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- 52 | Issue-2 (Apr-Jun) | Year 2020

Effect of different weed management options on weed flora, rice grain yield and economics in dry direct-seeded rice
P. Saravanane
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00019.2 | Volume: 52 Page No:102-106 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

The shift in the method of rice establishment from traditional manual transplanting of seedlings to direct seeding has occurred in many Asian countries including India. Weeds are the most important biotic constraint in dry direct-seeded rice (dry-DSR) production. Field experiments were carried out during 2015-16 and 2016-17 at Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture & Research Institute, Karaikal, and Puducherry UT, India to study the effect of different weed management options on the diverse weed flora, rice grain yield and economics in dry-DSR under unpuddled condition. The grassy weeds dominated the weed flora, with 86.12% relative density of Echinochloa colona (L). Link. The sequential application of pendimethalin and bispyribac-sodium herbicides (1000 fb 25 g/ha) with a manual weeding in 40 days after sowing (DAS) reduced total weed density (14.4 /m2) and biomass (37 g/m2), resulted in better rice growth (plant height and tillers/m2), yield parameters (panicle weight and 1000 grain weight) and higher rice grain yield (3.86 t/ha). Negative linear relationship was observed between rice grain yield and total weed biomass at 80 DAS. Uncontrolled weeds caused 68.3% dry-DSR yield loss. Pre-emergence pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha application integrated with manual weeding with or without bispyribac-sodium application and manual weeding thrice recorded higher B: C ratio in deltaic coastal ecosystem of Karaikal, Puducherry UT.

Email

psaravanane@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru College of Agriculture & Research Institute, Karaikal, Puducherry, 609 603, India
Long-term weed management effect on weed dynamics, weed shift and productivity of direct-seeded rice-chickpea cropping system
Nitish Tiwari, Shrikant Chitale* and Tapas Choudhary
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00020.9 | Volume: 52 Page No:107-115 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A long-term experiment was conducted on Inceptisol at Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh during 2010 to 2015 in direct-seeded rice (DSR)-chickpea cropping system to study the effect of continuous and rotational use of weed management practices on weed shift and productivity. No remarkable weed shift was visualized due to continuous or rotational application of combination of herbicides or manual weeding or its integration. However, appearance of Celosia argentea in unweeded plot was noticed in sixth year of DSR mainly due to its aggressive growth habit and non-submergence of rice field during Kharif 2015. The appearance of Celosia argentea suppressed the Alternanthera triandra. The Celosia argentea produced 8430 seeds/plant as against 1564 seeds/plant by Alternanthera triandra. Significantly higher seed yield of rice was registered under two hand weedings followed by oxadiargyl 80 g/ha fb bispyribac 25 g/ha. Seed yield of chickpea was higher under conventional tillage and continuous application of pendimethalin 1000 g/ha. Studies on weed seed bank suggested that although, there was no effect of different weed management treatments on seed bank up to 15 cm soil depth neither in DSR nor in chickpea at initial stage, but in unweeded control plot, there was perceptible variation in number of weed seeds of different annual weed species. The dominant weeds species were Celosia argentea (37.7%), Echinochloa colona (19.6%), Ischaemum rugosum (14.7%) and Cyperus iria (9.8%) over initially dominant species of Alternanthera triandra.

Email

shrikantmadhukarchitale@gmail.com

Address

Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492 012, India
Herbicide combinations effect on weeds and yield of wheat in North-Eastern plain
Dhiman Mukherjee
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00021.0 | Volume: 52 Page No:116-122 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

 

