Paper · 2001 · Indian Journal of Agronomy

Effect of crop-establishment methods and weed management on nutrient uptake microbial population and productivity of wheat (Triticum aestivum)

HANSRAJ SHIVRAN; R.S. YADAV; S.P. SINGH; et al.

12
claims
22
verbatim quotes
1
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted at Bikaner, Rajasthan, during the winter (rabi) seasons of 201617 and 201718, to find out the efficacy of crop establishment and weed-management on weed, the yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and its residual effect on succeeding summer greengram [Vigna radiate (L.) R. Wilczek]. The treatments in wheat during the winter seasons, comprising 28 combinations having 4 crop-establishment methods and 7 weed- management options, was laid out in a strip-plot design with 4 replications. Wheat variety Raj 3077 was sown at 22.5-cm-row spacing using a seed rate of 100 kg/ha. Both stale seedbed and deep tillage methods reduced the density and dry matter of all most weeds at all the stages significantly in comparison to conventional tillage, while stale seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/ha proved itself best among all the treatments. Metsulfuron @ 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-hoeing significantly decreased the weed density and dry matter of all the weeds except nut grass (Cyperus rotundus L.) and Burmuda grass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.] over all herbicidal treatments. The yield of wheat was significantly higher under state seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/ha followed by stale seedbed SSB using shallow tillage over deep and conventional tillage. In weed management, metsulfuron @ 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-hoeing significantly increased the yield over other herbicidal treatments. Stale seedbed technique was significant superior in nutrient uptake by grain and straw to deep and conventional tillage. In weed management, metsulfuron 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-weeding given better response over remained applied treatment. The crop-establishment methods had not significant effect on fungi, bacteria and dehydrogenase activity. In weed-management treatment lowest microbial population were recorded under metsulfuron-treated plot at 7 days after application, whereas at 30 days after application and harvest stage had not significant variation

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Stale seedbed reduced weed density and dry matter versus conventional tillage.

Treatment
stale seedbede0
Outcome
density and dry matter of all most weedse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
conventional tillagee0

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

e0

“Both stale seedbed and deep tillage methods reduced the density and dry matter of all most weeds at all the stages significantly in comparison to conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 607–773 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Deep tillage reduced weed density and dry matter versus conventional tillage.

Treatment
deep tillagee0
Outcome
density and dry matter of all most weedse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
conventional tillagee0

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

e0

“Both stale seedbed and deep tillage methods reduced the density and dry matter of all most weeds at all the stages significantly in comparison to conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 607–773 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stale seedbed with glyphosate performed best among establishment treatments.

Treatment
stale seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/hae0
Outcome
best among all the treatmentse0
Direction
beste0

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

e0

“stale seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/ha proved itself best among all the treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 781–868 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Metsulfuron plus hand hoeing decreased weed density and dry matter except in nut grass and Bermuda grass.

Treatment
Metsulfuron @ 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-hoeinge0
Outcome
weed density and dry mattere0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
except nut grass (Cyperus rotundus L.) and Burmuda grass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.]e0
Comparator
all herbicidal treatmentse0

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

e0

“Metsulfuron @ 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-hoeing significantly decreased the weed density and dry matter of all the weeds except nut grass (Cyperus rotundus L.) and Burmuda grass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.] over all herbicidal treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 870–1099 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield was higher with stale seedbed using glyphosate than with deep and conventional tillage.

Treatment
state seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/hae0
Outcome
yield of wheate0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
deep and conventional tillagee0

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

e0

“The yield of wheat was significantly higher under state seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/ha followed by stale seedbed SSB using shallow tillage over deep and conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1101–1281 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield was higher with stale seedbed using shallow tillage than with deep and conventional tillage.

Treatment
stale seedbed SSB using shallow tillagee0
Outcome
yield of wheate0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
deep and conventional tillagee0

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

e0

“The yield of wheat was significantly higher under state seedbed using glyphosate at 2.0 kg/ha followed by stale seedbed SSB using shallow tillage over deep and conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1101–1281 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Metsulfuron plus hand hoeing increased wheat yield relative to other herbicides.

Treatment
metsulfuron @ 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-hoeinge0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
other herbicidal treatmentse0

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

e0

“metsulfuron @ 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-hoeing significantly increased the yield over other herbicidal treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1303–1408 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Stale seedbed increased grain and straw nutrient uptake relative to deep and conventional tillage.

Treatment
Stale seedbed techniquee0
Outcome
nutrient uptake by grain and strawe0
Direction
superiore0
Comparator
deep and conventional tillagee0

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

e0

“Stale seedbed technique was significant superior in nutrient uptake by grain and straw to deep and conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1410–1529 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Metsulfuron plus hand weeding gave a better nutrient uptake response than remaining treatments.

Treatment
metsulfuron 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-weedinge0
Outcome
better responsee0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
remained applied treatmente0

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

e0

“metsulfuron 4.0 g/ha + 1 hand-weeding given better response over remained applied treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1551–1642 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Crop establishment did not significantly affect fungi, bacteria, or dehydrogenase activity.

Treatment
crop-establishment methodse0
Outcome
fungi, bacteria and dehydrogenase activitye0

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

e0

“The crop-establishment methods had not significant effect on fungi, bacteria and dehydrogenase activity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1644–1747 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Microbial population was lowest seven days after metsulfuron application.

Treatment
metsulfuron-treated plote0
Outcome
microbial populatione0
Direction
loweste0
Qualifier
7 days after applicatione0

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

e0

“lowest microbial population were recorded under metsulfuron-treated plot at 7 days after application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1778–1878 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Microbial population did not vary significantly at 30 days or harvest.

Outcome
variatione0
Qualifier
30 days after application and harvest stagee0

Not reportedDirection

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

e0

“at 30 days after application and harvest stage had not significant variation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1888–1964 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat (Triticum aestivum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 117–142 · show in text ↑

glyphosate · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

37 papers: 20 positive, 17 negative or no effect

19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

33 papers more in this group

See all 37 papers →

metsulfuron methyl · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

134 papers: 132 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

130 papers more in this group

See all 134 papers →

metsulfuron methyl · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

155 papers: 143 positive, 12 negative or no effect

142 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

151 papers more in this group

See all 155 papers →

tillage · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

183 papers: 126 positive, 57 negative or no effect

125 papers in the same direction as this paper · 56 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

179 papers more in this group

See all 183 papers →

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

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

1,410 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 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.