Paper · 2025 · International Journal of Plant & Soil Science

Effect of Weed Management Practices on Yield Attributes, Yield and Weed Density of Mungbean (Vigna radiate L.) in Vertisol of Chhattisgarh Plains

Neha; D. K. Chandrakar; Debasis Das; et al.

5
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted at Instructional cum Research Farm, Indira Gandhi Krishi VisHand weedingavidyalaya, Raipur (C.G.) during mansoon crop 2021 and 2022. The soil of experimental field was neutral in reaction, medium in organic carbon and low in available nitrogen, low in available phosphorus and high in available potassium. Experiment was laid out in randomized block design with three replications, consisted of T1-Imazethapyr 10 % SL (Dose-55 g a.i. ha-1), T2- Fluazifop-p-butyl 13.4% w w-1 (Dose-250 g a.i. ha-1), T3-Propaquizafop 2.5% w w-1 (weight per weight) + imazethapyr 3.75 % w w-1 ME (ready mix) (Dose-83.3g a.i. ha-1), T4- Acifluorfen-sodium 16.5% EC + clodinafop-propargyl 8% EC (ready mix) (Dose-210 g a.i. ha-1), T5- Fomesafen 11.1% w w-1 + fluazifop-p-butyl 11.1% w w-1 (ready mix) (Dose-440 g a.i. ha-1), T6-Hand weeding twice at 20 and 40 DAS (Days after sowing) , T7- Weed free (Hand weeding at 20, 40 and 60 DAS) and T8- Unweeded check. The weeds of the experimental site was dominated with grasses like Echinochloacolona, Dinebraretroflexa, broad leaves like Parthenium hysterophorus, Celosia argentea, sedge like Cyperus sps. and other weeds. Results revealed that all the yield attributes and yield was highest in fomesafen 11.1% w w-1 + fluazifop-p-butyl 11.1% w w-1 (ready mix) (Dose-440 g a.i. ha-1) (T5) which was at par with propaquizafop 2.5% w w-1 + imazethapyr 3.75 % w w-1 ME (ready mix) (Dose-83.3g a.i. ha-1)(T3) and acifluorfen-sodium 16.5% EC + clodinafop-propargyl 8% EC (ready mix) (Dose-210 g a.i. ha-1)(T4). Similar ways, weed density was also significantly reduced in these treatments to others. However, higher WCE (Weed control efficiency) was noticed in this treatment than unweeded check.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mungbean yield attributes and yield were highest with the fomesafen + fluazifop-p-butyl ready mix at 440 g a.i. ha-1 (T5).

Taxon
MungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
fomesafen 11.1% w w-1 + fluazifop-p-butyl 11.1% w w-1 (ready mix) (Dose-440 g a.i. ha-1)e0
Outcome
yield attributes and yielde0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Mungbean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–91 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the yield attributes and yield was highest in fomesafen 11.1% w w-1 + fluazifop-p-butyl 11.1% w w-1 (ready mix) (Dose-440 g a.i. ha-1) (T5)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1202–1345 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Mungbean yield attributes and yield with the propaquizafop + imazethapyr ready mix at 83.3 g a.i. ha-1 (T3) were at par with those under T5.

Taxon
MungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
propaquizafop 2.5% w w-1 + imazethapyr 3.75 % w w-1 ME (ready mix) (Dose-83.3g a.i. ha-1)e2
Outcome
yield attributes and yielde0
Direction
at pare1
Comparator
T5e0

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Mungbean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–91 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the yield attributes and yield was highest in fomesafen 11.1% w w-1 + fluazifop-p-butyl 11.1% w w-1 (ready mix) (Dose-440 g a.i. ha-1) (T5)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1202–1345 · show in text ↑
e1

“at par”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1356–1362 · show in text ↑
e2

“propaquizafop 2.5% w w-1 + imazethapyr 3.75 % w w-1 ME (ready mix) (Dose-83.3g a.i. ha-1)(T3)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1368–1461 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Mungbean yield attributes and yield with the acifluorfen-sodium + clodinafop-propargyl ready mix at 210 g a.i. ha-1 (T4) were at par with those under T5.

Taxon
MungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
acifluorfen-sodium 16.5% EC + clodinafop-propargyl 8% EC (ready mix) (Dose-210 g a.i. ha-1)e3
Outcome
yield attributes and yielde0
Direction
at pare1
Comparator
T5e0

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Mungbean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–91 · show in text ↑
e0

“all the yield attributes and yield was highest in fomesafen 11.1% w w-1 + fluazifop-p-butyl 11.1% w w-1 (ready mix) (Dose-440 g a.i. ha-1) (T5)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1202–1345 · show in text ↑
e1

“at par”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1356–1362 · show in text ↑
e3

“acifluorfen-sodium 16.5% EC + clodinafop-propargyl 8% EC (ready mix) (Dose-210 g a.i. ha-1)(T4)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1466–1561 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Weed density was significantly reduced in the T5, T3 and T4 treatments compared with the other treatments.

Taxon
MungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
these treatmentse1
Interactor
weede1weed
Outcome
weed densitye1
Direction
reducede1
Comparator
otherse1

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Mungbean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–91 · show in text ↑
e1

“weed density was also significantly reduced in these treatments to others”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1577–1650 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weed control efficiency (WCE) was higher in the T5 treatment than in the unweeded check.

Taxon
MungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
this treatmente1
Outcome
WCE (Weed control efficiency)e1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
unweeded checke1

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Mungbean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–91 · show in text ↑
e1

“higher WCE (Weed control efficiency) was noticed in this treatment than unweeded check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1661–1747 · show in text ↑

clodinafop-propargyl · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

fomesafen · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

propaquizafop · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Imazethapyr · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

52 papers: 46 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 46 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

48 papers more in this group

See all 52 papers →

fluazifop-P-butyl · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.