Paper · 2024 · Journal of Experimental Agriculture International

Impact of Various Weed Control Methods on Weed Density, Weed Control Efficiency, and Seed Yield in Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)

Satya Narayan Gurjar; Arvind Verma; Mahendra Choudhary; et al.

10
claims
20
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was carried out during the rabi season of 2021-22 at the Instructional Farm of Agronomy, RCA, MPUAT, Udaipur. The study utilized a Factorial Randomized Block Design with 20 treatment combinations and three replications. The experiment tested ten chemical weed management practices in factor A, including three different concentrations of pendimethalin (500 g ha-1, 750 g ha-1, and 1000 g ha-1, applied pre-emergence), three concentrations of imazethapyr (50 g ha-1, 60 g ha-1, and 70 g ha-1, applied post-emergence), and three combinations of pendimethalin and imazethapyr (500 g ha-1, 750 g ha-1, and 1000 g ha-1, applied pre-emergence). A control group with no herbicide application was also included. Additionally, hand weeding at 40 days after sowing (DAS) and a control treatment were considered as factor B. The experimental results indicated that hand weeding at 40 DAS significantly reduced weed density and achieved the highest weed control efficiency with maximum grain yield. Among the chemical treatments, the combination of pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE recorded the lowest total weed density and maximum grain yield and weed control efficiency. This result was comparable to the treatments with pendimethalin + imazethapyr at 750 g ha-1 PE and 500 g ha-1 PE. Overall, HW at 40 DAS and application of pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1000g ha-1 PE could be more productive, and capable for reducing weed population.

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 resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Hand weeding at 40 DAS significantly reduced weed density.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
hand weeding at 40 DASe0
Outcome
weed densitye0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“hand weeding at 40 DAS significantly reduced weed density”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–930 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hand weeding at 40 DAS achieved the highest weed control efficiency.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
hand weeding at 40 DASe0
Outcome
weed control efficiencye0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“hand weeding at 40 DAS significantly reduced weed density and achieved the highest weed control efficiency with maximum grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1004 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hand weeding at 40 DAS gave maximum grain yield.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
hand weeding at 40 DASe0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“hand weeding at 40 DAS significantly reduced weed density and achieved the highest weed control efficiency with maximum grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1004 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE gave the lowest total weed density.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PEe0
Outcome
total weed densitye0
Direction
loweste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the combination of pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE recorded the lowest total weed density and maximum grain yield and weed control efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1037–1194 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE gave maximum grain yield.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PEe0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the combination of pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE recorded the lowest total weed density and maximum grain yield and weed control efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1037–1194 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE gave maximum weed control efficiency.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PEe0
Outcome
weed control efficiencye0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the combination of pendimethalin and imazethapyr at 1000 g ha-1 PE recorded the lowest total weed density and maximum grain yield and weed control efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1037–1194 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 1000 g ha-1 combination was comparable to 750 g ha-1 PE.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
pendimethalin + imazethapyr at 750 g ha-1 PEe0
Outcome
comparablee0

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“This result was comparable to the treatments with pendimethalin + imazethapyr at 750 g ha-1 PE and 500 g ha-1 PE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1196–1308 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 1000 g ha-1 combination was comparable to 500 g ha-1 PE.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
500 g ha-1 PEe0
Outcome
comparablee0

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“This result was comparable to the treatments with pendimethalin + imazethapyr at 750 g ha-1 PE and 500 g ha-1 PE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1196–1308 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend hand weeding at 40 DAS for productivity and weed reduction.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
HW at 40 DASe0
Outcome
more productive, and capable for reducing weed populatione0

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“HW at 40 DAS and application of pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1000g ha-1 PE could be more productive, and capable for reducing weed population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1319–1459 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend pendimethalin plus imazethapyr 1000g ha-1 PE for productivity and weed reduction.

Taxon
LentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
application of pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1000g ha-1 PEe0
Outcome
more productive, and capable for reducing weed populatione0

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“HW at 40 DAS and application of pendimethalin + imazethapyr 1000g ha-1 PE could be more productive, and capable for reducing weed population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1319–1459 · show in text ↑
t0

“Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–131 · show in text ↑

Imazethapyr · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 15 positive, 3 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

pendimethalin · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results

24 papers: 22 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 papers →

Imazethapyr · weed · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

pendimethalin · weed · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results agree

14 papers: 14 positive, 0 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

herbicide · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results differ

47 papers: 36 positive, 11 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

herbicide · weed · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results

24 papers: 23 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 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.