1

i Introduction of the Centre I. Project Title : All India Coordinated Research Programme on weed control (ICAR) II. Sanction No. : FG In 653 PROJECT No. In-ARS-266 III. Reporting Period : Rabi 2012-13 and Kharif 2013 IV. Date of Start : April 1987 V. Date of Termination : To be continued VI. Name of the Institute : Birsa Agricultural University, Kanke, Ranchi (Jharkhand) VII. Department : Department of Agronomy VIII. Name of Principal : Dr. R R Upasani Investigator Principal Investigator Univ. Professor, Department of Agronomy

1 Project Title All India Coordinated Research Programme on weed control (ICAR)

2 Sanction No. : FG In 653 PROJECT No. In-ARS-266

3 Reporting Period Rabi 2012-13 and Kharif 2013

4 Date of Start April 1987

5 Date of Termination To be continued

6 Name of the Institute Birsa Agricultural University, Kanke, Ranchi (Jharkhand)

7 Department: Department of Agronomy

8 Name of Principal Investigator

Dr. R R Upasani Principal Investigator Univ. Professor, Department of Agronomy

II. Staff position and Expenditure statement

II. a. Technical Personnel’s employed:

Sl Name of sanctioned No.

of

post

Name of

incumbent

Date of

joining

Date of

leaving

1 Agronomist (16400-22400)

1 *Vacant Since 1st April, 2013

July, 2006 Continuing

2 Jr. Agronomist (12000-18300 1 Dr Sheela Barla March, 2013 Continuing

3 Jr. Microbiologist (8000-3500)

1 Sri A.N. Puran 22.07.2004 Continuing

4 T. A. II 5000-8000)

1 Mr. Shailesh Kumar 24.02.1995 Continuing

5 Jr. Steno-cum-Store Clerk {4000-6000)

1 Mrs Nirmala Lal 17-11-2009 Continuing

6 Driver (3050-4590) 1 S.B. Thapa 26.03.2007 Continuing

7 Messenger (2550-3200) 1 Smt. Bitia Oraon 12.12.2005 Continuing

*Dr. R.R. Upasani is looking after the work

2

II. b. Expenditure from 1st April, 2014 to December, 2014

Sl. No. Particulars Amount

1 Pay of officer 4,54,648

2 Pay of establishment 4,08,314

3 DA 9,83,682

4 Medical Allw. 16,200

5 House rent 1,70,226

6 Washing Allw. 1,350

7 Conv. Allw. 96,000

8 Travelling Allw. 4,871

9 Contingency (R) 1,34,264 10 Contingency (NR) -

Total 22,69,555

1.2. Background Information

The All India Coordinated Research Programme on Weed Control at the Birsa Agricultural

University, Kanke, Ranchi (Jharkhand) is in operation since April 1987. The centre is situated at

23°17’N latitude, 85°19’ E longitude and at an altitude of 625 m above the mean sea level and lies in the

plateau region of Jharkhand state. The climate is sub-tropical humid type. The average rainfall is 1400

mm most of which 80% of the annual rainfall is received during the period of June to September. Winter

rains are scanty and occasionally received during January to March. The temperature varies from as low

as 2.2°C in winter to as high as 42°C in summer. The maximum and minimum temperature generally

ranges between 21.0 to 42.4°C and 2.2 to 24.5°C, respectively. This is on the basis of 45 years average of

weather data. The hottest months are April and May, whereas, December and January are the coldest.

The soils, in general, are sandy loam in texture, testing slightly acidic in reaction, low in available

phosphorus, medium to high in available potassium and low in organic carbon and available nitrogen.

3

Jharkhand having total geographical area 79.72 lakh hectares forms a part of Agro-climatic zone

VII of the country known as Eastern plateau and hill region. Based on rainfall, temperature, terrain and

soil characteristics, the state has been divided in to three agro-climatic sob-zones i.e. IV-Central and

North Eastern Plateau (Hazaribagh, Chatra, Dhanbad, Bokaro, Giridih, Kodarma, Jamtara, Deoghar,

Godda, Dumka, Pakur and Sahebganj) V-Western Plateau (Ranchi, Palamu, Gumla, Lohardaga, Garhwa,

Latehar and Simdega) VI-South Eastern Plateau (East Singhbhum, West Singhbhum, Saraikala).

Land use pattern of different agro-climatic sub-zones (‘000 ha) of Jharkhand

Sub–zone IV

Sub–zone V

Sub–zone VI

Jharkhand % area

Geographical area 3518.34 3095.12 1556.62 7970.08 -

Forest area 989.68 896.55 446.32 2332.55 29.27

Land put to non-agricultural use 308.29 179.62 194.97 682.88 8.56

Barren and uncultivated land 260.10 199.74 113.25 573.09 7.19

Cultivable waste land 120.18 99.49 54.79 274.46 3.44

Permanent pasture and other grazing land

71.97 8.33 7.16 87.46 1.10

Land under misc. trees 54.16 41.04 18.24 113.44 1.42

Net area sown 712.31 800.90 294.69 1807.90 22.68

Total cropped area 795.12 894.00 379.36 2068.48 -

Cropping intensity (%) 112 112 129 114 -

Geographical area of sub-zone IV is 3518.34 thousand ha, out of which 28.13 per cent is covered

under forest and 20.24 per cent area is put to cropping. Area sown more than once is 82.81 thousand ha

with a cropping intensity of 112 per cent. Geographical area of sub-zone V is 3095.12 thousand ha, out

of which 29.87 per cent area is covered under forest and 25.88 per cent area is put under cultivation.

Area sown more than once is 93.1 thousand ha with a cropping intensity of 112 per cent. Whereas, sub-

zone VI is comprised of only 1556.62 thousand ha, out of which 28.67 per cent area is under forest cover

and 18.93 per cent area is put under cultivation. Area sown more than once is 84.67 thousand ha with

highest cropping intensity of 129 per cent.

Crop/Cropping system

Major crops :

Sub. Zone-IV : Rice, Wheat, Maize and Greengram. Sub. Zone V : Rice, Maize, Niger, Chickpea and Pigeonpea. Sub. Zone VI : Rice, Maize, Linseed and Niger.

4

Efficient Cropping systems for different land situations in Jharkhand

Upland : Rained ecosystem having water retention capacity 180-200mm per meter soil Depth

Existing Diversification

Rice/Maize-Fallow

Rice/Gundli-Fallow

Arhar/Black gram-Fallow

Fallow-Niger/Horse gram

Pegeonpea + Groundnut (1:2)

Pegeonpea + Blackgram (1:2)

Pegonpea + Rice (1:3)

Pegeonpea + Maize (1:1)

Maize + Black gram (1:2)

Maize + Soybean (1:2)

Black gram-Safflower /Linseed /Lentil /Chickpea /Niger /Horse gram

Maize-Safflower/Linseed/Lentil/Chickpea

Soybean-Safflower/Linseed/Lentil/Chickpea

Medium land : It is very potential land situation having limited to adequate irrigation facilities for sequential cropping

Existing Diversification

Rice/Maize-Chickpea/Lentil/Peas

Rice/maize-Barley/Mustard/Linseed

Rice/Maize-Potato/Wheat

Maize + Black gram-Wheat

Maize-Early Potato-Late Wheat

Maize-Early Potato-Late Peas (green pods)

Maize-Wheat-Green gram

Maize-Potato-Green gram

Maize-Potato-Onion

Maize-Toria-Wheat

Maize-Early Potato/Toria-Late Wheat-Green Gram

Maize-Wheat + Lentil (4:2)

Maize-Wheat + Mustard (8:2)

Maize-Lentil + Mustard (5:1)

Maize-Potato + Wheat (1:1)

Rice-Wheat-Green gram /Black gram

Rice-Potato-Green gram /Black gram

Rice-Early Potato-Late Wheat

Rice-Toria-Late Wheat

Rice-Early Potato-Late Peas

Rice-Early Potato-Onion

Rice-Berseem

Deenanath Grass-Berseem-Maize+Cowpea

Rice-Early Potato/Toria-Wheat

Rice-Early Potato/Toria-Wheat-Greengram

Rice-Wheat + Lentil (4:2)

Rice-Wheat + Mustard (8:2)

Rice-Potato + Wheat (1:1)

Rice-Lentil + Mustard (5:1)

Lowland : Excessive soil wetness after low land rice does not permit tillage operation till January-February. Consequently, land remains fallow. Under this condition, surface seedling of wheat utilized residual soil moisture efficiently and increases cropping intensity as well.

Existing Diversification

Rice-Fallow Rice-Wheat (surface seeded on wet soil)

Rice-Summer vegetable

Rice-Summer rice

Rice-Berseem

5

The climatic conditions of the region favour luxuriant growth of many weed species. Annual

grasses like Echinochloa colonum, Echinochloa crusgalli, Eleusine indica and Digitaria spp. and

perennial grasses like Sorghum halepense and Cynodon dactylon are the major weeds during rainy

season in crops like, rice, maize, soybean, groundnut and fingermillet. Trianthema portulacstrum and

Celosia argentea are also becoming a problem in upland crops. Sedges like Cyperus rotundus, Cyperus

iria and Cyperus difformis are very common in most of crops. During winter season, the major weeds in

wheat field are annual grasses like phalaris minor, Avena spp. and non grasses like Chenopodium album,

melilotus alba, Melilotus indica, Medicago denticulate, Fumaria parviflora, Anagallis arvensis, Lathyrus

aphaca and Vicia spp

Brief rationale of the project and importance of the study

History of weeds is a history of man’s efforts to cultivate food. Removal of unwanted and

undesirable plants from edible crops, nuts and fruits were common practices even in ancient time which

allowed more light to reach the useful plants for photosynthesis and reduced plant competition. The

weeds emerging with the crop compete with it for nutrient, moisture and space, grow faster and utilize it

in larger amount than the crop and this problem has also been intensified with the increase in irrigation

facilities and fertilizer use resulting in drastic reduction in grain yield of direct seeded upland rice (60-

80%), 30-45% in wheat, 40-50% in potato, 35-60% in oilseeds and pulses. It is, therefore, imperative to

provide weed free environment to the crop during critical period of crop-weed competition to enable the

crop to utilize the costly inputs well. In another word we can say that the farming started with a fight

with weeds and this fight continues even today.

6

Herbicides sales: Jharkhand

Figures in Kg / Ltrs

Year

Formulations 2011 2012 2013

2, 4-D 34.2 EC (Ester Salt) 1,400 930 1,000

2, 4-D 80 WP (Sodium Salt) 3,350 1,090 1,200

Atrazine 50 WP 1,500 3,690 2,600

Bispyribac Sodium 10 SC (Adora & Nominee Gold 10 SC) 210 45 200

Butachlor 50 EC 6,350 81,748 90,000

Butachlor 50 EW 2,000 3,910 4,000

Fluchloralin 45 EC (Basalin & others) 100 - -

Glyphosate 41 SL 3,010 1,240 800

Glyphosate Gr. 225 210 240

Metribuzin 70 WP (Sencor 70 WP) 82 48 200

Oxyfluorfen 23.5 EC 665 1,720 1,500

Paraquat 24 SL 400 3,000 3,500

Pendimethalin 30 EC 240 - -

Pretilachlor 30EC (Sofit) - 550 550

Pretilachlor 40 EW (Erijan 40%EW) 10 - -

Pretilachlor 50 EC (Rifit & others) 910 4,965 5,500

Propaquizafop 10 % EC - 35 35

Pyrazosulfuron 10 WP (Saathi) 95 50 60

Quaizalofop ehtyl 5 EC (Targa Super) 1,240 1,000 800

Oxidiargyl 6 EC (Raft) 300 150 150

Oxidiargyl (Topstar) 43 51 250

Fenoxaprop p-ethyl 9 EC (Whip super) 1,540 1,690 1,100

In order to generate/develop suitable technique for management of weeds in different crops and

cropping systems in different agro-climatic region under rainfed or irrigated conditions for increasing

the yields of crops, the All India Coordinated Research Programme on weed control was started by the

Indian Council of Agricultural Research and BAU Ranchi was selected as a centre.

