundal
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2009-41-1&2-23 | Volume: 41 Page No:110-112 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Email


Address

Department of Horticulture Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana -141 004 (Punjab)

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.