A field experiment was conducted at District Seed Farm (AB Block), Kalyani under Bidhan Chandra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya during winter season of 2016-17 and 2017-18 in upland situation to evaluate the effect of various herbicides and it’s combinations against different weed species and yield of wheat under new alluvial zone. The experiment was carried out in a randomized block design with eleven treatments in three replications. Total weed density at 30 days after spray, was recorded minimum with halauxifen-methyl-ester + florasulam + carfentrazone 10.21 + 20 g/ha and it was at par with the metsulfuron + carfentrazone 4 + 20 g/ha and considerably better than all other control measures except weed free situation. At 30 days after spray, least total weed biomass was observed with the 2,4-D E + carfentrazone 400 + 20 g/ha and showed parity with the halauxifen + florasulam + carfentrazone 10.21 + 20 g/ha, metsulfuron + carfentrazone 4 + 20        g/ha and halauxifen-methyl ester + florasulam 12.76 g/ha and statistically better than all other treatments except weed free situation. Amongst various herbicidal treatments, total weed density at 60 days after spray, lowest with halauxifen-methyl-ester + florasulam 12.76 g/ha and was at par with most of the treatments except 2,4-D Na 500 g/ha, 2,4-D Na + carfentrazone 400 + 20 g/ha and weedy check. This treatment also registered low weed biomass. The soil microbial population was significantly affected by weed control measures at 60 days after sowing.Higher grain yield of wheat was observed in weed free (4.80 t/ha) and was at par with metsulfuron + carfentrazone 4 + 20 g/ha (4.56 t/ha), halauxifen-methyl ester + florasulam + carfentrazone 10.21 + 20 g/ha (4.44 t/ha) and 2,4-D E + carfentrazone 400 + 20 g/ha (4.40 t/ha) and significantly better than other treatments. Total nutrient uptake by crop was highest in weed free and was at par with metsulfuron + carfentrazone 4 + 20 g/ha and significantly better to other treatments. From the study. It was concluded that use of metsulfuron + carfentrazone 4 + 20 g/ha resulted in maximum wheat yield followed by halauxifen-methyl ester + florasulam + carfentrazone 10.21 + 20 g/ha.

 

Email

dhiman_mukherjee@yahoo.co.in

Address

Department of Agronomy, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Kalyani, West Bengal 741 235, India
Endozoochorous dissemination of Rumex dentatus and its impact on wheat productivity
Pijush Kanti Mukherjee
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00022.2 | Volume: 52 Page No:123-126 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

The effectiveness of endozoochory and germination success of the weeds after passage through the animal gut are the important traits for dissemination and invasion of weeds. With this view, experiments were conducted during the Rabi season of 2017-18 and 2018-19 at ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute (IVRI), Izatnagar Campus with the objective to assess the effect of endozoochorous dissemination of weed (Rumex dentatus) on late sown wheat productivity (Variety HD 3059) while using cattle shed water for irrigation. The results revealed that late harvesting of the berseem led to the development of   R. dentatus up to seeding stage. Berseem green fodder contaminated with seeds of R. dentatus was fed to the cattle and buffaloes. Application of carfentrazone at 25 days after sowing (DAS) reduced the population of existing broad-leaved weeds, however, use of cattle shed water for irrigation increased the population of R. dentatus from 35 DAS up to 17% at 50 DAS, 134% at 65 DAS and 186% at 80 DAS. Whereas, the adjacent plot irrigated with normal ground water, recorded the declining trend of R. dentatus population from 35 DAS i.e. up to 15, 32 and 50% reduction at 50, 65 and 80 DAS, respectively. Large infestation of R. dentatus due to use of cattle shed water contaminated with seeds of R. dentatus reduced wheat productivity up to 44% (2.14 t/ha) as compared to the grain yield 3.82 t/ha obtained from the plot irrigated with normal ground water. During second year, the entire field was irrigated with normal ground water and similarly carfentrazone was used at 25 DAS. These measures reduced the population of R. dentatus and weed showed declining trend up to 30, 71 and 79% reduction at 50, 65 and 80 DAS from 35 DAS. These results confirmed that R. dentatus has the endozoochorous mechanism of its dissemination and use of cattle shed water for irrigation may not be recommended if the berseem fodder is infested with seeds of R. dentatus.

