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
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

Full length manuscript should not exceed 4500 words including space required for figures, tables and list of references. Research note can be up to 2500 words, with not more than 2 figures or tables. One season/year data should invariably be presented as research notes only.

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- 40 | Issue-3&4 Supplymentary (Jul-Dec) | Year 2008

Studies on weedy rice infestation and assessment of its impact on rice production
Jay G. Varshney and J.P. Tiwari
Review article | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-1 | Volume: 40 Page No:115-123 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A preliminary survey on weedy rice infestation in rice fields was carried out during 2008 in all the rice producing states of the country including Jabalpur district and adjoining areas in Madhya Pradesh in particular. The study revealed that almost all rice fields were found heavily infested with weedy rice. The extent of infestation was found 5-60% in different states of India, whereas it was observed in the range of 11.32 to 44.28% in cultivators’ field and 0.78 to 2.40% at research farm of DWSR. Ten types of weedy rice (known as Sada or Sadwan) found in the farmers’ field and other two types found in water ponds / tanks (called as Pasai Dhan in Madhya Pradesh) were identified and characterized. Considering mean 10% infestation, the average loss in rice production was assessed to the extent of 9.15 million tones. The damage is likely to increase exponentially in subsequent years, if not managed effectively, challenging the rice production system in the country.

Email

varshneyjg@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Recent advances in herbicide resistance in weeds and its management
B. Duary
Review article | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-2 | Volume: 40 Page No:124-135 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Herbicides are the most effective and economic among the weed management practices. Use of herbicide is rapidly increasing in the world including India. Herbicides have revolutionized the weed management in world agriculture. Along with the advantages there are some inadvertent disadvantages like shift in weed flora, herbicide resistance and environmental concern. Development of resistance against the herbicides in targeted species is the most prominent among them. Herbicide resistance is a worldwide phenomenon and number of resistant biotypes of weeds is increasing at an alarming rate. Recently, almost one dozen species have been reported to be resistant against Monsanto’s very potent broad spectrum herbicide glyphosate which has now become a key issue for all stakeholders. Sometimes the use of the term herbicide resistance is misleading. Before calling it herbicide resistance, the factors for poor efficacy of herbicide should be sincerely evaluated. It is essential to properly understand the herbicide resistance, its development and mechanism to tackle the problem. In this paper an attempt has been made to review of up to date information on current status of herbicide resistance in the world – development of resistance, factors controlling the development of herbicide resistance in weeds, resistance mechanisms, integrated approach of herbicide resistance management and lastly basic research and facilities required for better understanding of herbicide resistance and its management.

Email

bduary@yahoo.co.in

Address

Institute of Agriculture, Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan (West Bengal)
Effect of mulching on weed infestation and tuber yield of potato in black cotton soil
K.K. Barman, P.J. Khankhane and Jay G. Varshney
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-3 | Volume: 40 Page No:136-139 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during winter months of 2003-04 and 2004-05 on a sandy clay loam black cotton soil to study the feasibility of using water hyacinth mulch for weed control and increasing productivity of potato cv. Kufri Chandramukhi. The weed control treatments consisted of control (no weed control measure), farmers practice (scrubbing the soil of inter rows space and earthing potato rows), water hyacinth mulch (HM), rice straw mulch (SM), metribuzin 250 g/ha as PE + HM, metribuzin 250 g/ha as PE + SM, metribuzin 500 g/ha as PE, and metribuzin 500 g/ha as PE + HM. Sprinkler irrigation was given immediately after planting, and flood irrigation was given during 3rd and 8th week after planting. Both rice straw and water hyacinth mulches controlled weed infestation throughout the growing period of potato, and no additional benefit of herbicide application in terms of weed control or tuber yield was noted in the mulched plots. The lowest tuber yield of 7.2 t/ha was recorded in control, it increased to 13.1, 20.8, 14.8, 21.1, 15.9, 13.0 and 21.4 t/ha respectively in the above mentioned treatments. It was concluded that water hyacinth mulch was superior to rice straw mulch in increasing potato yield in black cotton soil.