II. Weather condition during the year

Weather condition during winter 2014: A brief description about weather condition prevailing

during crop season of winter 2014 and Kharif season 2014 has been described as hereunder. The detail

weekly weather data has been appended.

The crop period during winter season covered most of the period between 46th

std. weeks (12th Nov-

18th November, 2013 to 13th

std. week (26th

March – 1st April, 2014). The mean maximum and

7

minimum temperature during this period was 24.6 0

and 9.6 0 c the maximum being 33.8

o C at 13

th std.

week (26th Mar-1st Apr, 2014) while the lowest temperature 1.8 0

C was recorded at 52nd

std week i.e.

24th

December – 31st December, 2014. Similarly the mean relative humidity at 7 AM and 2 PM were

83.33% and 65.79% the maximum 85.4 % being on 26th

Feb. – 4th

March, 2014 and minimum 58.0 %

during 26th

March – 1st April, 2014. The total rainfall received during the period was 525.0mm. The

mean evapotranspiration during the period recorded was 25.43 mm, the maximum being during 13th

std. week (26th

March – 1st April, 2014) i.e. 35.7 mm and the lowest during 7

th std. week (12

th

February – 18th

February, 2014) i.e.11.7 mm.

Weather during Rainy season, 2014:

The crop season during rainy season covered most of the period between 25th

std. week (18th Jun-

24th Jun 2014) to 40th

week i.e. 1st October -7

th October. During this period the mean maximum and

minimum temperature recorded was 30.10

C and 22.10

C. The maximum and minimum temperature

was recorded at 26th

std. week (25th

June- 1st July, 2014) and 39

th std. week (24

th September- 30

th

September,2014) respectively. The average relative humidity at 7 AM and 2 PM recorded was

82.8%and 71.9%. The maximum 85.9% (7 AM) being at 27th

std. week (July – 8th

July, 2014 ) and the

lowest at 65.4% at 2 PM at 26th

std. week (25th

Jun – 1st July, 2014). The total rainfall received during

rainy periods was 1095.7 mm. The mean evapotranspiration during the period recorded was 18.3 mm,

the maximum being during 27th

std. week (1st October- 7

th October, 2014) i.e. 31.6 mm and the lowest

during 31st (30

th July – 5

th August, 2014) i.e.7.5 mm.

8

ii. c Approved Technical Programme for 2014 and 2016 and Status

Sl. No.

Particulars Remarks

1. WS 1 Weed surveillance and monitoring

WS 1.1a Monitoring of appearance of new weed species

Conducted

WS 1.2 Monitoring of weed shift due to weed management practices, changes in cropping systems and climatic parameters in prevailing ecosystems

Conducted

WS 1.3 Monitoring of herbicide resistance / escapes in weeds of the dominant cropping system

Conducted

2. WS 2 Weed biology and physiology

WS 2.1a Biology of important weeds Conducted WS 2.1b Weedy rice Conducted WS. 2.1d Viability/regeneration potential of

glyphosate-treated Cyperus rotundus

Conducted

3. WS 3 Weed management in crops and cropping systems

WS 3.1: Herbicides combinations for control of complex weed flora in rice

WS 3.1.3 Herbicides combinations for control of complex weed flora in direct- seeded rice (dry/wet)

The trial has already been conducted for two years hence not undertaken this year

WS 3.3 Weed management in turmeric/other vegetables

WS 3.3.1 Integrated weed management with pre and post emergence herbicides in turmeric

Conducted

WS 3.3.3 Integrated weed management in ginger

Conducted

WS 3.4 WS 3.4.1 Studies on time of application of imazethapyr and its ready mix combination with imazamox (Odyssey) against weeds in blackgram

The additional trial has been conducted considering need of location

WS 3.6 Weed management in conservation agriculture systems

Conducted

WS 3.7 Long-term herbicide trial in different cropping systems

The trial has already been conducted for the last 7 years and considered concluded after winter wheat. The land under which trial was conducted has been disturbed owing to land development programme of the university

9

WS 3.8 Station trials based on location-specific problems

WS 3.8.3 Weed control in Carrot Conducted

WS 3.8.4 Weed management in egg plant Conducted

WS 3.8.10 Effect of different herbicide combination on weed and yield of maize

The additional trial has been conducted considering need of the location

4. WS 4 Management of problematic weeds

WS 4.1b Management of Cuscuta Conducted

WS 4.1c Intensive Survey on the incidence of Orobanch/Striga/Cuscuta/Loranthus

Conducted

WS 4.2 Making of Partheniumfree campus Conducted

WS 4.3 Biological control of water hyacinth by Neochetina bruchi

Conducted

6. WS 6 On-farm research and impact assessment

WS 6.1 On-Farm Research Conducted

WS 6.2 Front Line Demonstration (FLD) Conducted

10

III Executive Summary (English & Hindi)

1. WS 1. Weed surveillance and monitoring

WS1.1a. Monitoring of appearance of new weed species

New weed Conyza canadensis is infesting farm area of agronomical research farm of university This

is a plant of sunflower family i.e. Asteraceae. The species are annual / biennial rarely shrub, growing

30 to 75 cm in height. The stem are erect and branched. The flowers are produced in inflorescences

with several inflorescence clustered loosely on each stem. The weed appeared to come in the field

through transport of soil in the process of land development.

WS 1.2 Monitoring of weed shift due to weed management practices, changes in cropping systems and climatic parameters in prevailing ecosystems

Observations on weed shift over the years have been recorded as per data found during weed survey

programme. On Ranchi Daltoganj rout the trend of weed shift had been probably due to change in

monsoon pattern which compelled farmers to adopt changed sowing/transplanting of rice.

WS 1.3: Monitoring of herbicide resistance / escapes in weeds of the dominant cropping system:

Cynadon dectylon: , Commelina bengalensis: Conyza bonareinsis: have been found to be resistant to

Glyphosate and 2,4-D.

WS 2: Weed biology and physiology

WS 2.1 a: Biology of important weeds

The weed biology of cyperus iria and Ludvigia parviflora of crop land weeds and Hyptis

suaveolense and Cassia tora of non crop weeds were studied.

WS 2.1b: Weedy Rice:To study detail biology and physiology of weedy rice

Weedy rice of farmers collected from farmers fields during 2013 were sown on 19.07.14 in pots as

detailed study were conducted.

WS. 2.1d Viability/regeneration potential of glyphosate-treated Cyperus rotundus:

Application of Glyphosate @ 1.5 kg/ha recorded 15% reduced density of Cyperus rotundus

compared to other treatments.

The tubers planted in the pots did not germinate owing to low temperature. However, the

regeneration of tubers will be seen in the plots itself where the treatment was applied. The

appropriate time of germination of tuber is during pre monsoon rain.

WS 3: Weed management in crops and cropping systems

WS 3.3: Weed management in turmeric/other vegetables

3.3.1: Integrated weed management with pre and post emergence herbicides in turmeric

Application of glyphosate @1.85 f.b. 2 H.W. at 45 & 75DAP was most effective in controlling

weed density and weed dry matter at intial stage of crop growth while latter on application of

metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron, not only reduced weed density of broad leaf,

11

narrow, sedges and total weeds but also reduced their dry matter accumulation. The crop is yet to

be harvested .

WS 3.3.3: Integrated weed management in ginger

Application of glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of

ginger was found to be most effective in reducing density as well as dry matter accumulation by

all three categories of weeds. The crop is still in field and it will be harvested in the month of

February.

WS 3.4.1: Studies on time of application of imazethapyr and its ready mix combination with

imazamox (Odyssey) against weeds in blackgram

Application of Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence (T12) being similar to Odyssey 50g/haPOE (T10), Odyssey 70g/ha post emergence (T11), Ody. 70g/ha PRE (T8) and Ody. 80g/haPRE (T9) as well as Pendim.1000g/haPRE (T13) and Valore 1000g/ha (T4) and Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS (T15) recorded 45.44% significantly higher seed yield (1091 kg/ha) compared to rest of the treatments.

WS 3.6 Weed management in conservation agriculture systems:

(i) Non-rice based cropping systems (Maize-wheat) Zero tillage - Zero tillage sequence recorded: 46.47% more grain and straw (13270.76 kg/ha)

yield compared to conventional- conventional tillage (CT-CT) sequence owing to reduced weed

density and dry matter accumulation by all categories of weeds. Among weed control methods

integrated weed management being similar to recommended herbicide recorded 14.23% more

number of grains/cob(442.87), 13.48% more number of grains/row (33.67), 15.43% more 100

seed weight (22.3)and 49.66% more grain yield (3097.53 kg/ha) compared to weedy check. WS 3.7: Long-term herbicide trial in different cropping systems

The trial was conducted for 7 years. During winter 2013-14 trial on wheat crop was conducted.

Continuous use of 2, 4-D in rice crop either in combination with butachlor or with Almix has

reduced weed density of broad leaved weeds. In wheat crop the herbicide isoproturon was

replaced with pendimethalin. A combination of butachlor + Almix in rice and pendimethalin +

2,4-D in wheat performed well in producing wheat yield.

WS 3.8: Station trials based on location-specific problems

WS 3.8.3: Weed control in carrot: Application of oxyfluorfen or pendimethalin was found to be effective in reducing grassy, broad leaf and sedges weeds.

WS 3.8.4: Weed management in egg plant Application of oxyfluorfen or pendimethalin was found to

be

effective in reducing grassy, broad leaf and sedges weeds.

WS 3.8.10: Effect of different herbicide combination on weed and yield of maize

Pre emergence application of Atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE recorded significantly

65.58% maximum grain yield (3802.47 kg/ha)as compared to weedy check (1308.64 kg/ha).

12

Whereas, Pre emergence application of Atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE being

similar to two hand weeding at 20 and 40 days after sowing recorded 65.57% more straw yield

(8648.77 kg/ha)as compared to weedy check (2977.40 kg/ha).

WS 4: Management of problematic weeds

WS 4.1b: Management of Cuscuta in niger

Application of pendimethalin as pre emergence did not influence niger plant adversely. However

application of Imazathapyre affected not only cuscuta but also affected plant germination as well

as growth of niger.The pendimethalin did not show adverse effect on niger.

WS 4.2: Making of Parthenium free campus

Effort was made to clean the campus nearby Department of Soil Science and Agric. Chemistry,

Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi to clean the campus free from Parthenium. The result

showed that the capus became clean as visible from the photographs below:

WS 4.3: Biological control of water hyacinth by Neochetina bruchi

Neochetina bruchi beetle was provided by Directorate of weed Science Research in order to

infest them for control of Water hycicinth. Accordingly the beetle was spread on the water

hyacinth plants. In Jharkhand we have very few ponds where water stagnat for long time and the

water do not recede. The applied beetle on water hyacinth did not show its activity and the impact

was not visible.

WS 6: On-farm research and impact assessment WS 6.1: On-Farm Research

5 on farm trials were conducted at farmers field on vegetable crops to find out the efficacy of

pendimethalin @1.0 kg/ha in brinjal, okra and tomato crops in approximately 1000 squire meter

plot. The farmers are harvesting a good crop from their field.