Email

pkm_agronomy@yahoo.co.in

Address

ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh 243 122, India
Tillage and weed management effect on productivity of wheat in North-West Rajasthan
H. Shivran*, R.S. Yadav, S.P. Singh, A.S. Godara, A.L. Bijarniya and S.R. Samota
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00023.4 | Volume: 52 Page No:127-131 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was carried out at SKRAU, Bikaner, Rajasthan, during Rabi seasons of 2016-17 and 2017-18 to investigate the effect of tillage and weed management practices on productivity of wheat (Triticum aestivum) in North- West Rajasthan. Amongst the tillage treatments, adoption of stale seedbed (SSB) using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/ha resulted in higher dry matter at harvest, effective tillers (101.77 per m.r.l.) and grain yield (4.06 t/ha), and significantly lowered the density and dry matter of weeds. Among various weed management treatments, metsulfuron 4.0 g/ha + one hand weeding (HW) at 45 DAS significantly lowered the density and dry matter of all the broad-leaf weeds, but not effective against Cyperus rotundus and Cynodon dactylon. Being at par with weed free check and also 2,4-D E + one HW, it was significantly superior to all other treatments and resulted 4.40 t/ha grain yield of wheat.

Email

hansrajshivran90@gmail.com

Address

Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner, Rajasthan 334 006, India
Tillage and weed control effect on weeds and wheat productivity
Arunima Paliwal*, V. Pratap Singh, Tej Pratap, S.P. Singh, S.K. Guru, Neeshu Joshi1, Sirazuddin and A. Kumar
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00024.6 | Volume: 52 Page No:132-137 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A 3-year study was conducted to assess the impact of tillage and weed control practices on weed flora and wheat productivity. Experiments were conducted during Rabi season of 2012-13 to 2014-15 at GBPUA&T, Pantnagar, with clay-loam soil. There were five crop establishment methods, viz. Transplanted rice (conventional tillage) (TPR)– wheat (conventional tillage) (CTW) (TPR-CTW), Transplanted rice (conventional tillage)– wheat (zero tillage)- Sesbania green manuring (S) (TPR-ZTW-S),  Direct-seeded rice (conventional tillage)- wheat (conventional tillage)- Sesbania incorporation (S) (DSR-CTW-S), Direct-seeded rice (zero tillage)- wheat (zero tillage)- Sesbania brown manuring (S) (ZTR-ZTW-S) and Direct-seeded rice (zero tillage) + residue retention- wheat (zero tillage) + residue retention- Sesbania brown manuring (S) (ZTR + R-ZTW+R-ZTS) and three weed control methods [(weedy check, recommended herbicide (Recommended ready-mix herbicide clodinafop 15% + MSM 1% (60 + 4 g/ha) and integrated weed management i.e., clodinafop 15% + MSM 1% 60 + 4 g/ha fb manual weeding at 45 days after seeding (DAS)]. Continuous zero-till cropping system along with residue retention and brown manuring of Sesbania has resulted in the lowest total weed biomass at 60 DAS and greatly reduced the density of Phalaris minor, Medicago denticulata, Polygonum plebeium and Coronopus didymus. However, density of C. didymus, Rumex acetosella and Vicia sativa was reduced under conventionally tilled wheat. Ready mix application of clodinafop 15% + MSM 1% supplemented with one hand weeding at 45 DAS greatly reduced the density and biomass of weeds. The maximum wheat grain (4.5 t/ha) and straw (6.3 t/ha) yields was achieved under zero-tilled wheat with rice residue retention and Sesbania as brown manure. The integration of clodinafop 15% + MSM 1% with 1 HW at 45 DAS resulted in an increase in grain and straw yields by 45.5% and 30.8%, respectively, over weedy check. It may inferred that in wheat cultivation conventional tillage could be replaced with zero-tillage along with residue retention by growing of Sesbania and the application of 2,4-D at 30 days stage to attain sustainability of rice-wheat cropping system.