Email

barmankk@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Weed management in field pea with special reference to wild safflower
A.N. Tewari, A.K. Tripathi, Sanjay Singh and A.K. Batham
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-4 | Volume: 40 Page No:140-143 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field investigations were carried out for three consecutive rabi seasons (2001-04) on farmers’ field at Bariapur village of Jalaun district in Uttar Pradesh to develop effective weed management technology in field pea involving cultural and chemical measures for managing weed problem especially menace of Carthamus oxyacantha. Results revealed that metribuzin (175 g/ha) as preemergence followed by metribuzin (87.5g /ha) as post-emergence (after first irrigation) demonstrated satisfactory the mortality of C. oxycantha and other associated weeds with an overall weed control efficiency of 72.0% resulting in increased grain yield by 56.8% and greater net monetary returns (Rs 7140 /ha) with higher B:C ratio (5.49) over unweeded. Cross or bidirectional sowing reduced dry weight of weeds to the extent of 1 1% only and failed to incr ease grain yield significantly. Use of five tined hoe caused weed mor tality to the extent of 18-24% resulting in increased grain yield to the extent of 16-17%.

Email

ant_kanpur@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, CSAUniversity of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh)
Assessment of post-emergence herbicides in direct seeded rice
Anil Dixit and Jay G. Varshney
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-5 | Volume: 40 Page No:144-147 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field investigation was carried out during the rainy seasons of 2001 and 2002 to test the bioefficacy of post-emergence herbicides for controlling weeds in direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.). All the herbicidal treatments significantly r educed the density and biomass of weeds and increased grain yield of the crop significantly over unweeded check. Uncontrolled growth of weeds caused 68% reduction in the crop yield as compared to weed free in both the years of investigation. Pre-emergence application of butachlor at 1500 g/ha followed by one hand weeding produced maximum grain yields in both the years among all herbicidal weed control treatments, which were comparable to those obtained with post-emergence application of pyrazosulfuron at 25 g/ha, chlorimuon+metsulfuron at 4 g/ha, butanil 4000 ml/ha and bentazone at 1250 g/ha. The same treatments also resulted in maximum reduction in the density and growth of the weeds. Application of fenoxaprop reduced the population of grassy weeds, whereas butanil and pretilachlor reduced the grassy as well as broad leaved weeds. Post-emergence application of chlorimuon+metsulfuron, bentazone and pyrazosulfuron were most promising for controlling broad leaved weeds and sedges in direct seeded drilled rice.

Email

dranildixit@in.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Maharajpur, Jabalpur (Madhua Pradesh)
Suppression of Parthenium by botanical agents - standardization of technique
N. Arun kumar, L.K. Akshata , R. Devendra and Louis Linda
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-6 | Volume: 40 Page No:148-150 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Parthenium contact cause skin allergy, pollen leads to breathing problems in sensitive human and if deposited on stigmatic surface fruits gets aborted in brinjal. Parthenium harbors organisms of virus diseases and infect the crop later. Managing the Parthenium is absolutely essential but costly. Non-availability of timely labour force and the awareness of chemical pollution causes dilemma of herbicide usage. Alternative technique to manage Parthenium weed is a welcome challenge.Aqueous extracts of fresh or dry leaves (1%) of Lantana camara and Hyptis sulvelolensis suppressed germination of Parthenium more than that by Cassia uniflora extracts. Mulching of these botanical agents (10 t/ha) suppressed Parthenium till 60 DAS, but stimulated the growth of sunflower and tomato, respectively. Mulching of fresh or 30 days deposited materials suppressed the germination and growth of Parthenium. Soil sterilization enhanced the allelochemical efficacy of botanical agent indicating the role of soil microbes in degrading the allelochemicals.