WS 6.2: Front Line Demonstration (FLD)

Improved weed control method in rice crop by applying pretilachlor @ 1.0kg/ha (formulation)

recorded higher gross return and B:C ratio (Rs34,000.00 and 1.88) compared to farmers practice

of one hand weeding at 25 days after sowing. Similarly in case of demonstration on maize it was

found that under improved practice of weed control i.e. application of atrazine 2.0 kg/ha

(formulation) recorded higher gross return and B:C ratio (37,920.00 and 2.26).

VII.TSP programme:

Under tribal development programme a Fruit Based Land use System has been developed with

following to acquaint farmers about improved method of orchard development, introduce

intercropping in orchard to utilize interspace for cultivation of field crops, suppress weeds by

intercropping in newly developed orchard and to evaluate the economics of farmers.

Other activities :

A weed science contest was organized from 17 to 22 December 2014 was organized for students of faculty of Agriculture in which quiz, debate, essay, exhibition were organized.

13

” ”

WS 1

WS 1.1 ”

WS 1.2

WS 1.3 ”

WS 2:

WS 2.1a.

WS 2.1b.

WS 2.1d.

%

WS 3:

WS 3.3: ” ”

”

” +

14

WS 3.3.3 +

WS 3.4-1:

” T12 T10

T11 ” T8

T13 T4

” T15

%

WS 3.6

” ”

%” ”

%

WS 3.7 ”

+ +

WS 3.8 ”

WS 3.8

WS 3.8

WS 3.8 ”

+ +

%

15

WS 4 :

WS 4.1.b

WS 4:2 ”

WS 4:3 ”” ”

WS 6

WS 6.1

”

WS 6.2

”

16

V. Results of practical utility:

For effective control of Cyperus rotundus a Glyphosate @ should be applied.

Application of Metribuzin 0.7 kg/ha fb straw mulch 10 t/ha fb one hand weeding is most successful in controlling weeds in turmeric crop

For better control on weeds application of 2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha + isoproturon 0.75 kg/ha

should be applied at 25-30 days after sowing in wheat.

Under direct seeded rice crop, application of pyrazosulfuron 0.20kg/ha early pre

emergence fb. application of bisparibac sodium 0.25 kg/ha + one hoing is most effective

method of weed control.

In transplanted rice application of pyrazosulfuron 0.20kg/ha as early post emergence is

most effective in controlling weeds.

Glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of ginger was

found to be most effective in reducing density as well as dry matter accumulation by all three

categories of weeds.

Application of oxyfluorfen or pendimethalin was found to be effective in reducing grassy,

broad leaf and sedges weeds

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS PASSED ON TO STATE PACKAGE AND PRACTICIES

Sl. No. Year Name of Technology with results in trial

1. 2013 Herbicide combinations for control of complex weed flora in direct seeded rice (Dry):

Application of Pendimethalin 3DAS FB application of Bisparibac sodium 20 DAS fb

manual weeding at 25 DAS is most economical and produce maximum yield owing

to better weed management in direct seeded rice.

Weed management in turmeric: 1. Application of metribuzin 0.7 kg/ha fb. by two

hoeing recorded significantly reduced weed dry matter accumulation similar to hand

weeding at 30 DAS and 60 DA and produce maximum net return and :C ratio.

Long-term trial on tillage in different cropping systems : Zero method of tillage

performed in rice followed by conventional tillage in wheat both with recommended

weed control practices produce maximum grain and straw yield resulting and higher

net return and B:C ratio..

Weed management in conservation agriculture systems Maize crop sown as zero tillage produce grain yield similar to conventional tillage.Intercropping black gram with maize in 1:2 row ratio can be practice to achieve weed control through smothering effect similar to application of atrzine @1.0 kg/ha as pre emergence.

Management of Cuscutain niger:Application of Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha and stale bed Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha reduced appearence of cuscuta in niger

17

VII. Research Achievements:

WS 1 Weed surveillance and monitoring

WS 1.1a: Monitoring of appearance of new weed species

New weed Conyza canadensis is infesting farm area of agronomical research farm of B A U. This

is a plant of sunflower family i.e. Asteraceae. The species are annual / biennial rarely shrub,

growing 30 to 75 cm in height. The stem are erect and branched. The flowers are produced in

inflorescences with several inflorences clustered loosely on each stem.

The weed was first noticed on the bunds. But after land development plan most of the bunds

were destroyed. This resulted in spread of this weed in the main field. It appears that part of root,

seeds and other propagule might be responsible for its dispersal.

WS 1.2: Monitoring of weed shift due to weed management practices, changes in cropping

systems and climatic parameters in prevailing ecosystems.

Observations on weed shift over the years have been recorded as per data found during weed

survey programme.

Ranchi-Daltonganj route: Fimbristlis milliaceae (IVI 30.11%) and Sphellanthus acmella (IVI

27.45%) during 2009-10; during 2010-11 Ageratum conzoides (IVI 43.5%) and Fimbristlis

millaiaceae (IVI 18.6%); during 2011-12 and Cyperus iria (IVI 45.5%) Ageratum conzoides (IVI

30.3%) and Ludvigia parviflora (IVI 27.1%) and during 2012-13 Ludvigia parviflora (IVI

18

21.11%), Cypersus iria (IVI 15.17%) and Sphillencthus acmella (IVI 11.36%) were dominant

weeds.. The trend of weed shift had been probably due to change in monsoon pattern which

compelled farmers to adopt changed sowing/transplanting of rice.

Ranchi-Gumla route: The trend of weed shift in rice field on Ranchi Gumla rout showed that

during 2010-11 Panicum repense (IVI 17.4%) Digitaria sanguinalis (IVI 17.4%) Sphellanthus

acmella (IVI 10.4%) were dominant. While during 2011-12, Fimbristlis millaceae (IVI 26.9 %),

Cyperus iria (IVI 19 %) and Ludvigia parviflora (IVI 5.31%) were dominant weeds.

WS 1.3: Monitoring of herbicide resistance / escapes in weeds of the dominant cropping

system:

Following weeds were found to be resistant to herbicides mentioned against them:

Cynadon dectylon: Glyphosate

Commelina bengalensis: Glyphosate

Conyza bonareinsis: Glyphosate and 2,4-D.

Weed Survey during Kharif 2014:The major weeds during winter season were Coronopus

dydimus, mililotus indica, Spergula arvensis, Vicia sativa, Vicia hersuta, Avena fatua.

The major weeds during Kharif seasons were Echinocloa crusgali, Ageratum conzoides,

Sphellanthus acmella, Cyperus rotundus, Cyperus iria, Fimbristlis milliaceae, Marselia quadrifolia etc.

WS 2 Weed biology and physiology

WS 2.1a: Biology of important weeds

Methodology:

Crop land:

1. Cyperus iria: Two pots were filled with fine soil and were saturated with water to attain soil

resemble to transplanted paddy like soil. Two newly germinated seedlings of Cyperus iria were

selected from rice fields and were planted in pots on 12th

August, 2014.

2. Ludvigia parviflora: Four just germinated tender plants of Ludvigia parviflora were selected in

rice field on 20th

August and were labeled. The first observation was recorded at 30 days after

labeling i.e Con 20th

September, 2014.

19

Study on biology of Cyperus iria

Non crop land:

1. Hyptis suaveolense: Four tender plants of ten days old of Hyptis suaveolense were identified and

tagged for recording observation on 30th July, 2014. The plants were on the bund side in

agronomical research farm.

2. Cassia tora: Seeds of cassia tora were sown in two different pots on 30th July. The seeds

germinated 13 days after sowing. Two healthy seedling were kept in each pot and rest of the

germinated seedlings were uprooted. The observations were recorded at 30 DAS and at maturity.

20

Study on Weed Biology

Table WS 2.1a. 1: Study on Weed Biology

Name of

Weed

Dry matter at

maturity (g) /

plant

root

shoot

ratio

Days

to

flower

days

to

matur

ity,

no. of

reproductive

structure/plant,

no. of

seed

per

plant,

Plant

height

(cm)

Panicle Spikelets

Cyperus iria root shoot

1 38.25 6.25 6.1 45 86 6 29 125 55

2 26.22 4.8 5.5 56 90 5 16 167 45

3 28.56 2.25 12.7 55 70 6 14 154 47

4 30.23 3.5 8.6 50 70 6 19 189 55

Average 30.81 4.2 8.2 51.5 79 5.75 19.5 158.75 50.5

Name of Weed days to flower

days to maturity,

no. of flowers

no. of seed per plant,

dormancy of seeds

Plant height (cm)

Hyptis suaveolense

1 110 483 180 days 160

2 105 398 142

3 85 234 143

4 102 353 155

Name of

Weed

Ludvigia

parviflora

Days to

flower

days to

maturity,

No. of branches

No. of

capsules

no. of

seed

per

capsule,

Seed

weight

(mg/100

seeds)

Plant

height

(cm) plant sample

1 38 89 34 28882 68 0.176 93

2 54 90 36 1282 45 0.180 107

3 40 95 38 381 56 0.177 108

4 55 90 23 82 67 0.168 76

Average 46.75 91 32.75 7656.75 59 0.17525 96

21

Name of Weed

Days to flower

days to maturity,

Number Of branches

Number of pods / plant

no. of seed per plant,

dormancy of seeds

Plant height (cm)

Cassia tora

1 45 85 5 21 21 240 days 40

2 50 95 5 11 23 240 days 53

3 54 90 5 15 22 240 days 46

4 55 85 6 15 20 240 days 45

Average 51 88.75 5.25 15.5 21.5 240 46

Plant of Hyptis suaveolense

22

WS 2.1b: Weedy rice

B. Weedy rice of following farmers collected during 2013 were sown on 19.07.14 in pots as detailed

below:

1. Somra Munda

2. Dinesh Mahto

3. Debilal Munda

4. Link women

c. Pots from serial no. 1 to 18 have been marked to identify their names after full growth.

The weeds started germinating on 22.07.14 after watering on 21.07.14

Date of sowing: 18.7.14

Table WS 2.1b 1: Observations on weedy rice

Name Phenophases (days taken after sowing) Plant ht (cm)

Total tiller/plant

Effec. Tiller/plant

Panicle length (cm)

Grains/panicle

Tiller Panicle em

fl milk Dough

mat

Somra Munda

21

41 51 62 N R 70 65 3 2 17 13

Dinesh Mahto

30

45 56 65 N R 72 55 5 2 16 32

Debilal Munda

32

39 50 61 N R 77 45 5 3 18 44

Link women

36

46 51 59 N R 78 70 5 3 18 55

NR= Not recorded

23

WS. 2.1d: Viability/regeneration potential of glyphosate-treated Cyperus rotundus

Methodology: A field trial was conducted at Agronomical research farm of Birsa agricultural University,

Ranchi, during rainy season of 2014 to find out the effect of chemical method of weed control on viability

and regeneration potential of Cyperus rotundus . The treatments were as follows:

Treatments:

1. Glyphosate @ 1.5 kg/ha

2. Glyphosate @ 750 g/ha

3. 2,4-D amine salt @ 500 g/ha)

4. 2,4-D amine salt (125 g/ha)

5. 2,4-D amine salt (125 g/ha) to induced senescence for 48h followed by Glyphosate @ 750 g/ha

6. Control

24

Plot size - 2 x 2 m2 (in fixed plots) Replications –Three

Date of layout: 25.08.14

Observations:

Table WS. 2.1d 1: Effect of glyphosate on mortality of Cyperus rotundus

Treatments Initial

density of

C.

rotundus

(No./m2)

Density of

C. rotundus

(No./m2)

(15 DAS)

Mortali

ty (%)

Density of

C. rotundus

(No./m2)

(30 DAS)

Mortality

(%)

Density

Of

C. Rotundus

(No./m2)

(60 DAS)

Mortali

ty (%)

Glyphosate @

1.5 kg/ha

100 85 15 2 98 0 100

Glyphosate @

750 g/ha

100 88 12 7 93 0 100

2,4-D amine

salt @ 500

g/ha)

100 98 2 78 22 75 25

2,4-D amine

salt (125 g/ha)

100 100 0 94 6 86 14

2,4-D amine

salt (125

g/ha)+

Glyphosate @

750 g/ha

100 100 0 65 35 38 62

Control 100 100 0 100 0 100 0

Result: Application of Glyphosate @ 1.5 kg/ha recorded 15% reduced density of Cyperus rotundus

compared to other treatments.