Email

arunima.28@rediffmail.com

Address

G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand 263 145, India
Control of mixed weed flora with different herbicides in barley
Hari Ram, Gurbrinder Singh*, Neha Gupta and S.S. Dhaliwal
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00025.8 | Volume: 52 Page No:138-142 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during 2014-15 and 2015-16 to study the efficacy of herbicides for control of diverse weeds in barley. Herbicides were sprayed alone or in combinations. The highest grain yield (5.54-6.07 t/ha) was recorded in weed-free treatment which was at par with isoproturon 750 g/ha + 2,4-D 500 g/ha and pinoxaden 40 g/ha + carfentrazone 20 g/ha. Uncontrolled weed competition caused an average 8-54% yield reductions compared to weed-free treatment. The magnitude of net returns and the benefit-cost ratio was higher with the applications of isoproturon 750 g/ha + 2,4-D (Na salt) 500 g/ha, pinoxaden 40 g/ha + carfentrazone 20 g/ha, isoproturon 750 g/ha + metsulfuron 4 g/ha and pinoxaden 40 g/ha followed by metsulfuron 4 g/ha and in weed-free.

Email

gurbrinder-coaagr@pau.edu

Address

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab 141 004, India
Efficacy of pre- and post-emergence herbicides in maize
S.U. Kakade*, J.P. Deshmukh, S.S. Thakare and M.S. Solanke
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00026.X | Volume: 52 Page No:143-146 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field investigation was carried out at Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola during three consecutive Kharif seasons (2016-2018) to study the relative efficacy of herbicides on weed control in maize. Results revealed that, among the herbicidal treatments, atrazine 0.5 kg/ha fb tembotrione 0.120 kg/ha PoE at 20 DAS produced less weed count and weed dry matter than rest of the herbicides. Among the herbicidal treatments, maximum growth and yield attributes were recorded with treatment of atrazine 0.5 kg/ha fb tembotrione 0.120 kg/ha which was at par with atrazine 0.5 kg/ha fb 2,4-D sodium salt 0.5 kg/ha. Yield reduction varied from 12.49% to 54.17% in the herbicide applied plots as compared to weed free treatment. Atrazine 0.5 kg/ha fb tembotrione 0.120 kg/ha PoE 20 DAS (4.33 t/ha) and atrazine 1.0 kg/ha PE (3.89 t/ha) proved as effective as weed free treatment (4.91 t/ha) and recorded significantly higher grain yield with net monitory returns of  47832/ha and B:C ratio of 3.22.

Email

snjykakade@gmail.com

Address

All India Coordinated Research Project on Weed Management, Department of Agronomy, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, Maharashtra 444 104, India
Weed management effect in blackgram under acidic soils of Manipur
K.S. Shashidhar*, Samuel Jeberson, M. Premaradhya, N. Amit Kumar Singh and S. Bhuvaneswari
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00027.1 | Volume: 52 Page No:147-152 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment on effect of different weed management practices in blackgram under acidic soils of Manipur was conducted at C.A.U. research farm, Andro, Imphal East of Central Agricultural University, Manipur during Kharif season 2013, 2014 and 2015. It was laid out in randomized block design with nine different weed management treatments, viz. pre-emergence application of pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha, pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1.0 kg/ha, pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + quizalofop-ethyl 75 g as post-emergence application, pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1.0 kg/ha + quizalofop-ethyl 75 g as post-emergence application, pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + imazethapyr 55 g/ha, pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha + hand weeding at 30 DAS, pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1.0 kg/ha + hand weeding at 30 DAS and twice hand weeding at 20 and 40 DAS. Pendimethalin1.0 kg/ha with hand weeding twice at 20 and 40 DAS recorded significant reduction in weed density, weed biomass and weed control efficiency followed by pre-emergence application of pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1.0 kg/ha, + hand weeding at 25 DAS. Significantly higher number of pods per plant, seed and stover yield and growth attributes like plant height and number of branches per plant were recorded under twice hand weeding followed by integrated treatment of pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1.0 kg/ha + hand weeding.

