Paper · 2007 · JOURNAL OF WEED SCIENCE RESEARCH

Weed management in rice based zero tilled sown wheat.

Moolchand Singh; P. S. Chandurkar; Arun Kumar

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted at Research Farm of Directorate of Plant Protection, Quarantine and Storage, Faridabad, Haryana, India to study the weeds spectrum and weed control efficacy of different herbicides and their combinations in zero tilled sown wheat during 2003-04 and 2004-05. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block (RCB) design with three replications. During both the years the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS). However, it was found at par with hand weeding at 30 and 40 DAS. The highest weed control efficiency (WCE) 89.2 and 86.7 per cent was recorded from application of paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-D and two hand weeding, respectively in 2003-04. The corresponding WCE was 92.2 and 90.6 per cent during 2004-05. Net profit was also highest in the plots treated with paraquat + isoproturon + 2.4-D followed by the plots treated with paraquat 0.5 kg a.i. ha -1 two days before sowing. Weedy check realized the lowest net profit of Rs. 10518 (US$257) and Rs.4484 (US$109 ha 1 ) in 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Paraquat followed by isoproturon and 2,4-D gave the lowest weed population in zero-tilled wheat (2 to 5 weeds m -2) in both years.

Treatment
paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)e2
Interactor
weedse2weed
Outcome
weed populatione2
Direction
loweste2
Value
2 to 5 weeds m -2e2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same paraquat-based sequence gave the lowest weeds dry matter in zero-tilled wheat (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2).

Treatment
paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)e2
Interactor
weedse2weed
Outcome
weeds dry mattere2
Direction
loweste2
Value
5.25 to 7.51 g m -2e2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same paraquat-based sequence gave the highest wheat yield (3850 and 3375 kg ha-1 in 2003-04 and 2004-05).

Treatment
paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)e2
Outcome
yielde2
Direction
higheste2
Value
3850 and 3375 kg ha 1e2
Qualifier
during 2003-04 and 2004-05e2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Paraquat with isoproturon and 2,4-D gave the highest weed control efficiency, 89.2 per cent, in 2003-04.

Treatment
paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-De4
Outcome
weed control efficiency (WCE)e4
Direction
higheste4
Value
89.2e4
Qualifier
in 2003-04e4

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e4

“The highest weed control efficiency (WCE) 89.2 and 86.7 per cent was recorded from application of paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-D and two hand weeding, respectively in 2003-04.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 837–1012 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two hand weeding gave a weed control efficiency of 86.7 per cent in 2003-04, the second highest value reported.

Treatment
two hand weedinge4
Outcome
weed control efficiency (WCE)e4
Direction
higheste4
Value
86.7e4
Qualifier
in 2003-04e4

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e4

“The highest weed control efficiency (WCE) 89.2 and 86.7 per cent was recorded from application of paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-D and two hand weeding, respectively in 2003-04.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 837–1012 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The corresponding weed control efficiency was 92.2 per cent for paraquat with isoproturon and 2,4-D in 2004-05.

Treatment
paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-De4
Outcome
WCEe5
Value
92.2e5
Qualifier
during 2004-05e5

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e4

“The highest weed control efficiency (WCE) 89.2 and 86.7 per cent was recorded from application of paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-D and two hand weeding, respectively in 2003-04.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 837–1012 · show in text ↑
e5

“The corresponding WCE was 92.2 and 90.6 per cent during 2004-05.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1013–1077 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The corresponding weed control efficiency was 90.6 per cent for two hand weeding in 2004-05.

Treatment
two hand weedinge4
Outcome
WCEe5
Value
90.6e5
Qualifier
during 2004-05e5

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e4

“The highest weed control efficiency (WCE) 89.2 and 86.7 per cent was recorded from application of paraquat + isoproturon + 2,4-D and two hand weeding, respectively in 2003-04.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 837–1012 · show in text ↑
e5

“The corresponding WCE was 92.2 and 90.6 per cent during 2004-05.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1013–1077 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Net profit was highest in plots treated with paraquat with isoproturon and 2,4-D.

Treatment
paraquat + isoproturon + 2.4-De6
Outcome
Net profite6
Direction
higheste6

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e6

“Net profit was also highest in the plots treated with paraquat + isoproturon + 2.4-D followed by the plots treated with paraquat 0.5 kg a.i. ha -1 two days before sowing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1078–1248 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The weedy check had the lowest net profit, Rs. 10518 (US$257), in 2003-04.

Treatment
Weedy checke7
Outcome
net profite7
Direction
loweste7
Value
Rs. 10518 (US$257)e7
Qualifier
in 2003-04e7

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e7

“Weedy check realized the lowest net profit of Rs. 10518 (US$257) and Rs.4484 (US$109 ha 1 ) in 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1249–1378 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The weedy check had the lowest net profit, Rs.4484 (US$109 ha-1), in 2004-05.

Treatment
Weedy checke7
Outcome
net profite7
Direction
loweste7
Value
Rs.4484 (US$109 ha 1 )e7

Not reportedComparatorQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the lowest weed population (2 to 5 weeds m -2 ), weeds dry matter (5.25 to 7.51 g m -2 ) and highest yield of 3850 and 3375 kg ha 1 during 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively of wheat was recorded from the treatments of paraquat 0.5 kg a.i.ha -1 two days before sowing followed by isoproturon 1.0 kg a.i.ha -1 and 2,4-D 0.5 kg ha -1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 410–770 · show in text ↑
e7

“Weedy check realized the lowest net profit of Rs. 10518 (US$257) and Rs.4484 (US$109 ha 1 ) in 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1249–1378 · show in text ↑

isoproturon · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

89 papers: 75 positive, 14 negative or no effect

74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

85 papers more in this group

See all 89 papers →

2,4-D · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

116 papers: 78 positive, 38 negative or no effect

77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

112 papers more in this group

See all 116 papers →

paraquat · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

paraquat · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 5 positive, 3 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

2,4-D · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

66 papers: 64 positive, 2 negative or no effect

63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

62 papers more in this group

See all 66 papers →

isoproturon · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

74 papers: 72 positive, 2 negative or no effect

71 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 papers →

herbicide · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

401 papers: 362 positive, 39 negative or no effect

361 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

397 papers more in this group

See all 401 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.