Email

devendra_cuticle@yahoo.co.in

Address

Department of crop Physiology, UAS, Bangalore (Karnataka)
Effect of various composts alone and in combination with inorganic fertilizers on maize yield and soil health
C.B. Gaikwad, M.C. Kasture and B.M. Lambade
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-7 | Volume: 40 Page No:151-154 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

An experiment was conducted during kharif 2005 and 2006 in MPKV, Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar (MS) to find out the effect of parthenium compost in maize yield and soil health. The results indicated that application of 50% N through parthenium compost + 50% N through RDF (60:30:30 NPK kg/ha) and 50% N through vermicompost + 50% N through RDF were found at par with each other and recorded significantly higher grain and stover yield of maize over rest of the treatments. Organic carbon status of soil was not influenced by addition of different levels of organic compost and inorganic fertilizer. However, available N, P2O5 and K2O in the soil after harvest of crop was found significantly higher with the application of 50% N through parthenium compost + 50% N through RDF and 50% N through vermicompost + 50% N through RDF.

Email

cbgaikwad@indiatimes.com

Address

Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar (Maharastra)
Effect of weed control and nitrogen application rates on weed infestation and productivity in maize-cowpea intercropping system
R.P. Dubey
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-8 | Volume: 40 Page No:155-158 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during 2002-03 and 2003-04 at Jabalpur to study the effect of three intercropping systems viz., maize (Zea mays L.) sole, maize + cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.)] for grain and maize + cowpea for fodder, two treatments of weed control viz., pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + 1 hand weeding at 30 DAS and weedy check, and three levels of nitrogen viz. 0, 50 and 100 kg N/ha on weed infestation and crop productivity. The total weed population at 60 DAS was significantly reduced by 36 and 32% under intercropping combinations of maize + cowpea (grain) and maize + cowpea (fodder), respectively as compared to sole crop of maize. The maize grain yield was at par (2969 kg/ha) in sole maize and maize + cowpea (grain). However, it was significantly reduced to 2225 kg/ha under maize + cowpea (fodder). The maize equivalent yield was higher under maize + cowpea (grain) treatment. The maize grain yield was significantly reduced under weedy check (2140 kg/ha). Increasing levels of N significantly increased the maize grain and maize equivalent yields. The uptake of N by weeds was significantly reduced under maize + cowpea intercropping combinations. The highest net monetary returns of Rs14547/ha and B: C ratio of 1.54 were obtained from maize + cowpea (grain) treatment

Email

dubeyrp@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Effect of time of application on the efficacy of Combi and glyphosate against paragrass in non-cropped area
M.L. Kewat, Vasudev Meena, Neetu Sharma and A.K. Jha
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-9 | Volume: 40 Page No:159-161 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

An experiment was conducted during rabi season of 2006-07 and 2007-08 to evaluate the effect of time of application on the efficacy of Combi (mixture of glyphosate 35% + 2,4-D 35%) and glyphosate alone against weeds particularly Paragrass (Brachiaria mutica) in noncropped area. All the herbicidal treatments had marked influence on the density, dry weight, shoot length and root length of Brachiaria mutica. Application of combinations 2.5 kg/ha during noon hours (12.00-14.00) totally killed Brachiaria mutica within 60 days in comparison of its evening and morning application as well as aplication of glyphosate alone at 2.0 and 2.5 kg/ha at the same time (noon), which took longer time ( 90 days) for total weed kill

Email

mlkewat_2006@yahoo.co.in

Address

Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, JNKVV, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Evaluation of advanced generation transgenic groundnut lines resistant to herbicide-glyphosate
S.B. Manjunatha, T.C. Suma, Rohini Sreevathsa, R. Devendra, M. Udaya Kumar and T.G. Prasad
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-10 | Volume: 40 Page No:162-165 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

In groundnut, glyphosate resistant plants (cul. TMV-2) were developed by over expressing pEGADEPSPS with altered kinetics of enzyme, which do not bind to glyphosate. Agrobacterium mediated in planta transformation adopted to develop transgenic groundnut lines expressing EPSPS. Single leaflet glyphosate induced chlorosis bioassay was standardized and used to assess the glyphosate resistance in groundnut transgenic lines of T1 and T2 generations. The T1 generation plants grown under transgenic housing facilities along with wild type and their relative tolerance analyzed by the leaf swabbing technique indicated the integration of the transgene in tolerant plants by PCR. The T2 generation plants screened for glyphosate resistance by swabbing 3000 ppm of glyphosate at 45 DAS observed that 30% of transgenic plants showed some degree of yellowing and leaf mortality and resistance confirmed by PCR. The chlorophyll degradation was less in transgenic and also maintained higher membrane integrity compared to wild type plant