The tubers planted in the pots did not germinate owing to low temperature. However, the

regeneration of tubers will be seen in the plots itself where the treatment was applied. The appropriate time

of germination of tuber is during pre monsoon rain.

25

Fig. Effect of glyphosate on Cyperus rotundus

26

WS 3. Weed management in crops and cropping systems WS 3.3: Weed management in turmeric/other vegetables

3.3.1: Integrated weed management with pre and post emergence herbicides in turmeric

Objectives:

To study the bio-efficacy of different herbicides against weeds and their effect on growth and yield of turmeric

To study the phytotoxic effects on the crop, if any.

Treatments:

Herbicides Dose Application time

T1 Metribuzin fb 2 hand weeding 0.7 kg/ha 0-5 DAP fb 45 and 75 DAP

T2 Metribuzin fb fenoxaprop + metsulfuron

0.7 kg/ha fb 67 + 4 g/ha

0-5 DAP fb 45 DAP

T3 Metribuzin fb straw mulch fb HW 0.7 kg/ha fb 10 t/ha 0-5 DAP fb 10 DAP fb 75 DAP

T4 Pendimethalin fb 2 HW 1.0 kg/ha 0-5 DAP fb 45 and 75 DAP

T5 Pendimethalin fb fenoxaprop + metsulfuron

1.0 kg/ha fb 67 + 4 g/ha

0-5 DAP fb 45 DAP

T6 Pendimethalin fb straw mulch fb HW 1.0 kg/ha fb 10 t/ha 0-5 DAP fb 10 DAP fb 75 DAP

T7 Atrazine fb two HW 0.75 kg/ha 0-5 DAP fb 45 and 75 DAP

T8 Atrazine fb fenoxaprop + metsulfuron 0.75 kg/ha fb 67 + 4 g/ha

0-5 DAP fb 45 DAP

T9 Atrazine fb straw mulch fb HW 0.75 kg/ha fb 10 t/ha 0-5 DAP fb 10 DAP fb 75 DAP

T10 Oxyfluorfen fb two HW 0.30 kg/ha 0-5 DAP fb 45 and 75 DAP

T11 Oxadiargyl fb two HW 0.25 kg/ha 0-5 DAP fb 45 and 75 DAP

T12 Glyphosate fb 2 HW 5.0 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP

T13 Glyphosate fb 2 HW 7.5 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP

T14 Hand weeding (3) 25, 45 and 75 DAP

T15 Un-weeded check

Methodology: A field experiment was conducted in agronomical research farm of Birsa agricultural

University, Ranchi during Kharif season of 2014-15 with objective to find out the bio-efficacy of

different herbicides against weeds and their effect on growth and yield of turmeric and also to study the

phytotoxic effects on the crop, if any.The experimental field was low in nitrogen (210 kg/ha) medium in

phosphorus (21 kg/ha) and low in potassium (168 kg/ha). The pH of soil was 6.2. The treatment

comprised of metribuzine. f.b. 2 hand weeding.(45 & 75DAP) (T1), metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. +

27

metsulfuron, (T2) - metribuzine. f.b. straw mulch S.M. f.b. hand weeding (75DAP) (32), pendimethalin

f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T4), - pendimethalin. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron, (T5),

pendimethalin f.b. straw mulch f.b. hand weeding (75DAP) (T6), atrazine. f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 &

75DAP) (T7), atrazine. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron,. (T8), atrazine f.b. straw mulch f.b.

H.W.(75DAP) (T9), oxyfluorfen. f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T10), oxardiagyl. f.b. 2 hand

weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T11), glyphosate 5.0 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 &

75DAP) (T12), - glyphosate 7.5 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T13), -

hand weeding (25,45 & 75 DAP) (T14), un weeded control (T15). The experiment was laid out in

randomized block design replicated thrice. The crop was sown on 03.07.2014.

Result:

Weed density:

Application of Gly. (1.85) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) (T13) recorded significantly reduced density of

broad leaf weed (24.00/ m2), narrow (181.00/m2), sedges 12.00/m2), and total weeds (217.33/m

2) at 30

DAP, and this was similar to Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) (T9), Oxy. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP)

(T10), Oxa. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) (T11) and (T12), in case of broad leaf weeds; Metri. f.b. feno.

+ mets. (T2), Metri. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W. (75DAP) (T3), Atra. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) (T7), Atra. f.b.

feno. + mets. (T 8), Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) (T9), Oxy. f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) (T10),

Oxa. f.b. 2 H.W.(45 & 75DAP) (T11) and Gly.(1.25) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) (T12) in case of

narrow leaf and Gly.(1.25) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) (T12) in case of total weeds.

Application of Metri. f.b. feno. + mets. (T2) recorded significantly reduced broad leaf weed

density (165.33, 48.67/m2) compared to rest of the treatments except Pendi. f.b. feno. + mets. (T5) at 90

DAP, narrow weed density(48.00/m2) at 90 DAP and (111.00/m

2) at 150 DAP compared to Metri. f.b. 2

H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) (T1), Metri. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W. (75DAP) (T3), Pendi. f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP)

(T4), Pendi. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) (T6), Atra. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) (T7), Atra. f.b. feno. +

mets. (T8), Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) (T9) and un weeded check(T15) at 90 DAP and (T10) at

150 DAP.

Dry matter accumulation:

Application of glyphosate 7.5 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T13)

being similar to atrazine. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron,. (T8), oxyfluorfen. f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 &

28

75DAP) (T10), oxardiagyl. f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T11) and hand weeding (25,45 & 75

DAP) (T14) in case of broad, narrow and sedges weeds and also metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. +

metsulfuron, (T2), metribuzine. f.b. straw mulch S.M. f.b. hand weeding (75DAP) (T3), atrazine. f.b. 2

hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T7) and atrazine f.b. straw mulch f.b. H.W.(75DAP) (T9) in case of

narrow weeds recorded 56.49% reduced dry matter accumulation by broad leaf (11.16 g/m2); 77.34% by

narrow leaf (19.47 g/m2) and 66.38% reduced dry matter accumulation by sedges compared to their

respective weed dry matter under weedy checks i.e. 25.65, 85.95 and 34.51 g/m2

at 30 DAS.

At 90 DAS, application of metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron, (T2) recorded

significantly reduced dry matter of broad leaf weeds, narrow and sedges weeds over rest of the

treatments. The reduction was to the extent of 81.48, 84.80 and 83.68 percent of broad leaf (81.48 g/m2),

narrow (83.71 g/m2) and sedges (16.11 g/m

2) compared to their respective dry matter under weedy

checks. T2 also recorded significantly reduced total weed dry matter over rest of the treatments and the

extent of reduction was to the tune of 83.35% .

At 150 DAP application of metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron, (T2) recorded significantly

reduced broad leaf weed dry matter (55.07 g/m2) over the rest of the treatments and the reduction was

77.29% compared to weedy check. (242.49 g/m2). Similarly metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. +

metsulfuron, (T2) being similar to T5 in case of narrow and sedges and also atrazine. f.b. fenoxaprop. +

metsulfuron,. (T8), glyphosate 5.0 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP)

(T12), lyphosate 7.5 ml/lit 25 fb 45 and 75 DAP f.b. 2 hand weeding (45 & 75DAP) (T13), hand

weeding (25,45 & 75 DAP) (T14) in case of sedges recorded reduced weed dry matter to the extent of

70.48 and 100% in case of sedges compared to weedy checks (317.87 and 69.61g/m2 respectively ).The

reduction in weed dry matter accumulation by total weeds at 150 DAS by T2 was 76.36% compared to

weedy check (629 g/m2).

It can be inferred that application of Gly. (1.85) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) (T13) was most

effective in controlling weed density and weed dry matter at intial stage of crop growth while latter on

application of metribuzine. f.b. fenoxaprop. + metsulfuron, (T2) not only reduced weed density of broad

leaf, narrow, sedges and total weeds but also reduced their dry matter accumulation.

29

Table WS 3.3.1 - Weed density /m2 of turmeric as influenced by weed control methods

Treatment

Broad leaf weeds Narrow leaf weeds Sedges 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP

T1 - Metri. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 13.16

(180.00)

25.80

(666.67)

19.76

(159.33)

18.12

(328.00)

19.03

(362.67)

15.61

(244.00)

10.08

(101.33)

6.48

(42.67)

5.63

(32.67) T2 - Metri. f.b. feno. + mets. 12.08

(148.00)

12.88

(165.33)

6.95

(48.67)

16.20

(264.00)

6.96

(48.00)

10.54

(111.00)

8.51

(72.00)

3.34

(10.67)

0.71

(0.00)

T3 - Metri. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP)

13.20

(174.67)

25.37

(661.33)

19.28

(135.00)

16.37

(273.33)

18.77

(352.00)

15.48

(239.33)

9.61

(92.00)

6.53

(42.67)

5.07

(25.33)

T4 - Pendi. f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 15.68

(246.67)

27.98

(789.33)

23.41

(199.00)

23.10

(533.33)

21.43

(458.67)

20.88

(438.33)

14.25

(202.67)

8.03

(64.00)

9.33

(86.67) T5 - Pendi. f.b. feno. + mets. 13.49

(186.67)

13.77

(190.67)

11.55

(238.33)

18.12

(328.00)

8.95

(80.00)

10.66

(113.33)

13.31

(177.33)

4.64

(21.33)

0.71

(0.00) T6 - Pendi. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 15.43

(240.00)

25.80

(666.67)

22.08

(191.00)

22.23

(495.67)

21.16

(448.00)

17.70

(320.67)

13.34

(181.33)

8.03

(64.00)

7.42

(54.67) T7 - Atra. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 11.91

(142.00)

25.48

(650.67)

16.40

(192.33)

15.47

(242.67)

18.77

(352.00)

15.24

(238.33)

8.19

(66.67)

6.15

(37.33)

5.00

(24.67) T8 - Atra. f.b. feno. + mets. 7.57

(57.33)

17.21

(298.67)

12.64

(390.33)

15.10

(240.00)

11.08

(122.67)

12.25

(151.33)

7.76

(60.00)

4.64

(21.33)

0.71

(0.00) T9 - Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 8.82

(77.33)

24.49

(602.67)

15.75

(190.00)

15.32

(240.00)

18.31

(336.00)

13.25

(175.33)

8.16

(66.67)

6.13

(37.33)

5.07

(25.33) T10 - Oxy. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 7.33

(53.33)

21.92

(485.33)

15.15

(374.67)

15.00

(233.33)

16.01

(256.00)

12.94

(167.00)

7.33

(53.33)

6.15

(37.33)

4.18

(17.00) T11 - Oxa. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 7.10

(52.33)

21.53

(464.00)

14.08

(247.67)

14.91

(228.00)

