Abstract
Weed management in blackgram is one of the most efficient ways to improve its yield, as uncontrolled weed growth causes a significant decrease in crop yield. A field experiment was performed at Berthin, Himachal Pradesh, India, to investigate the efficacy, energy use efficiency (EUE), and carbon footprints of weed management tactics. Twelve weed control treatments were tested applied alone or in combination at pre and post emergence stages. The most prominent weeds were Cyperus iria, Dactyloctenium aegyptium, and Echinochloa colona, which caused a 68.1% loss in unweeded conditions. The application of weed control treatments reduced the weed count at 60 DAS from around 50% to 90%. The most efficient weed control treatment was pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1, which resulted in a minimum weed infestation (i.e., weed count and weed biomass) and consequently highest yield. Its efficacy in weed control treatment was on par with PRE use of ready mix imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG @ 70 g ha−1. Maximum energy use efficiency was also obtained upon PRE use of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) @ 80 g ha−1 (8.27), trailed by PRE use of imazethapyr + imazamox @ 70 g ha−1 (7.84), mainly because of the higher yield obtained in these treatments which shows their efficiency in energy conversion. The carbon footprints were observed to be the lowest in ready mix combination of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 80 g ha−1 (0.11 kg CE kg−1 yield), followed by imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 70 g ha−1 (0.12 kg CE kg−1 yield), as it resulted in the lowest emission per unit output production.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Prominent weeds caused 68.1% yield loss in unweeded blackgram.
- Taxon
- Blackgram
Vigna mungot0 - Interactor
- Cyperus iria
.jpg?width=60)
Cyperus iriae0weed - Outcome
- losse0
- Direction
- losse0
- Value
- 68.1%e0
- Qualifier
- unweeded conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“The most prominent weeds were Cyperus iria, Dactyloctenium aegyptium, and Echinochloa colona, which caused a 68.1% loss in unweeded conditions.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed treatments reduced weed count at 60 DAS by roughly 50% to 90%.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- weed control treatmentse0
- Outcome
- weed counte0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 50% to 90%e0
- Qualifier
- at 60 DASe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“The application of weed control treatments reduced the weed count at 60 DAS from around 50% to 90%.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 80 g ha−1 imazethapyr–imazamox premix produced minimum weed infestation.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1e0
- Outcome
- weed infestation (i.e., weed count and weed biomass)e0
- Direction
- minimume0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1, which resulted in a minimum weed infestation (i.e., weed count and weed biomass)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 80 g ha−1 premix produced the highest yield.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1, which resulted in a minimum weed infestation (i.e., weed count and weed biomass) and consequently highest yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The 80 g ha−1 premix reached energy use efficiency of 8.27.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- PRE use of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) @ 80 g ha−1e0
- Outcome
- energy use efficiencye0
- Direction
- Maximume0
- Value
- 8.27e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“Maximum energy use efficiency was also obtained upon PRE use of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) @ 80 g ha−1 (8.27)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 70 g ha−1 premix reached energy use efficiency of 7.84.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- PRE use of imazethapyr + imazamox @ 70 g ha−1e0
- Outcome
- energy use efficiencye1
- Direction
- trailede0
- Value
- 7.84e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“trailed by PRE use of imazethapyr + imazamox @ 70 g ha−1 (7.84)”
e1“Maximum energy use efficiency was also obtained upon PRE use of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) @ 80 g ha−1 (8.27)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 80 g ha−1 premix had the lowest carbon footprint, 0.11 kg CE kg−1 yield.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- ready mix combination of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 80 g ha−1e0
- Outcome
- carbon footprintse0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Value
- 0.11 kg CE kg−1 yielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“carbon footprints were observed to be the lowest in ready mix combination of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 80 g ha−1 (0.11 kg CE kg−1 yield)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 70 g ha−1 premix had the next lowest carbon footprint, 0.12 kg CE kg−1 yield.
- Taxon
- BlackgramVigna mungot0
- Treatment
- imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 70 g ha−1e0
- Outcome
- carbon footprintse1
- Direction
- followed bye0
- Value
- 0.12 kg CE kg−1 yielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)”
e0“followed by imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 70 g ha−1 (0.12 kg CE kg−1 yield)”
e1“carbon footprints were observed to be the lowest in ready mix combination of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 80 g ha−1 (0.11 kg CE kg−1 yield)”
The same questions in other papers
imazamox · yield · Vigna mungo (black gram)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →Imazethapyr · yield · Vigna mungo (black gram)Positive and negative results
31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- negative
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →imazamox · weed · Vigna mungo (black gram)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Imazethapyr · weed · Vigna mungo (black gram)Results agree
34 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →herbicide · weed · Vigna mungo (black gram)Positive and negative results
65 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
65 papers more in this group
See all 69 papers →herbicide · yield · Vigna mungo (black gram)Positive and negative results
88 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
91 papers more in this group
See all 95 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.