Email

sbmanju.acharya@gmail.com

Address

Department of Crop Physiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore (Karnataka)
Using chlorophyll fluorescence to study the effect of sulfosulfuron and surfactants on little seed canary grass
Piyush Kumar, Dalveer Kaur, R.C. Srivastva and S.K. Guru
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-11 | Volume: 40 Page No:166-169 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Chlorophyll fluorescence has been used widely to detect the effect of herbicides in crops and weeds as it is a simple, sensitive and non-destructive method. Among the chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, maximum quantum efficiency, Fv/Fm, can be used to study the effects of herbicides as well as to monitor the development of herbicide resistance in weeds. In the present study, an attempt was made to assess the effectivity of sulfosulfuron, a sulfonylurea herbicide, in controlling Phalaris minor, a notorious weed of wheat crop in the Indo-Gangetic plains. Sulfosulfuron is very effective in controlling the isoproturon resistant population of P. minor. Differences in Fv/Fm values were observed among the control and treated plants within a week after treatment.

Email

piyushkalra22@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Biochemistry, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar (Uttarakhand)
Effect of herbicides wtih and without FYM on soil properties and residues in potato field
R.B. Patel, B.D. Patel and M.I. Meisuriya
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-12 | Volume: 40 Page No:170-172 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Soil microbial population in soil was suppressed due to application of metribuzin 0.35 kg/ha and fluchloralin 1.0 kg/ha, but simultaneous application of FYM (10 t/ha) supported the proliferation of microbial population. Bacterial population was significantly declined due to application of herbicides at 1st and 7th day of spraying, while fungal and actinomycetes population were significantly declined at 1st, 7th and 15th day of spraying. No significant change was observed in soil pH, electrical conductivity, available phosphorus and available potassium due to application of fluchloralin or metribuzin alone or with 10 t FYM/ha at harvest while nitrogen content was significantly changed. Total nitrogen content of the soil was significantly the highest in application of fluchloralin with FYM. Fluchloralin residues were gradually reduced with time. FYM application supported the fluchloralin decomposition.

Email

rbpatel33@yahoo.com

Address

AICRP on Weed Control, B. A. College of Agriculture, Anand Agricultural University, Anand (Gujarat)
Performance of time and dose of post emergence herbicide application on relay cropped black gram
R. Veeraputhiran and C. Chinnusamy
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-13 | Volume: 40 Page No:173-175 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiment was conducted to study the effect of post emergence herbicide imazethapyr on weed infestation and yield of black gram variety (ADT 3) under rice fallow situation (relay cropping). The treatments consisted of three times (14, 21 and 28 days after sowing) of application in main plot and post emergence herbicide imazethpyr at 60, 75 and 90 g/ha and an absolute control formed the subplot treatments. The effect of imazethapyr on weed density, weed dry weight and weed control efficiency was at par when applied on either 21 or 28 DAS. Imazethapyr of 90 g/ha recorded lowest weed density and weed dry weight and was at par with that of 75 g/ha. Higher growth and yield attributes of black gram were associated with imazethpyr application on 21 DAS at 90 g/ha. The highest grain yield of 759 kg/ha was recorded under 21 DAS than other times of application of herbicide. Among the doses, application of imazethapyr at 90 g/ha registered significantly high grain yield (751 kg/ha) in comparison of other doses and control. The favorable economic benefits in terms of higher gross income, net income and benefit cost ratio was high by the application of imazethpayr at 90 g/ha on 21 DAS