14.95

(223.33)

15.24

(238.33)

6.12

(38.67)

6.12

(37.33)

4.12

(16.67) T12 - Gly.(1.25) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 5.17

(26.67)

19.36

(378.67)

13.83

(549.67)

13.26

(182.67)

13.42

(180.00)

12.63

(159.33)

3.70

(13.33)

5.58

(32.00)

0.71

(0.00) T13 - Gly. (1.85) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 4.91

(24.00)

18.05

(325.33)

13.79

(487.00)

13.19

(181.33)

11.79

(138.67)

12.52

(157.67)

3.52

(12.00)

5.70

(32.00)

0.71

(0.00) T14 - H.W. (25,45 & 75 DAP) 5.87

(36.00)

20.59

(426.67)

13.88

(271.00)

14.14

(200.00)

14.71

(218.97)

12.64

(160.67)

4.20

(17.33)

5.58

(32.00)

0.71

(0.00) T15 - U. W. C. 17.04

(290.67)

35.59

(1266.67)

25.37

(643.00)

23.85

(569.33)

24.19

(584.99)

21.15

(447.00)

15.03

(225.67)

15.64

(244.33)

9.61

(91.93) SEm± 0.90 1.33 0.77 1.44 0.55 1.03 0.49 0.46 0.28 CD (P = 0.05) 2.61 3.86 2.22 4.17 1.59 2.98 1.43 1.33 0.82 CV% 14.74 10.30 8.15 14.70 5.95 12.22 9.65 12.11 12.33

30

Table WS 3.3.1.1: Dry matter accumulation by weeds (g/m2) of turmeric )var. Rajendra Sonia

Treatment

Broad leaf weeds Narrow leaf weeds Sedges 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP

T1 - Metri. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 4.84

(22.92)

13.97

(194.81)

13.88

(192.16)

5.98

(35.23)

16.61

(275.28)

14.66

(214.51)

4.26

(17.66)

6.56

(42.53)

5.37

(28.39) T2 - Metri. f.b. feno. + mets. 4.66

(21.29)

9.05

(81.48)

7.45

(55.07)

5.27

(27.76)

9.18

(83.71)

9.70

(93.81)

3.88

(14.65)

4.07

(16.11)

0.71

(0.00)

T3 - Metri. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP)

4.75

(22.04)

13.94

(193.85)

11.73

(137.32)

5.28

(28.48)

15.12

(228.31)

14.59

(212.48)

4.19

(17.07)

6.52

(42.01)

4.63

(20.94) T4 - Pendi. f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 5.04

(24.95)

18.41

(339.55)

12.05

(144.92)

8.98

(80.24)

22.24

(495.73)

17.25

(297.90)

5.73

(32.38)

7.27

(52.49)

7.11

(50.30) T5 - Pendi. f.b. feno. + mets. 4.88

(23.35)

9.98

(99.11)

11.38

(128.97)

8.07

(64.69)

11.38

(129.57)

9.87

(96.99)

5.29

(27.49)

5.08

(25.36)

0.71

(0.00) T6 - Pendi. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 4.92

(23.77)

13.97

(194.81)

13.45

(180.54)

8.37

(69.61)

21.76

(474.31)

15.04

(225.79)

5.66

(31.50)

7.25

(52.06)

5.93

(34.67) T7 - Atra. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 4.49

(19.65)

13.86

(191.63)

12.43

(154.19)

5.30

(27.71)

14.99

(224.29)

14.55

(211.26)

3.83

(14.16)

6.11

(36.85)

4.56

(20.32) T8 - Atra. f.b. feno. + mets. 3.74

(13.53)

10.75

(115.23)

11.24

(125.95)

5.24

(27.15)

11.59

(134.24)

12.89

(165.76)

3.68

(13.07)

5.10

(25.52)

0.71

(0.00) T9 - Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 4.09

(17.00)

12.86

(165.02)

11.49

(131.67)

5.23

(27.32)

14.89

(221.40)

13.76

(188.93)

3.72

(13.37)

6.08

(36.52)

4.39

(18.83) T10 - Oxy. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 3.61

(12.57)

11.32

(127.82)

13.04

(169.56)

4.77

(22.47)

13.44

(180.24)

13.66

(186.25)

3.56

(12.21)

6.04

(36.09)

4.01

(15.59) T11 - Oxa. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 3.57

(12.23)

11.24

(125.89)

11.64

(135.23)

4.62

(20.87)

13.04

(169.54)

13.64

(186.15)

3.43

(11.25)

5.98

(35.30)

3.94

(15.06) T12 - Gly.(1.25) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 3.46

(11.49)

11.11

(123.07)

11.94

(141.98)

4.47

(19.50)

12.02

(143.90)

13.22

(174.43)

3.98

(15.38)

5.84

(33.57)

0.71

(0.00) T13 - Gly. (1.85) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 3.41

(11.16)

10.99

(120.22)

11.79

(138.40)

4.47

(19.47)

11.66

(135.50)

13.08

(170.85)

3.48

(11.60)

5.82

(33.53)

0.71

(0.00) T14 - H.W. (25,45 & 75 DAP) 3.50

(11.79)

11.14

(123.80)

11.63

(134.80)

4.58

(20.57)

12.97

(167.74)

13.33

(177.16)

3.39

(11.03)

5.84

(33.60)

0.71

(0.00) T15 - U. W. C. 5.11

(25.65)

20.98

(439.94)

15.53

(242.49)

9.30

(85.95)

23.4

(550.91)

17.82

(317.87)

5.92

(34.51)

9.93

(98.16)

8.37

(69.61) SEm± 0.19 0.29 0.34 0.31 0.41 0.37 0.11 0.13 0.12 CD (P = 0.05) 0.55 0.84 1.00 0.90 1.18 1.06 0.32 0.37 0.35 CV% 7.65 3.88 4.96 9.02 4.71 4.61 4.47 3.59 6.02

31

Table WS 3.3.1.2: Total weed density and weed dry matter g/m2 of turmeric as influenced by weed control

Treatment Total weed density/m

2 Total weed dry matter g/m

2

30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP

T1 - Metri. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 24.63

(609.33)

32.72

(1072.00)

25.83 (667.00)

8.73

(75.81)

22.65

(512.62)

20.87 (435.06)

T2 - Metri. f.b. feno. + mets. 21.95

(484.00)

14.98

(224.00)

12.66 (159.67)

7.98

(63.71)

13.48

(181.29)

12.22 (148.88)

T3 - Metri. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP)

23.23

(540.00)

32.34

(1056.00)

25.24 (639.33)

8.22

(67.59)

21.55

(464.17)

19.27 (370.74)

T4 - Pendi. f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 31.34

(982.67)

36.16

(1312.00)

32.71 (1074.67)

11.75

(137.57)

29.77

(887.76)

22.21 (493.12)

T5 - Pendi. f.b. feno. + mets. 26.28

(692.00)

17.07

(292.00)

15.72 (248.33)

10.77

(115.53)

15.94

(254.04)

15.05 (225.97)

T6 - Pendi. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 30.18

(917.00)

34.34

(1178.67)

29.33 (862.33)

11.19

(124.88)

26.85

(721.18)

21.01 (441.00)

T7 - Atra. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 21.22

(451.33)

32.25

(1040.00)

22.95 (534.00)

7.87

(61.51)

21.29

(452.77)

19.65 (385.77)

T8 - Atra. f.b. feno. + mets. 18.74

(357.33)

21.02

(442.67))

17.61 (310.67)

7.36

(53.75)

16.59

(274.99)

17.09 (291.71)

T9 - Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 19.48

(384.00)

31.23

(976.00)

21.18 (448.33)

7.57

(57.69)

20.57

(422.94)

18.43 (339.43)

T10 - Oxy. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 18.30

(340.00)

27.85

(778.67)

20.46 (422.33)

6.90

(47.25)

18.56

(344.15)

19.28 (371.41)

T11 - Oxa. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 17.71

(319.00)

26.92

(724.67)

21.29 (454.00)

6.70

(44.35)

18.20

(330.73)

18.35 (336.44)

T12 - Gly.(1.25) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 14.71

(222.67)

24.22

(590.67)

18.72 (350.33)

6.84

(46.37)

17.35

(300.54) 17.80

(316.41) T13 - Gly. (1.85) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 14.57

(217.33)

22.28

(496.00)

18.62 (347.67)

6.53

(42.23)

17.02

(289.25) 17.59

(309.25) T14 - H.W. (25,45 & 75 DAP) 15.89

(253.33)

25.97

(677.63)

18.77 (353.00)

6.62

(43.39)

18.04

(325.15) 17.68

(311.96) T15 - U. W. C. 32.94

(1085.67)

45.79

(2095.99)

34.39 (1181.93)

12.11

(146.11)

33.00

(1089.01) 25.09

(629.97) SEm± 1.35 1.09 0.90 0.28 0.39 0.28 CD (P = 0.05) 3.92 3.16 2.60 0.82 1.12 0.81 CV% 10.62 6.66 6.96 5.76 3.25 2.59

32

Table WS 3.3.1.3: Dry matter accumulation by plants (g)

Leaves / plant Stems / plant Rhizomes / plant

Treatment 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 30 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 90 DAP 150 DAP 210 DAP

T1 - Metri. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 2.23 8.14 5.87 2.25 4.92 4.64 28.58 58.00

T2 - Metri. f.b. feno. + mets. 2.09 3.89 2.72 2.06 2.58 3.34 11.06 30.33

T3 - Metri. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 2.32 8.76 7.55 2.34 5.36 7.09 38.69 78.67

T4 - Pendi. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 2.19 7.53 4.91 2.14 4.29 3.21 22.12 48.00

T5 - Pendi. f.b. feno. + mets. 2.05 3.71 2.32 2.05 2.79 2.78 13.65 27.00

T6 - Pendi. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 2.24 8.59 7.03 2.33 5.30 5.19 35.48 65.00

T7 - Atra. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 2.22 7.90 5.31 2.22 4.72 3.73 24.70 52.33

T8 - Atra. f.b. feno. + mets. 2.02 3.26 2.28 2.01 4.64 1.93 12.27 23.33

T9 - Atra. f.b. S.M. f.b. H.W.(75DAP) 2.37 11.20 9.22 2.39 7.59 5.05 68.93 124.67

T10 - Oxy. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 2.11 5.28 4.50 2.11 3.35 4.15 12.91 32.67

T11 - Oxa. f.b. 2 H.W.. (45 & 75DAP) 2.09 5.21 3.74 2.08 2.95 4.07 14.45 31.67

T12 - Gly.(1.25) f.b. 2 H.W. . (45 & 75DAP) 2.19 7.11 4.80 2.14 3.76 4.15 20.46 44.67

T13 - Gly. (1.85) f.b. 2 H.W. (45 & 75DAP) 2.13 6.46 4.69 2.14 3.73 2.28 20.04 40.00

T14 - H.W. (25,45 & 75 DAP) 2.21 7.87 5.11 2.16 4.64 4.96 24.58 49.33

T15 - U. W. C. 1.41 2.76 2.02 2.01 1.78 2.61 9.55 19.07

Sem 0.14 1.34 0.74 0.13 0.70 0.59 3.28 5.94

CD 0.39 3.88 2.13 NS 2.02 1.70 9.51 17.21

CV% 11.09 35.66 26.57 10.33 29.09 25.79 23.87 21.30

33

WS 3.3.3: Integrated weed management in ginger

Methodology: A field experiment was conducted at Birsa Agricultural Universiy, Ranchi during

Kharif season of 2014 to find out the effect of Integrated weed management in ginger. The treatments

comprised of T1- Pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha after planting but before mulching, T2- Oxyfluorfen @

0.20 kg/ha after planting but before mulching, T3- T1+ 1 Hand weeding before mulching, T4- T2 + 1

Hand weeding before mulching, T5- Glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of

ginger, T6 - Glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + Pendimethalin 1.5 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of

ginger T7 - . Glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + Oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of

ginger, T8-. Hand weedings (25 and 50 DAS ) and T9 - .unweeded control. The treatments were

replicated three times. The experimental soil was low in nitrogen (125 kg/ha) and phosphorus (19

kg/ha) and medium in potash (187 kg/ha). The pH of soil was 6.2 and the organic carbon was 0.34%.