Email

shashiuas@gmail.com

Address

Central Agricultural University, Imphal, Manipur 795 004, India
Intercrops and weed management effect on productivity and competition indices of cotton
A. Sathishkumar*, G. Srinivasan, E. Subramanian and P. Rajesh
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00028.3 | Volume: 52 Page No:153-159 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiments were conducted during summer 2016 and winter 2016-17 at Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai to study the allelopathic effect of different intercrops and tree leaf extracts in managing weeds and increasing productivity of cotton. The cotton + sorghum intercropping system registered lower weed density at 20, 40 and at 60 days after seeding (DAS) during both the seasons. Among the weed management practices, lower weed density was recorded with pre-emergence application of pendimethalin at 1.0 kg/ha at 20 DAS and with hand weeding twice at 20 and 40 DAS at 40 and 60 DAS during studied periods. The highest cotton equivalent yield (389, 419       kg/ha), land equivalent ratio (1.52, 1.54), monetary equivalent ratio (1.18, 1.17) and system productivity (2.13, 2.39 t/ha) were recorded in cotton + sunflower intercropping system with hand weeding twice at 20 and 40 DAS during both the years. Among the combined applications of intercropping system and tree leaf extracts, cotton + sunflower (1:1) + pre-emergence application of Mangifera indica leaf extract at 30% + hand weeding at 40 DAS registered the maximum cotton equivalent yield (349, 374 kg/ha), land equivalent ratio (1.31, 1.34), monetary equivalent ratio (1.0, 1.02) and system productivity (1.81, 2.07 t/ha) during summer 2016 and winter 2016-17, respectively.

Email

sathishkumar08668@gmail.com

Address

TNAU, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625 104, India
Efficacy of herbicides on weed control, rhizospheric micro-organisms, soil properties and leaf qualities in tea plantation
Rajib Kundu, Mousumi Mondal*, Sourav Garai, Hirak Banerjee, Dibakar Ghosh, Aparajita Majumder and Ratneswar Poddar
Research article | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00029.5 | Volume: 52 Page No:160-168 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field trials were conducted in Tarai region of Jalpaiguri, West Bengal, India (26°88 N latitude; 88°32 E longitude, and 122 m above mean sea level) under natural weed infestations in tea garden during 2017 and 2018 to evaluate the efficacy of herbicides on weed flora, non-target soil organisms, leaf quality and productivity of tea (var. TV-23). The pattern of nutrient uptake and soil physico-chemicals properties were also itemized. The treatments were comprised of three doses of glufosinate ammonium 13.5% SL (0.27, 0.34, 0.45 kg/ha), glyphosate 41% SL (1.23 kg/ha), paraquat dichloride 24% SL (0.60 kg/ha) and weedy check within a randomized complete block design, replicated four times. The results revealed that glufosinate ammonium at 0.45 kg/ha was the most efficient against grassy and broad-leaf weeds with higher weed control efficiency (> 90%) and total green leaf yield (3.0 t/ha and 2.96 t/ha). Herbicides did not show any phytotoxicity symptoms on the matured tea plants throughout the observation period. An initial detrimental effect on rhizospheric micro-flora (total bacteria, fungi, and actinomycetes) was imposed by residual toxicity of herbicides but at later stage, no harmful effects were observed. Maximum nutrients uptake and soil available nutrients were determined under the higher dose of glufosinate ammonium. Tea leaf quality did not significantly influence by weed management practices. Based on overall performance, the glufosinate ammonium 0.45 kg/ha may be considered as the best substitute for others post-emergent herbicide against the complex weed floras in tea garden.