Email

chinnusamy@hotmail.com

Address

AC & RI, Madurai (Tamil Nadu)
Bioefficacy and phytotoxicity of herbicide UPH-206 (clodinafop propargyl 15% + metsulfuron 1%) for the control of complex weed flora in wheat and its residual effect on succeeding sorghum crop
S.S. Punia, Dharambir Yadav, Ashok Yadav, R.S. Malik and Yash Pal Malik
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-14 | Volume: 40 Page No:176-179 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Two field experiments were conducted at Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar during winter season of 2005-06 and 2006-07 to study the bioefficacy and phytotoxicity of herbicide UPH-206 (Clodinafop propargyl 15% + Metsulfuron 1%) for the control of complex weed flora in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Dominant grassy weeds, viz., little seed canary grass (Phalaris minor Retz.), wild oat (Avena ludoviciana and broadleaf weeds like common lambsquartres (Chenopodium album L.), yellow sweet clover (Melilotus indica All), golden dock (Rumex dentatus L.) and swine grass (Coronopus didymus L.) were effectively controlled by post emergence (35 DAS) application of UPH-206, a ready-mix formulation of clodinafop 15% + metsulfuron 1%) at 60 + 4 g /ha. Maximum grain yield (4890 and 4894 kg/ha) was obtained with the use of UPH-206 + S at 75+5 g/ha which were at par with weed free check and ready mixture of sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron and UPH 206 + S at 60 + 4 g/ha but significantly higher than clodinafop and sulfosulfuron. No carry over effect of this herbicide at any of doses tested was observed on succeeding sorghum crop

Email

jagir@hau.ernet.in

Address

Department of Agronomy, CCS HAU, Hisar (Haryana)
Evaluation of herbicides in context to regrowth against terrestrial form of alligatorweed
Sushilkumar, Shobha Sondhia and K. Vishwakarma
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-15 | Volume: 40 Page No:180-187 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Terrestrial form of alligatorweed has been reported as a difficult weed to control by the herbicides due to heavy regrowth. No quantitative data is available on regrowth of alligatorweed after herbicides application except visual observations. Hence a comprehensive study was conducted in pot, plot and field conditions to evaluate the effect of three most recommended herbicides in context to superficial control and regrowth. After herbicide application, superficial control of alligator weed was achieved in pot, plot and field conditions but regrowth appeared from the no killed rhizomes. In pot experiment, hundred percent superficial control of alligatorweed at 15 DAA (days after application) was noticed with 2,4-D (2.5 and 3.5 kg/ha) and glyphosate (3.5 and 4.5 kg/ha) and by 20 DAA with metsulfuron-methyl (MSM) at 0.016 and 0.020 kg/ha. In plot experiment, 2,4-D (1.5 kg/ha) and glyphosate (2.0 kg/ha) caused almost 100 percent superficial killing at 10 and 15 DAA, respectively. MSM was most effective at 0.024 kg/ha, however, 0.020 kg/ha was at par with glyphosate (3.0 kg/ha) and 2,4-D (2.0 kg/ha). In plot experiment, little regrowth was noticed in higher doses of glyphosate, 2,4-D and MSM. Repeat application of same herbicides after 90 days of first application revealed no significant difference in regrowth at 30 DAA, however significant difference appeared at 60 and 90 DAA. Effect of MSM (0.020 kg/ha) was at par with higher dose of glyphosate (3.0 kg/ha) on regrowth after repeat application. In naturally infested area, no regrowth appeared in higher doses of glyphosate (3.5 and 4.0 kg/ha) up to 180 DAA, while glyphosate (3.0 kg/ha) and 2,4-D (2.5 kg/ha) were at par with MSM (0.020 kg/ha) at 360 DAA. This information may aid in the development of more effective management of alligatorweed by herbicide application.