The crop was sown on 27.06.14. The crop is still in the field and will be harvested in the month of

February, 2015. The plot size was 5 X 2 meter.

Observations:

i. Weed population (no./m2) and dry matter (g/m2) at 75 DAS. ii. Weed control efficiency (%) at 75 DAS

iii. Crop growth parameters iv. Yield attributes and yield. v. Phytotoxicity on crop

vi. Nutrient depletion by weeds (uptake kg/ha) at harvest vii. Economics analysis

Result:

Weed density: Application of glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just before emergence

of sprouts of ginger (T7) being similar to application of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha after planting but

before mulching, fb hand weeding (T3) , oxyfluorfen @ 0.20 kg/ha after planting but before mulching

fb hand weeding (T4) and hand weedings (25 and 50 DAS ) (T8) recorded 93.93, 85.00% and

90.00% at 30 DAS and 94.17, 85.11 and 90.18% at 75 DAS reduced grassy, sedges and total weeds

compared to un weeded check. Hand weeding performed twice at 25 and 50 DAS (T8) being similar

to application of glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha (T7), pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha

after planting but before mulching, fb hand weeding (T3), oxyfluorfen @ 0.20 kg/ha after planting

but before mulching fb hand weeding (T4) and hand weedings (25 and 50 DAS ) (T8) recorded

34

89.33 and 88.77% reduced broad leaved weed density compared to un weeded control (T9) (75 and

98/m2 respectively).

Weed dry matter: Application of glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just before

emergence of sprouts of ginger (T7) being similar to application of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha after

planting but before mulching, fb hand weeding (T3) , oxyfluorfen @ 0.20 kg/ha after planting but

before mulching fb hand weeding (T4) and hand weedings (25 and 50 DAS ) (T8) recorded 90.15%

and 89.16% reduced weed dry matter compared to un weeded control at 30 and 60 days after sowing

(T9) thus recorded maximum weed control efficiency (90.1%)

Growth and yield attributes: Application of glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just

before emergence of sprouts of ginger (T7) being similar to application of oxyfluorfen @ 0.20 kg/ha

after planting but before mulching (T2), oxyfluorfen @ 0.20 kg/ha after planting but before mulching

fb hand weeding (T4), glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of ginger (T5), and

hand weeding performed twice at 25 and 50 DAS (T8) recorded maximum leaves (29 leaves/plant)

compared to un weeded control (T9) which recorded 10 leaves / plant. Application of oxyfluorfen @

0.20 kg/ha after planting but before mulching fb hand weeding (T4) being similar to all treatments

recorded maximum plant height (72.67 cm) at maturity compared to un weeded control (T9) .

Application of glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha + oxyfluorfen 0.2 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of

ginger (T7) also recorded higher number of clump/ plant and finger length compared to application of

pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha after planting but before mulching (T1), pendimethalin fb hand weeding

(T3), glyphosate 0.80 kg/ha just before emergence of sprouts of ginger (T5), glyphosate+

pendimethalin (T6 ) and uncontrolled weedy check (T9) and was similar to oxyfluorfen @ 0.20 kg/ha

after planting but before mulching (T2), Oxyfluorfen fb hand weeding (T4) and hand weeding

performed twice at 25 and 50 DAS (T8).

Yield: The crop is yet to be harvested

35

Table WS 3.3.3.1: Effect of weed control methods on weed density in ginger

Treatments Weed density (no./m2) Weed density (no./m2)

30 DAS 75 DAS

grassy blw sedges Total grassy blw sedges Total

T1 Pendimethalin

6.77 (45)

5.91 (35)

4.11 (17)

9.86 (97)

7.48 (56)

6.73 (45)

4.73 (22)

11.10 (123)

T2 Oxyfluorfen

4.16 (18)

4.51 (21)

3.23 (10)

6.92 (49)

4.58 (22)

5.12 (27)

3.70 (13)

7.79 (62)

T3 Pendimethalin fb hand weeding

2.94 (8)

3.45 (12)

2.35 (5)

5.04 (25)

3.23 (10)

3.93 (15)

2.67 (7)

5.72 (33)

T4 Oxyfluorfen fb hand weeding

3.24 (10)

3.23 (10)

2.35 (5)

5.07 (25)

3.57 (12)

3.68 (13)

2.68 (7)

5.73 (33)

T5 Glyphosate

5.20 (27)

4.56 (21)

4.38 (19

8.16 (67)

5.75 (33)

5.20 (28)

5.04 (25)

9.24 (86)

T6 Glyphosate+ pendimethalin

4.51 (20)

5.08 (26)

3.23 (10)

7.46 (56)

4.98 (25)

5.79 (33)

3.72 (13)

8.43 (71)

T7 Glyphosate + oxyfluorfen

2.49 (6)

3.23 (10)

2.26 (5)

4.59 (21)

2.74 (7)

3.58 (12)

2.58 (6)

5.15 (26)

T8 Hand weeding (2)

3.04 (9)

2.90 (8)

2.35 (5)

4.76 (22)

3.34 (11)

3.30 (11)

2.69 (7)

5.39 (29)

T9 Un-weeded control

9.96 (99

8.69 (75)

5.97 (35)

14.50 (210)

10.98 (120)

9.91 (98)

6.86 (47)

16.28 (265)

SEm± 0.43 0.45 0.31 0.49 0.46 0.50 0.36 0.54

CD (P=0.05) 1.28 1.36 0.94 1.46 1.37 1.51 1.07 1.63

CV% 15.73 17.01 16.14 11.41 15.30 16.61 16.01 11.31

36

Table WS 3.3.3.2: Effect of weed control methods on dry matter accumulation by weeds and weed control efficiency

Treatments Weed dry matter (g/m2) Weed control efficiency (%)

30 DAS 75 DAS 30 DAS 75 DAS

T1 Pendimethalin

6.6

(43.65)

7.68

(58.54) 53.19 52.95

T2 Oxyfluorfen

4.7

(21.9)

5.39

(29.14) 76.23 76.16

T3 Pendimethalin fb hand weeding

3.4

(11.4)

4.01

(16.06) 88.1 87.77

T4 Oxyfluorfen fb hand weeding

3.4

(11.4)

4.01

(15.72) 87.89 87.65

T5 Glyphosate

5.5

(30)

6.41

(40.96) 68.2 67.71

T6 Glyphosate+ pendimethalin

5.0

(25.05)

5.84

(33.79) 73.03 72.73

T7 Glyphosate + oxyfluorfen

3.1

(9.3)

3.59

(12.44) 90.1 90.1

T8 Hand weeding (2)

3.2

(10.05)

3.77

(13.82) 89.39 89.19

T9 Un-weeded control

9.7

(94.5)

11.29

(127.6) 0 0

SEm± 0.32 0.38

CD (P=0.05) 0.97 1.13

CV% 11.27 11.34

37

Table WS 3.3.3.3: Effect of weed control methods on growth and yield attributes of ginger

Treatments Number of

leaves /plant

Plant

height

(cm)

Tillers/clump Finger

length

(cm)

leaf

area

(cm2)

T1 Pendimethalin 16 63.33 4 5 459

T2 Oxyfluorfen 26 65 6 7 625

T3 Pendimethalin fb hand weeding 20 72 5 6 916

T4 Oxyfluorfen fb hand weeding 25 72.67 6 7 958

T5 Glyphosate 24 66 5 6 633

T6 Glyphosate+ pendimethalin 21 72 4 5 732

T7 Glyphosate + oxyfluorfen 29 70.33 7 8 958

T8 Hand weeding (2) 28 67.67 8 7 1056

T9 Un-weeded control 10 51.67 3 4 249

SEm± 2.21 3.77 0.65 0.34 54.95

CD (P=0.05) 6.64 11.29 1.94 1.01 164.71

CV% 17.50 9.78 20.47 9.86 13.01

.

38

39

3.4.1: Studies on time of application of imazethapyr and its ready mix combination with imazamox

(Odyssey) against weeds in blackgram

Herbicides Dose (g/ha) Time of application

T1 Imazethapyr 70 PRE

T2 Imazethapyr 80 PRE

T3 Imazethapyr 70 3-4 leaf stage

T4 Imazethapyr 80 3-4 leaf stage

T5 Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 70 PRE

T6 Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 80 PRE

T7 Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 70 3-4 leaf stage

T8 Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 80 3-4 leaf stage

T9 Pendimethalin 1000 PE

T10 Imazethapyr + pendimethalin (RM)

1000 PE

T11 Hoeing (2) - 20 & 40 DAS

T12 Weedy check -

40

Methodology: A field experiment was conducted at agronomical research farm of Birsa Agricultural

University, Ranchi during Kharif 2014 to find out the bio-efficacy of different herbicides against weeds and

their effect on growth and yield of blackgram and also to study the residual effect of herbicides applied in

urd bean on succeeding mustard crop.The experiment was laid out in a randomized block desighnwith three

replications. The treatments comprised of Imazethapyr 70 g/PE (T1), Imazethapyr 80 g/PE (T2),

Imazethapyr 70 g/PE 3-4 leaf stage(T3), Imazethapyr 80 g/PE 3-4 leaf stage(T4), Imazethapyr + imazamox

(RM) 70g/ha PE (T5), Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 80g/ha PE (T6), Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 80

g/ha PE (T7), Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM) 70 g/ha 3-4 leaf stage (T8), Imazethapyr + imazamox (RM)

80 g/ha 3-4 leaf stage (T8), Pendimehecthalin 1.0 kg/ha PE (T9), Imazethapyr + pendimethalin (RM) 1.0

kg/ha (T10), Hoeing (20 & 40 DAS)(T10) and Weedy check. (T12). In addition to theses treatments four

additional treatments i.e., Imaze. 50g/haPRE (T1) , Imaze. 50g/haPOE (T4), Ody. 50g/haPRE (T7), Ody.

50g/haPOE (T10) were included for more precise information.The experimental field was poor in nitrogen

(189 kg/ha) and potash (186 kg/ha) and medium in phosphorus (21 kg/ha). The crop was sown on 16.07.14

and harvested on 05-22 October 2014.