Email

mou.mousumi98@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, West Bengal 741 252, India
Weed management in dry direct-seeded rice: Assessing the impacts on weeds and crop
Suman Sen*, Ramanjit Kaur and T.K. Das
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00030.1 | Volume: 52 Page No:169-174 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Weeds are the major biotic stress limiting productivity, profitability and sustainability of direct-seeded rice (DSR). Effective weed control determines the success of DSR. Therefore, a field study was undertaken to assess the impacts of potential pre- and post-emergence herbicides in sequence and integrated use of herbicides with other methods on weeds and DSR. Eleven weed control treatments comprising of six combinations of pre- and post-emergence herbicides, two brown manuring, one herbicide with manual weeding, and two control (weed-free check and unweeded control) were evaluated in a randomized complete block design with three replications. Results showed that grassy weeds were most dominant, constituting 66.0–91.8% of total weed dry weight across the treatments. Unit increase in weed density (per m2) and weed dry weight (g/m2) could reduce rice grain yield by 14.5 and 11 kg/ha, respectively. All weed control treatments impacted weed interference, crop growth and yield significantly. Sequential applications of pendimethalin (1.0 kg/ha) as pre-emergence and ready-mixture of penoxsulam + cyhalofop-butyl (130 g/ha) at 25 days after sowing (DAS) significantly reduced weed dry weight by 87.6% at harvest, and was superior to other treatments. This treatment increased rice grain yield (3.92 t/ha) by 378.9% over unweeded control, gross benefit: cost (2.30) by 31.4% over weed-free check, and gave highest overall impact index (1.27) with an economic threshold level of 9.0 weeds/m2, and found to be the best weed control option in DSR. Likewise, brown manuring followed by application of metsulfuron-methyl 10% + chlorimuron-ethyl 10% (20 g/ha Almix) at 40 DAS led to 80.3% reduction in weed dry weight, causing significant improvements in crop growth and grain yield (3.67 t/ha) with 30.3% higher gross benefit: cost over weed-free check, and could become a profitable alternative weed control option in DSR.

Email

sumansen.agri@gmail.com

Address

Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, Delhi 110 012, India
Crop establishment method and planting density effects on weeds, insects and productivity of rice
Buta Singh Dhillon*, Makhan S. Bhullar and Preetinder S. Sarao
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00031.3 | Volume: 52 Page No:175-178 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

The effect of establishment methods and seedling density on weed dynamics, pest incidence and productivity of transplanted rice were evaluated in a field study, conducted in summer 2019 at Ludhiana, India.Three rice establishment methods [rice transplanted on puddled flat soil (PFTR), rice transplanted on unpuddled raised bed (UBTR), rice transplanted on unpuddled ridge (URTR)] in main plots, and three planting densities (20, 25, 33 seedling hills/m2) in sub-plots were evaluated in a split-plot design. It was found that UBTR and URTR methods had higher weed biomass than PFTR at 20 and 70 days after transplanting (DAT). All three establishment methods gave similar rice grain yield. Increase in planting density from 20 to 33 seedling hills/m2 reduced weed biomass at 20 and 70 DAT but at 45 DAT, all the planting densities had similar weed biomass. Likewise, there was consistent decline in rice grain yield due to reduction in planting densities but differences among consecutive planting densities were not significant. The incidence of insect-pest remained below economic threshold level under all treatments.

Email

bsdhillon@pau.edu

Address

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab 141 004, India
Bio-efficacy of pre-and post-emergence herbicides on weed control and yield of rainfed lowland rice
G. Gangireddy and D. Subramanyam
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00032.5 | Volume: 52 Page No:179-182 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted at Sri Venkateswara Agricultural College, Tirupati campus of Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Andhra Pradesh, India to study the performance of sequential application of pre-emergence (PE) and post-emergence (PoE) herbicides for broad-spectrum weed control in rainfed lowland rice and their residual effect on succeeding greengram. The major weed flora associated with rainfed lowland rice were Cyperus rotundus L. (55%), Digitaria sanguinalis L. Scop (12%) and Commelina benghalensis L.(7%) and other weeds (26%). The lowest density and dry weight and increased growth and yield components were recorded with PE application of pendimethalin 1000 g/ha fb florpyrauxifen-benzyl 25 g/ha or halosulfuron-methyl 67.5 g/ha. The higher grain and straw yields and benefit-cost ratio were obtained with PE application of pendimethalin 1000 g/ha fb florpyrauxifen-benzyl 25 g/ha or halosulfuron-methyl 67.5 g/ha. Pre-emergence application of pretilachlor, oxadiargyl and pendimethalin reduced the plant population of rice by 12.10, 5.94 and 4.46%, respectively compared to unweeded check. Sequential application of PE and PoE herbicides applied to rainfed lowland rice did not affect the germination of greengram, however the best weed management practice in rice continuing its superiority in obtaining higher seedling vigour index and dry matter production at 15 DAS.