Email

sknrcws@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Evaluation of Parthenium for pulp and paper making
Sanajy Naithani, R.B. Chhetri1, P.K. Pande and Geetika Naithani
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-16 | Volume: 40 Page No:188-191 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Parthenium hysterophorus, a weed commonly known in India as congress grass was evaluated for its pulp and paper making properties. Studies on chemical constituents, fibre dimensions, unbleached, bleached yield and physical strength properties of pulp sheets were carried out. The proximate analysis of Parthenium hysterophorus showed that its plant material contained 78.0% holocellulose and 17.2% lignin. The pentosan was 15.8% and solubility in hot water and alcohol benzene was 11.25% and 5.89%. The unbleached pulp yield was 41.8% to 43.8% with varying alkali charge from 14-16% in soda cook. Kappa number was 27.2 to 30.2. Pulping pulp yield and kappa number decreased with the increase in alkali charge under the identical conditions. The pulp produced using 14% alkali charge had better strength properties as compare to pulp produced using 15% and 16% alkali charge. Laboratory handmade pulp sheets with adequate strength properties were obtained from soda pulp prepared from this plant material

Email

pandep@icfre.org

Address

Forest Research Institute P.O New Forest, Dehra Dun (Uttarakhand) 1ABC Paper Mill Sailakhurd (Punjab)
Dissipation of sulfosulfuron from wheat field and detection of its residues in wheat grains and straw
Shobha Sondhia
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-17 | Volume: 40 Page No:192-194 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Persistence of sulfosulfuron applied at 25 g/ha in rabi 2006-07 in wheat crop was determined in soil, wheat grains and straw. Soil samples treated with sulfosulfuron were collected at 1, 15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 days after herbicide application and were analyzed for herbicide residues. Wheat grains and straw were sampled at the time of harvest. HPLC coupled with PDA detector was used to detect sulfosulfuron residues. Sulfosulfuron degraded rapidly in soil and was not detected in soil, wheat grains and straw at harvest. Half-life of sulfosulfuron was found 14.40 days.

Email

shobhasondia@yahoo.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Influence of different tillage systems and herbicides on soil microflora of rice rhizosphere
Tapas Chowdhury, A.P. Singh, S.B. Gupta and S.S. Porte
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-18 | Volume: 40 Page No:195-199 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was conducted in an inceptisol with rainy season rice to evaluate the effect of different tillage systems vis-à-vis different weed control measures on the survival and growth of total bacteria, actinomycetes, fungi, Rhizobium and Azotobacter in rhizosphere soil. Four types of tillage system were evaluated viz. (i) conventional-conventional (ii) conventional-zero (iii) zero-conventional and (iv) zero-zero tillage systems. Among weed control measures comparative effect of hand weeding and recommended herbicidal application (butachlor as pre emergence and fenoxaprop ethyl + ethoxysulfuron as post emergence) were tested along with a weedy check. The results of the investigation revealed that maximum growth of different microorganisms was observed in conventional-conventional tillage system, whereas minimum was in zero-zero tillage system. Pre emergence herbicide suppressed the microbial population between 0 to 10 days after emergence of plant (DAE), whereas post emergence herbicide inhibited the microbial population for a period of 10 days between 20 to 30 DAE. In weedy check, the microbial population was found significantly higher over other weed management practices in most of the cases.

Email

tapas_mb@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Microbiology, Agronomy1, Soil Science2 IGKV, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
Non-target effect of herbicides on Neochetina spp, a biological control agent of waterhyacinth
Sushilkumar, Kamlesh Vishwakarma and Puja Ray
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-19 | Volume: 40 Page No:200-202 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Water hycienth is one of the worst weeds of water bodies in India. It is responsible for causing great loss to water by evapotranspiration besides blockage of water, loss to fish production and responsible for creating breeding sites for mosquitoes and other disease causing organisms. The host specific waterhyacinth weevils, Neochetina bruchi Hustache and N. eichhorniae Warner (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) are the most important biocontrol agents used against waterhyacinth with notable success in India. Bioagent if used alone takes longer time, hence integration of herbicide in the area of 15 to 25% of the weed mats at suitable interval is recommended. These herbicides may cause harmful effects on bioagent. Significant impact of herbicides was observed on the mortality of the weevils. When herbicide was sprayed on both the leaves and weevils, 3.3 % mortality was seen on all doses of glyphosate, paraquat and the lower (0.5x) dose of 2,4-D while higher dose (x) caused significantly high mortality of 20% by 24 hours. 2,4-D at a higher concentration caused 53% mortality followed by paraquat (50%) when herbicide was sprayed directly on weevils. Glyphosate caused the lowest mortality among the three herbicides tested