:

41

Table WS 3.4.1.1: Weed density (no./m2) as influenced by imazathepyre and its ready mix

TREATMENT Weed density (no./m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

BLW Grassy Sedges BLW Grassy Sedges Total Total T1

Imaze. 50g/haPRE 18.61 (351)

13.59 (188)

3.39 (15)

20.28 (412)

11.22 (125)

0.71 (0)

23.49 (553)

23.17 (537)

T2 (Imaze. 70g/haPRE

14.24 (267)

10.75 (119)

2.12 (5)

18.87 (360)

10.97 (120)

0.71 (0)

19.77 (391)

21.84 (480)

T3 Imaze. 80g/haPRE

16.34 (203)

9.38 (93)

1.65 (3)

17.21 (298)

10.08 (102)

0.71 (0)

17.29 (299)

20.00 (400)

T4 Imaze. 50g/haPOE

18.40 (340)

8.36 (251)

2.72 (52)

15.91 (256)

10.85 (117)

3.24 (10)

25.29 (643)

19.53 (383)

T5 Imaze. 70g/haPOE

13.12 (228)

15.75 (155)

6.14 (11)

15.62 (256)

9.95 (99)

2.90 (8)

19.84 (393)

18.80 (363)

T6 Imaze. 80g/haPOE

15.12 (172)

11.43 (85)

2.56 (8)

13.51 (184)

8.38 (72)

0.71 (0)

16.30 (265)

15.94 (256)

T7 Ody. 50g/haPRE

15.44 (239)

12.32 (135)

3.84 (15)

18.66 (353)

9.95 (99)

3.13 (9)

19.70 (388)

21.38 (461)

T8 Ody. 70g/haPRE

15.32 (236)

8.22 (76)

0.71 (1)

15.27 (233)

9.87 (97)

2.39 (5)

17.66 (313)

18.32 (336)

T9 Ody. 80g/haPRE

12.91 (167)

7.17 (55)

1.18 (0)

12.89 (167)

8.52 (75)

1.34 (1)

14.88 (221)

15.59 (243)

T10 Ody. 50g/haPOE

21.85 (477)

13.56 (201)

5.02 (32)

16.78 (287)

12.49 (156)

2.90 (8)

26.63 (711)

21.13 (451)

T11 Ody. 70g/haPOE

13.20 (176)

7.87 (64)

5.16 (25)

15.12 (229)

7.17 (53)

3.53 (12)

16.21 (265)

17.18 (295)

T12 Ody. 80g/haPOE

9.44 (96)

5.11 (28)

3.90 (20)

10.66 (117)

5.61 (33)

2.67 (7)

11.57 (144)

12.34 (157)

T13 Pendim.1000g/haPRE

6.98 (53)

5.93 (36)

5.67 (32)

7.82 (67)

5.25 (28)

3.34 (11)

10.82 (121)

10.16 (106)

T14 Valore 1000g/ha

6.34 (40)

5.68 (32)

2.12 (5)

14.84 (231)

4.95 (27)

1.83 (5)

8.82 (77)

16.02 (263)

T15 Hoeing twice

9.96 (100)

4.06 (16)

5.07 (25)

9.56 (93)

5.36 (29)

2.34 (5)

11.87 (141)

11.30 (128)

T16 Weedy check

14.45 (209)

8.37 (344)

5.81 (47)

14.11 (199)

7.11 (52)

4.04 (16)

24.51 (601)

16.31 (267)

SEm± 1.29 2.05 1.50 1.72 1.00 0.43 3.45 1.56

CD (P=0.05) 3.86 6.12 NS 5.12 2.97 1.27 10.28 4.64

CV% 16.18 38.54 72.81 20.07 20.03 32.34 34.93 15.46

42

Table WS 3.4.1.2: Weed dry matter (g./m2)as influenced by imazathepyre and its ready mix

TREATMENT Weed dry matter (g./m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

BLW Grassy Sedges BLW Grassy Sedges Total Total T1

Imaze. 50g/haPRE 3.46

(11.60) 4.93

(24.13) 2.39

(5.33) 3.31

(10.49) 7.62

(59.45) 0.71

(0.00) 6.44

(41.07) 8.30

(69.95)

T2 (Imaze. 70g/haPRE

3.20 (9.87)

4.29 (18.00)

1.07 (0.67)

2.85 (7.68)

5.33 (30.38)

0.71 (0.00)

5.38 (28.53)

6.02 (38.06)

T3 Imaze. 80g/haPRE

2.35 (5.07)

3.55 (12.13)

0.97 (0.47)

2.59 (6.29)

4.88 23.73)

0.71 (0.00)

4.26 (17.67)

5.50 (30.03)

T4 Imaze. 50g/haPOE

4.10 (16.40)

8.30 (68.53)

3.40 (11.07)

3.72 (13.39)

10.24 (111.57)

0.91 (0.40)

9.82 (96.00)

10.92 (125.36)

T5 Imaze. 70g/haPOE

3.86 (14.93)

6.03 (35.87)

1.49 (1.73)

3.14 (9.36)

10.53 (110.52)

0.79 (0.13)

7.26 (52.53)

10.97 (120.01)

T6 Imaze. 80g/haPOE

3.49 (11.73)

3.98 (15.47)

1.12 (0.93)

2.85 (7.80)

8.33 (69.49)

0.89 (0.35)

5.32 (28.13)

8.81 (77.64)

T7 Ody. 50g/haPRE

1.91 (3.20)

4.71 (22.13)

1.49 (1.73)

2.61 (6.32)

6.65 (43.84)

0.78 (0.12)

5.22 (27.07)

7.12 (50.28)

T8 Ody. 70g/haPRE

1.78 (2.67)

3.13 (9.33)

0.71 (0.00)

2.37 (5.31)

4.01 (15.89)

0.72 (0.01)

3.53 (12.00)

4.63 (21.21)

T9 Ody. 80g/haPRE

1.75 (2.67)

1.61 (2.40)

0.71 (0.00)

1.92 (3.28)

2.92 (8.05)

0.71 (0.00)

2.35 (5.07)

3.44 (11.33)

T10 Ody. 50g/haPOE

3.96 (15.27)

5.45 (29.20)

2.24 (4.53)

3.88 (14.60)

9.44 (90.65)

3.30 (10.45)

7.04 (49.00)

10.70 (115.71)

T11 Ody. 70g/haPOE

3.87 (14.53)

3.34 (10.67)

2.14 (4.13)

3.83 (14.29)

4.97 (25.07)

3.19 (9.65)

5.46 (29.33)

7.01 (49.01)

T12 Ody. 80g/haPOE

3.71 (13.60)

3.12 (9.47)

1.90 (3.20)

3.39 (11.01)

4.23 (19.52)

2.41 (5.31)

5.14 (26.27)

5.93 (35.84)

T13 Pendim.1000g/haPRE

2.38 (5.33)

4.55 (20.93)

5.39 2(8.80)

2.58 (6.49)

5.00 (24.68)

3.50 (12.23)

7.41 (55.07)

6.62 (43.40)

T14 Valore 1000g/ha

0.87 (0.27)

2.29 (4.78)

0.87 (0.27)

2.39 (5.24)

2.07 (4.32)

0.92 (0.43)

2.39 (5.31)

3.20 (9.99)

T15 Hoeing twice

1.37 (1.47)

1.26 (1.20)

0.95 (0.40)

1.50 (1.95)

1.88 (3.43)

0.85 (0.25)

1.89 (3.07)

2.44 (5.63)

T16 Weedy check

4.46 (20.13)

6.26 (38.80)

5.76 (32.80)

4.80 (26.20)

13.62 (192.67)

4.04 (15.87)

9.59 (91.73)

15.10 (234.74)

SEm± 0.38 0.40 0.22 0.52 1.24 0.23 0.39 1.12

CD (P=0.05) 1.14 1.19 0.66 1.54 3.70 0.70 1.17 3.34

CV% 22.72 16.53 18.76 29.94 33.80 25.87 12.30 26.54

43

Table WS 3.4.3: Yield attributes and yields of black gram

TREATMENT

Plant height (cm) Np. Of pods/plant

No. of Seeds/Pods

1000 Seeds weight (g)

Yield (Kg/ha)

30 DAS 45 DAS 60 DAS Seed Straw T1 Imaze. 50g/haPRE 38.27 50.60 49.33 17 6.67 31.63 1045 2399 T2 (Imaze. 70g/haPRE 36.40 51.87 49.33 13 6.67 33.70 841 1743 T3 Imaze. 80g/haPRE 35.93 51.53 52.53 11 6.67 31.73 769 1773 T4 Imaze. 50g/haPOE 38.73 52.40 50.67 11 7.00 35.87 769 1740 T5 Imaze. 70g/haPOE 39.73 52.93 49.80 12 6.67 33.40 830 1753 T6 Imaze. 80g/haPOE 39.13 54.13 55.67 14 6.33 34.47 974 2101 T7 Ody. 50g/haPRE 38.33 52.20 49.80 10 7.33 33.07 769 1732 T8 Ody. 70g/haPRE 39.53 54.07 53.27 16 6.33 35.43 974 2307 T9 Ody. 80g/haPRE 40.87 54.93 54.47 16 6.67 35.87 1035 2245 T10 Ody. 50g/haPOE 38.07 39.33 50.40 14 6.67 34.00 892 1978 T11 Ody. 70g/haPOE 39.93 51.53 49.73 19 7.00 35.50 1056 2471 T12 Ody. 80g/haPOE 41.13 58.87 56.33 20 7.00 37.43 1091 2578 T13 Pendim.1000g/haPRE 43.20 61.00 56.87 16 6.67 36.50 1045 2317 T14 Valore 1000g/ha 34.13 47.27 48.27 14 6.33 34.60 871 1712 T15 Hoeing twice

(20 & 40 DAS) 45.73 61.33 61.47 14 6.33 36.60 882 1743 T16 Weedy check 47.80 59.73 55.80 10 6.33 37.23 523 1366 SEm± 3.22 7.84 7.14 1.27 0.40 1.33 78.00 217.39 CD (P=0.05) NS NS NS 3.78 NS NS 232.73 648.58

CV% 14.01 25.46 23.45 15.35 10.37 6.64 15.05 18.85

44

Table WS 3.4.4: Economics of weed control in black gram

treatments Cost of weed control (Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation without weed control (Rs/ha)

Application cost (Rs/ha)

Total cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)

Gross return (Rs/ha)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

Gross B:C ratio

T1 Imaze. 50g/haPRE 35.61 10030 334 10400 32405 22005 3.12 T2 (Imaze. 70g/haPRE 49.85 10030 334 10414 26056 15641 2.50 T3 Imaze. 80g/haPRE 56.98 10030 334 10421 23831 13410 2.29 T4 Imaze. 50g/haPOE 35.61 10030 334 10400 23831 13431 2.29 T5 Imaze. 70g/haPOE 49.85 10030 334 10414 25738 15324 2.47 T6 Imaze. 80g/haPOE 56.98 10030 334 10421 30186 19765 2.90 T7 Ody. 50g/haPRE 65.75 10030 334 10430 23834 13404 2.29 T8 Ody. 70g/haPRE 92.05 10030 334 10456 30186 19730 2.89 T9 Ody. 80g/haPRE 105.2 10030 334 10470 32093 21623 3.07 T10 Ody. 50g/haPOE 65.75 10030 334 10430 27647 17217 2.65 T11 Ody. 70g/haPOE 92.05 10030 334 10456 32728 22272 3.13 T12 Ody. 80g/haPOE 105.2 10030 334 10470 33834 23364 3.23 T13 Pendim.1000g/haPRE 540 10030 334 10904 32405 21501 2.97 T14 Valore 1000g/ha 735 10030 334 11099 27009 15909 2.43 T15 Hoeing twice

(20 & 40 DAS) 6686 10030 334 17050 27327 10276 1.60 T16 Weedy check 1030 10030 334 11394 16205 4811 1.42 SEm± SEm± 2418.12 2418.12 0.22 CD (P=0.05)

CD (P=0.05) 7214.55 7214.55 0.66

CV% CV% 15.05 15.60 14.93

45

Weed density

Broad leaf weeds: Application of Valore 1000g/ha being similar to Pendimathalin.1000g/ha pre emergence

and Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence recorded reduced broad leaf weed density (40/m2) to the tune of

84.34% compared to mean broad leaf density of rest of the treatments at 30 days after sowing. At 60 DAS

hoeing twice at 20 and 40 DAS (T15) being similar to all the treatments except imazethapyre 50g/ha pre

emergence (T1), imazethapyre 70g/hapre emergence (T2), imazethapyre 80g/ha pre emergence (T3),

Odyssey 50g/hapre emergence (T7) and weedy check (T16) recorded significantly reduced broad leaf weed

density (93/m2) to the extent of 71.29% compared to mean of rest of the treatments

Grassy Weeds: Hoeing at 20 and 40 DAS (T15) being similar to all treatments except Imaze. 50g/haPRE (T1),

Imaze. 70g/haPOE (T5), Ody. 50g/haPRE (T7) and Ody. 50g/haPOE (T10) recorded 92.13% reduced grassy weeds at 30

DAS (16/m2) compared to mean grassy weed density under rest of the treatments. While at 60 DAS

application of Valore 1000g/ha was similar to all treatments except Ody. 70g/haPOE (T11), Ody. 80g/haPOE (T12),

Pendim.1000g/haPRE (T13) and Hoeing twice at 20 and 40 DAS (T15) recorded reduced density of grassy weeds (27/m2)

to the tune of 73.40% compared to mean of rest of the treatments.