Email

subbuagro37@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, S.V. Agricultural College, Acharya NG Ranga Agricultural University, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh 517 502, India
Effect of live mulches and herbicides on weeds and yield of direct-seeded rice under irrigated conditions
Lovejeet Singh and Santosh Kumar
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00033.7 | Volume: 52 Page No:183-186 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted at Mata Gujri College, Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab during rainy season of 2017 to study the effect of live mulches and herbicides in direct-seeded rice under irrigated condition. The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with three replications. The live mulch include Sesbania rostrata, Vigna unguiculata and Sesamum indicum while weed management treatments were pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha (PE) fb bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha (PoE), bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha + carfentrazone 20 g/ha (PoE), bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha + ethoxysulfuron 18 g/ha (PoE) and pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha (PE) along with weed free and weedy checks. Results indicated that higher yield attributes and yield were recorded under live mulch with Sesbania rostrata, which was statistically at par with live mulch with Vigna unguiculata and significantly superior over live mulch with Sesamum indicum. Among herbicides, application of bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha + carfentrazone 20 g/ha being at par with bispyribac- Na 25 g/ha + ethoxysulfuron 18 g/ha was significantly superior over other treatments.

Email

santoshagro.nd@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agriculture, Mata Gujri College, Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab 140 406, India
Weed dynamics in wheat as affected by weed management practices under Doon valley conditions
Naziya Khan, Roop Kishore, Gaurav Verma, Afjal Ahmad, Ramakant Mishra and Sanjay Kumar*
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00034.9 | Volume: 52 Page No:187-189 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted at Agronomic Research Station of Doon (P.G) College of Agriculture Science and Technology, Rampur (Selaqui) Dehradun, Uttarakhand during 2018-19 to study the effect of different herbicides in wheat. The experimental soil was sandy loam in texture, slightly acidic in nature with low in N, high in available P and medium in K. The results revealed that post-emergence application of sulfosulfuron 25 g/ha, followed by metsulfuron-methyl 4.0 g/ha gave the highest yield of wheat which was at par with manual weeding at 30, 60 and 90 DAS. Based on the results, hand weeding at 30, 60 and 90 days after sowing in wheat recorded the lowest values of weed count and biomass with the highest weed control efficiency, and also showed superiority over rest of the treatments. Among the herbicides, sulfosulfuron at 25 g/ha applied as post-emergence produced grain yield of wheat 3.49 t/ha, which increased the grain yield of wheat to the tune of 24.2, 35.8, 46.0, 49.8 and 103% over carfentrazone, clodinafop propargyl, pendimethalin, pinoxaden and weedy check, respectively.

