Paper · 1995 · The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Herbicide and fertilizer compatibility under normal and stale seedbed sowing of wheat (Triticum aestivum) at different levels of nitrogen.

P. K. Yadav; S. P. Kurchania; J. P. Tiwari

13
claims
26
verbatim quotes
6
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

An experiment was conducted during the winter season of 1988-89 and 1989-90 to study herbicide and fertilizer compatibility forweed control in wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.) under different levels of nitrogen and methods of seedbed preparation. Four methods of isoproturon (1.0 kg/ha) application were spray pre-emergence, post-emergence, broadcast as mixture with superphosphate basal at pre-emergence stage and with urea top·dressed at post-emergence stage; and 3 levels of N were 60, 90 and 120 kg/ha. Isoproturon @ 1.0 kg/ha as pre-emergence spray effectively controlled small canarygrass (Phalaris minor Retz.) and annual broad-leaf weeds, viz scarlet pimpernel (Anagallis arvensis L.), lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.), toothed medick (Medicago hispida Gaertn.), sweet clover (Melilotus alba Medikus), common purslane (Portulaca oleracea L.) and corn spurry (Spergula arvensis L.). It showed weed-control efficiency 64%, followed by isoprouron post-emergence spray (57%), isoproturon +urea top-dressed (49%) and isoproturon + superphosphate ( 41 %). The weed-control efficiency increased under stale seedbed (34%) compared with normal seedbed. An increase in N level (60-120 kg/ha) also increased the weed-control efficiency (11-21 %) and reduced the weed biomass (11-21 %). The grain yield (4 270 kg/ha) and net profit (Rs 7 369) were higher under stale seedbed and with increase in N level. The mean yield under different isoproturon treatments (4252-4321 kg/ha) was at par with that under hand-weeding (4 222 kg/ha) but significantly superior to weedy control (3 667 kg/ha), and hence proved economical. The benefit: cost ratio with isoproturon was higher (2.53-2.58) than that with hand-weeding (2.19) and weedy control (2.44).

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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-emergence isoproturon effectively controlled the listed weeds.

Treatment
Isoproturon @ 1.0 kg/ha as pre-emergence spraye0
Interactor
Phalaris minor Retz.Phalaris minore0weed
Outcome
small canarygrass (Phalaris minor Retz.) and annual broad-leaf weedse0
Direction
effectively controllede0

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

e0

“Isoproturon @ 1.0 kg/ha as pre-emergence spray effectively controlled small canarygrass (Phalaris minor Retz.) and annual broad-leaf weeds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 524–662 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-emergence isoproturon achieved 64% weed control efficiency.

Outcome
weed-control efficiencye0
Value
64%e0

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

“It showed weed-control efficiency 64%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 911–948 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Post-emergence isoproturon spray achieved 57% weed control efficiency.

Treatment
isoprouron post-emergence spraye0
Outcome
weed-control efficiencye0
Value
57%e0

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

“It showed weed-control efficiency 64%, followed by isoprouron post-emergence spray (57%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 911–999 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon plus urea top dressing achieved 49% weed control efficiency.

Treatment
isoproturon +urea top-dressede0
Outcome
weed-control efficiencye0
Value
49%e0

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

“It showed weed-control efficiency 64%, followed by isoprouron post-emergence spray (57%), isoproturon +urea top-dressed (49%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 911–1036 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon plus superphosphate achieved 41% weed control efficiency.

Treatment
isoproturon + superphosphatee0
Outcome
weed-control efficiencye0
Value
41 %e0

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

“It showed weed-control efficiency 64%, followed by isoprouron post-emergence spray (57%), isoproturon +urea top-dressed (49%) and isoproturon + superphosphate ( 41 %)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 911–1077 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stale seedbeds increased weed control efficiency compared with normal seedbeds.

Treatment
stale seedbede0
Outcome
weed-control efficiencye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
34%e0
Comparator
normal seedbede0

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 weed-control efficiency increased under stale seedbed (34%) compared with normal seedbed.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1079–1172 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing nitrogen level increased weed control efficiency.

Treatment
N level (60-120 kg/ha)e0
Outcome
weed-control efficiencye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
11-21 %e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“An increase in N level (60-120 kg/ha) also increased the weed-control efficiency (11-21 %)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1173–1263 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing nitrogen level reduced weed biomass.

Treatment
N level (60-120 kg/ha)e0
Outcome
weed biomasse0
Direction
reducede0
Value
11-21 %e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“An increase in N level (60-120 kg/ha) also increased the weed-control efficiency (11-21 %) and reduced the weed biomass (11-21 %).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1173–1303 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stale seedbeds and increased nitrogen produced higher grain yield.

Treatment
stale seedbed and with increase in N levele0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
4 270 kg/hae0

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 grain yield (4 270 kg/ha) and net profit (Rs 7 369) were higher under stale seedbed and with increase in N level.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1304–1421 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stale seedbeds and increased nitrogen produced higher net profit.

Treatment
stale seedbed and with increase in N levele0
Outcome
net profite0
Direction
highere0
Value
Rs 7 369e0

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 grain yield (4 270 kg/ha) and net profit (Rs 7 369) were higher under stale seedbed and with increase in N level.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1304–1421 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon treatment yields were comparable to hand weeding.

Treatment
different isoproturon treatmentse0
Outcome
mean yielde0
Direction
at pare0
Value
4252-4321 kg/hae0
Qualifier
4 222 kg/hae0
Comparator
hand-weedinge0

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 mean yield under different isoproturon treatments (4252-4321 kg/ha) was at par with that under hand-weeding (4 222 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1422–1547 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon treatments yielded significantly more than the weedy control.

Treatment
different isoproturon treatmentse0
Outcome
mean yielde0
Direction
superiore0
Qualifier
3 667 kg/hae0
Comparator
weedy controle0

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 mean yield under different isoproturon treatments (4252-4321 kg/ha) was at par with that under hand-weeding (4 222 kg/ha) but significantly superior to weedy control (3 667 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1422–1605 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon had higher benefit:cost ratios than hand weeding and weedy control.

Treatment
isoproturone0
Outcome
benefit: cost ratioe0
Direction
highere0
Value
2.53-2.58e0
Comparator
hand-weeding (2.19) and weedy control (2.44)e0

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 benefit: cost ratio with isoproturon was higher (2.53-2.58) than that with hand-weeding (2.19) and weedy control (2.44).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1636–1760 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–85 · show in text ↑

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

24 papers: 18 positive, 6 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 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 →

nitrogen · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

41 papers: 27 positive, 14 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

37 papers more in this group

See all 41 papers →

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

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 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.