Paper · 2020 · Indian Journal of Weed Science

Management of herbicide resistant Phalaris minor through sequential application of pre- and post-emergence herbicides in wheat

Abdull Raseed; S.S. Punia; Manjeet; et al.

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

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.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sequential pre-emergence then post-emergence herbicides controlled resistant P. minor in wheat.

Treatment
PE followed by PoE herbicidese0
Interactor
P. minorPhalaris minore0weed
Outcome
control of resistant P. minor populatione0
Direction
effectivee0

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 ↗
Phalaris minor
Phalaris minor · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryMatt Lavin from Bozeman, Montana, USA · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Phalaris minor through sequential application of pre- and post-emergence herbicides in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–126 · show in text ↑
e0

“PE followed by PoE herbicides are effective for the control of resistant P. minor population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1142–1234 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin plus metribuzin followed by mesosulfuron plus iodosulfuron was most effective against resistant P. minor compared with a single timing.

Treatment
PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) 2000 g/ha fb mesosulfuron + iodosulfuron (RM) 14.4 g/hae0
Interactor
P. minorPhalaris minore0weed
Outcome
control of resistant P. minore0
Direction
most effectivee0
Comparator
alone PE or PoE herbicidee0

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 ↗
Phalaris minor
Phalaris minor · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryMatt Lavin from Bozeman, Montana, USA · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 118–126 · show in text ↑
e0

“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”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1266–1575 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin plus metribuzin followed by sulfosulfuron plus metsulfuron was among the most effective treatments for resistant P. minor.

Treatment
PE pendimethalin + metribuzin (RM) 2000 g/ha fb sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron (RM) 32 g/hae0
Interactor
P. minorPhalaris minore0weed
Outcome
control of resistant P. minore0
Direction
most effectivee0
Comparator
alone PE or PoE herbicidee0

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 ↗
Phalaris minor
Phalaris minor · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryMatt Lavin from Bozeman, Montana, USA · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 118–126 · show in text ↑
e0

“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”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1369–1575 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pinoxaden was among the most effective treatments for resistant P. minor.

Treatment
pinoxaden 50 g/hae0
Interactor
P. minorPhalaris minore0weed
Outcome
control of resistant P. minore0
Direction
most effectivee0
Comparator
alone PE or PoE herbicidee0

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 ↗
Phalaris minor
Phalaris minor · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryMatt Lavin from Bozeman, Montana, USA · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 118–126 · show in text ↑
e0

“pinoxaden 50 g/ha were the most effective for control of resistant P. minor compared to alone PE or PoE herbicide”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1462–1575 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat grain yield was higher with the effective herbicide treatments.

Treatment
these treatmentse0
Outcome
Grain yielde0
Direction
highere0

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

t0

“in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 118–126 · show in text ↑
e0

“Grain yield and economics were also higher with these treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1577–1641 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Economics were higher with the effective wheat herbicide treatments.

Treatment
these treatmentse0
Outcome
economicse0
Direction
highere0

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

t0

“in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 118–126 · show in text ↑
e0

“Grain yield and economics were also higher with these treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1577–1641 · show in text ↑

pinoxaden · Phalaris minor · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

pendimethalin · Phalaris minor · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 18 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

metsulfuron methyl · Phalaris minor · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

metribuzin · Phalaris minor · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

18 papers: 18 positive, 0 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

herbicide · Phalaris minor · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 37 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 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.