Email

sanjaygbpuat@gmail.com

Address

Doon (P.G.) College of Agriculture Science and Technology, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248011, India
Management of herbicide resistant Phalaris minor through sequential application of pre- and post-emergence herbicides in wheat
Abdull Raseed, S.S. Punia*, Manjeet, Kumarsein and Sushil Punia
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00035.0 | Volume: 52 Page No:190-193 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was conducted during winter season of 2017-18 at Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar under irrigated conditions to evaluate the management of P. minor through sequential application of pre-emergence (PE) and post-emergence (PoE) herbicide in wheat crop and their phytotoxic effect on the succeeding crop. Total fifteen treatments consisting of pre-emergence (PE) use of pendimethalin  1500 g/ha, clodinafop 60 and 120 g/ha (35 DAS), sulfosulfuron 25 g/ha (35 DAS), sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron 32 g/ha (35 DAS), pinoxaden 50 g/ha (35 DAS), mesosulfuron + iodosulfuron (RM) 14.4 g/ha (35 DAS), PE of pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) 2000 g/ha, PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) fb clodinafop 60 g/ha (35 DAS), PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) fb sulfosulfuron 25 g/ha (35 DAS), PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) fb sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron 32 g/ha(35 DAS), PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) fb pinoxaden 50 g/ha (35 DAS), PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) fb mesosulfuron + iodosulfuron (RM) 14.4 g/ha (35 DAS), weedy check and weed free were take. The results of present study revealed that PE followed by PoE herbicides are effective for the control of resistant P. minor population. The sequential application of PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) 2000 g/ha fb mesosulfuron + iodosulfuron (RM) 14.4 g/ha followed by PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) 2000 g/ha fb sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron (RM) 32 g/ha and pinoxaden 50 g/ha were the most effective for control of resistant P. minor compared to alone PE or PoE herbicide. Grain yield and economics were also higher with these treatments.

Email

puniasatbir@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana 125 004, India
On farm assessment of ready mix herbicide combinations for broad-spectrum weed control in wheat
Shailendra Singh Kushwah
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00036.2 | Volume: 52 Page No:194-196 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Farmers led on-farm trials were conducted in Morar and Bhitarwar blocks of district Gwalior during Rabi seasons of the year 2014-15 and 2015-16 in K.V.K. adopted villages to validate, refine and popularize the technologies recommended by Directorate of Weed Research, Jabalpur for managing grassy and broad-leaf weeds in wheat. Application of clodinafop + metsulfuron (60 + 2 g/ha) caused significant reduction in total weed counts (28.6 and 40.8/m2) and weed dry weight (3.5 and 4.2 g/m2) over farmer’s practice (2,4-D at 500 g/ha) as it reduced the population of both grassy and broad-leaved weeds and produced the highest weed control efficiency (83 and 82.6%) over application of sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron (30 + 2 g/ha) (70.87 and 76.03%) and farmers’ practice during both the year. Recommended practice of clodinafop + metsulfuron (60 + 2 g/ha) gave significantly higher grain yield (4.10 and 4.71         t/ha) over sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron (30 + 2 g/ha) and farmers practice. There were 21.42 and 22.46 and 12.18 and 9.87% increase in grain yield over farmers’ practice respectively under clodinafop + metsulfuron (60 + 2 g/ha) and sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron (30 + 2 g/ha) during the year 2014-15 and 2015-16. The highest net returns (` 51003 and 65267/ha) and B:C ratio (2.78 and 3.45) were recorded under recommended practice of clodinafop + metsulfuron (60 + 2 g/ha).

Email

shailendrakushwah91@rediffmail.com

Address

Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh 474002, India
Weed management in sunflower through sequential application of herbicides in Western Odisha
S. Mohapatra*, S.K. Tripathy and A.K. Mohanty
Research note | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2020.00037.4 | Volume: 52 Page No:197-199 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiment was conducted during the winter seasons of 2014-15 and 2015-16 to study the effect of sole and sequential application of herbicides on weed growth and productivity of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Echinochloa colona, Digitaria sanguinalis and Dactyloctenium aegyptium among grasses; Cyperus rotundus and Cyperus difformis among sedges and Cleome viscosa, Euphorbia hirta and Borreria hispida among broad-leaved weeds, were predominant throughout the cropping period. Weed competition resulted in 31.3% yield loss in sunflower. Sequential application of oxyfluorfen 250 g/ha at 3 days after seeding (DAS) followed by (fb) quizalofop-ethyl 50 g/ha at 20 DAS resulted in the lowest weed density (41/m2), total weed biomass (19.37 g/m2), maximum nutrient uptake, yield (2.1 t/ ha) and benefit:cost ratio (1.82).

Email

sanjukta.mohapatra34@gmail.com

Address

Regional Research and Technology Transfer Station, Chiplima, Odisha 768 025, India

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.