Email

sknecws@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Maharajpur, Adhartal, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Comparative efficacy of Lantana, Sesbania and crop residues as nutrient source under submerged field conditions
K.K. Barman, Nasreen G. Ansari, G.K. Boudh, and Jay G. Varshney
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-20 | Volume: 40 Page No:203-207 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Lantana is an obnoxious weed in the pastures and forest land. The prospect of utilizing its huge biomass as an organic source of nutrient compared to Sesbania, wheat straw, mustard straw and chickpea straw was studied under submerged field conditions. These were chopped, taken in nylon mesh bags and then placed (0-10 cm) in a puddled field. One set of bags was dipped in butachlor solution (3000 ug/ml) prior to its placement in field. Three replicates of each treatment were taken out periodically and analysed for NPK and S content. The butachlor showed no effect on dry matter decomposition rate. The decomposition half-life of Lantana (26 d) was lower than that of wheat (45 d), mustard (41 d) and chickpea (34 d) straws and similar to Sesbania (26 d). Lantana was also superior to wheat, mustard and chickpea straws, and comparable to Sesbania in terms of NPS mineralization

Email

barmankk@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
On farm demonstration of zero tillage and herbicides in wheat
P. K. Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-21 | Volume: 40 Page No:208-209 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

25 field demonstrations were laid out during the rabi seasons of 2002-03 to 2004-05 in randomly selected two villages (Kushner and Chheri Boroda) adjoining to the National Reserach Centre for Weed Scienc, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh) with an objective to demonstrate the performance and profitability of zero tillage and herbicides on weed and productivity of wheat crop under rice-wheat system at farmers’ fields. Higher weed density and population of Phalaris minor were recorded in conventional tillage than zero tillage. Maximum reduction in weed density was obtained with the application of 2,4-D and isoproturon (500g + 750 g/ha) as tank mix under ZT and CT system. Higher average grain yield and monetary returns due to treatment were also achieved under zero tillage wheat with tank mixed application of 2,4-D and isoproturon as post emergence. Yield achieved in zero tillage was comparable to conventional tillage with clodinafop application.

Email

drsinghpk@gmail.com

Address

National Research Centre for Weed Science, Maharajpur, Adhartal, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh)
Evaluation of mechanical weeders in irrigated maize
V.S. Mynavathi, N.K. Prabhakaran and C. Chinnusamy
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-22 | Volume: 40 Page No:210-213 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Effect of different manually operated weeders on weeds and grain yield of maize was studied. Among the manually operated weeders evaluated, wheel hoe registered an yield increase of 154% over control, took lowest weeding time (71.43 hr/ha), covered maximum area with minimum cost of operation (Rs. 714/ha) on weeding twice on 25 and 45 DAS which was on par with pre-emergence application of atrazine 0.5 kg/ha on 3 DAS followed by hand weeding on 45 DAS.

Email

mynagri@yahoo.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu)
Bio-efficacy and phytotoxicity evaluation of imazethapyr in soybean
M.M. Venkatesha, H.B. Babalad, V.C. Patil, B.N. Patil and N.S. Hebsur
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2008-40-3&4 Supplymentary-23 | Volume: 40 Page No:214-216 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field studies conducted during kharif season 2003 at UAS, Dharwad revealed that post emergence application of imazethapyr 75 g/ha alone and with hand weeding was most effective in minimizing weed growth and enhancing the grain yield of soybean (Glycine max (L)). Although recommended soybean herbicides, viz., chlorimuron ethyl and pendimethalin reduced the dry weed bio-mass markedly compared with weedy plot both were found inferior to weed free check. Soybean grain yield due to weed free check was similar to that of imazethapyr 75 g/ha alone and with hand weeding and imazethapyr 100 g/ha fb HW. Crop phytotoxicity symptoms were not observed in soybean due to application of imazethapyr. Imazethapyr 75 g/ha was found also effective provided profitable and comparable with other treatments

Email

mandi_venkatesha@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad (Karnataka)

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.