Sedges: Application of Imaze. 80g/haPOE (T6) being similar to application of Imazethapyre 50g/ha pre

emergence (T1), Imazethapyre 70g/ha pre emergence (T2), Imazethapyre 80g/ha pre emergence (T3),

Odyssey 80g/haPRE (T9) and Valore 1000g/ha (T14) reduced density of sedges at 60 days after sowing to

the tune of 100% compared to mean of rest of the treatment.

Total Weed Density: Total weed density at 30 DAS was minimum with application of Valore 1000g/ha

(T14) being similar to all the weed control methods except application of Imazethapyre 50g/ha pre

emergence (T1), Imaze. 70g/haPOE (T5), Imaze. 80g/haPOE (T6) and Odyssey 50g/haPRE (T7), while at 60

DAS it was minimum with application of Pendim.1000g/haPRE (T13) being similar to application of Odyssey

80g/ha post emergence (T12) and Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS (T15).

Weed dry matter

Minimum weed dry matter of broad leaf weed at 30 DAS was recorded with application of Valore

1000g/ha (T14) being similar to Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS (T15). Grassy leaf dry matter was minimum

46

with Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS (T15) being similar to application of Odyssey 80g/haPRE (T9) and Valore

1000g/ha (T14). Minimum weed dry matter of sedges was recorded with application of Odyssey 70g/haPRE

(T8) and Odyssey 80g/haPRE (T9) being similar to Imazethapyre 70g/ha pre emergence (T2), Imazethapyre

80g/ha pre emergence (T3), Imaze. 80g/haPOE (T6), Valore 1000g/ha (T14) and Hoeing twice at 20 & 40

DAS (T15).

At 60 DAS minimum weed dry matter of broad leaf was recorded with Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS

(T15) being similar to all the weed control methods except application of Imazethapyre 50g/ha pre

emergence (T1), Valore 1000g/ha (T4), Imaze. 70g/haPOE (T5), Odyssey 50g/haPOE (T10), Odyssey

70g/haPOE (T11), Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence (T12) and Weedy check (T16). Grassy leaf dry matter

was minimum with Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS (T15) being similar to all the weed control methods except

application of Imazethapyre 50g/ha pre emergence (T1), Valore 1000g/ha (T4), Imaze. 70g/haPOE (T5),

Imaze. 80g/haPOE (T6), Odyssey 50g/haPRE (T7), Odyssey 50g/haPOE (T10), and Weedy check (T16).

Application of Odyssey 80g/haPRE (T9) recorded significantly superior in reducing weed dry matter of

sedges.

Yield attributes and yield:

Application of Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence (T12) being similar to application of

Imazethapyre 50g/ha pre emergence (T1) , Odyssey 70g/ha (T8) and 80g/ha pre emergence (T9) recorded

maximum pods / plant (20/plant) compared to rest of the treatments.

Application of Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence (T12) being similar to Odyssey 50g/haPOE

(T10), Odyssey 70g/haPOE (T11), Ody. 70g/haPRE (T8) and Ody. 80g/haPRE (T9) as well as

Pendim.1000g/haPRE (T13) and Valore 1000g/ha (T4) and Hoeing twice at 20 & 40 DAS (T15) recorded

45.44% significantly higher seed yield (1091 kg/ha) compared to rest of the treatments.

Economics: Application of Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence (T12) being similar to Imazethapyre 50g/ha

pre emergence (T1), Imaze. 80g/ha POE (T6), Odyssey 50g/haPRE (T7), Ody. 70g/haPRE (T8), Odyssey

80g/haPRE (T9), Odyssey 50g/haPOE (T10), Odyssey 70g/haPOE (T11), Odyssey 80g/ha post emergence

(T12)and (T13) recorded significantly net return and B:C ratio compared to Imazethapyre 70g/ha pre

47

emergence (T2), imazethapyre 80g/ha pre emergence (T3), Valore 1000g/ha (T4), (T5), Hoeing twice at 20

& 40 DAS (T15) and Weedy check (T16)..

WS 3.6 Weed management in conservation agriculture systems

(ii) Non-rice based cropping systems (Maize-wheat)

Methodology: A field experiment was conducted at agronomical research farm of Birsa agricultural

university, Ranchi to find out the effect of conservation agriculture on weed dynamics and Crop

growth parameters and yield (grain and straw) at harvest.Tperimental soil was poor fertility and the soil

consisted of low nitrogen (198 kg/ha), medium in phosphorus (17 kg/ha) and poor in potash(200

kg/ha). The treatments comprised of 5 tillage sequences i.e. 1. CT –C T,2. CT – ZT , 3. ZT – ZT, 4.

ZT-ZT+R and 5. ZT + R – ZT+R in main plots and weed control methods 1. Recommended

herbicides, 2. Integrated weed management (herbicide + hand weeding) and Unweeded sub plots.

The experiment was laid out in a strip plot design.The wheat crop was sown on 03.12.13 and

harvested on 22.04.14. The maize crop was sown on 10.07.14 and 19.06.14 and harvested on

26.09.14.

48

Table: WS 3.6.1: Effect of tillage and weed control methods on weed density and weed dry matter at

different crop stages of wheat (2013-14)

Treatments

weed density (no./m2)

Weed Dry matter (g/m

2)

30 DAS 60DAS 30 DAS 60DAS

G BL T G BL T

Tillage Methods

CT-CT 1.99(3.91) 3.22(11.81) 3.76(15.72) 1.63(3.28) 5.35(32.56) 5.58(35.84) 2.44(6.26) 3.58(14.33) CT-ZT-ZT

1.82(3.44) 3.32(12.38) 3.79(15.82) 1.89(4.22) 5.67(36.44) 5.99(40.67) 2.49(6.51) 3.83(16.27) ZT-ZT-ZT

2.16(6.61) 3.91(17.24) 4.45(23.86) 2.90(10.28) 7.24(58.67) 7.81(68.95) 2.87(9.60) 4.97(27.58) ZT-ZT+R-ZT

2.31(5.74) 3.80(16.72) 4.45(22.47) 2.81(9.59) 6.50(47.89) 7.14(57.48) 2.91(9.18) 4.56(22.99) ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT 2.16(6.51) 4.02(17.13) 4.68(23.64) 2.46(7.01) 7.03(54.22) 7.55(61.24) 3.05(9.75) 4.81(24.49) SEm+- 0.30 0.47 0.43 0.34 0.94 0.96 0.27 0.60 CD at 5 % Ns NS NS 1.11 NS NS NS NS Weed control methods

R – H 1.41(1.65) 2.86(8.25) 3.15(9.89) 1.58(2.27) 5.71(36.40) 5.90(38.67) 2.09(4.05) 3.78(15.47) IWM

1.39(1.77) 2.98(8.91) 3.27(10.67) 1.44(1.86) 4.89(24.60) 5.07(26.46) 2.11(4.16) 3.26(10.58) WC 3.47(12.32) 5.13(28.02) 6.27(40.34) 3.99(16.51) 8.47(76.87) 9.46(93.37) 4.05(16.56) 6.01(37.35)

SEm 0.41 0.88 0.56 0.45 1.38 1.13 0.38 0.71 CD (P=0.05) 1.60 3.47 2.18 1.75 5.41 4.44 1.49 2.79 NS SEm 0.41 0.88 0.56 0.45 1.38 1.13 0.38 0.71 CD (P=0.05) 1.22 NS NS NS NS NS NS Ns CV% 23.57 27.11 18.52 23.58 30.72 24.76 17.46 24.30

G= Grassy weeds; BL= Broad leaved weeds; T= Total weeds

49

Table: WS 3.6.2: Effect of tillage and weed control methods on yield attributes, yield and

economics of wheat(2013-14)

Treatments Tillers/m

2

Plant Height (cm)

Spike length (cm)

Grains /spike

1000 seed weight (g)

Yield (t/ha) Cost of cultivation Rs/ha)

Gross return

(Rs/ha)

Net return (Rs/ha)

B:C

Tillage Methods

Total Effective

Grain Straw

CT-CT 661 546 104 11 44 47.36 6056 9778 16636 108056 91420 5.48 CT-ZT-ZT 613 511 101 12 41 46.89 5444 9500 15436 99278 83842 5.45 ZT-ZT-ZT 574 489 110 11 36 46.04 5167 9056 15436 94333 78897 5.12 ZT-ZT+R-ZT 568 495 107 11 37 46.34 5278 8944 15436 95444 80008 5.20 ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT 577 486 111 10 37 46.29 5333 8944 15436 69333 53897 3.51 SEm± 46.43 25.13 4.96 0.46 3.46 1.18 485 782 8021 8021 0.53 CD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS 26154 26154. 1.73 Weed Control

R - H 610 515 109 11 40 46.86 5533 9467 15328 94833 79505 5.18 IWM 639 540 110 12 43 47.38 5867 9767 17350 99967 82617 4.75 WC 547 461 101 9 34 45.51 4967 8500 14350 85067 70717 4.92 SEm± 42.83 19.86 3.34 1.36 3.89 1.15 348.28 1096 6703 6703 0.45 CD (P=0.05)

NS 77.97 13.12 5.34 15.26 NS 1367.0

8 NS

NS NS NS Interaction

SEm± 42.83 19.86 3.34 1.36 3.89 1.15 348.28 1096 6703 6703 0.45 CD (P=0.05) NS NS 10.02 NS Ns NS NS NS NS NS NS CV% 10.16 10.70 5.43 13.66 12.17 3.69 23.31 12.6 19.46 23.40 23.72

50

Table: WS 3.6.3: Weed density as influenced by different tillage and weed management methods

in maize (2014)

Table: WS 3.6.4: Weed dry matter as influenced by different tillage and weed management methods

Treatments

Weed Density (No./m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS

Tillage NL BL S Total NL BL S Total

CT-CT 6.48(42) 6.19(50) 7.14(55) 11.69(147) 7.21(53) 7.90(72) 7.54(65) 13.22(190)

CT-ZT-ZT 5.37(31) 6.02(57) 8.16(76) 11.69(163) 6.52(43) 7.28(61) 7.78(67) 12.56(171)

ZT-ZT-ZT 5.60(32) 7.74(67) 7.20(58) 12.16(157) 6.40(44) 7.59(62) 7.01(54) 12.16(159)

ZT-ZT+R-ZT 5.35(30) 7.69(64) 7.64(67) 12.21(161) 6.53(43) 6.73(55) 6.24(47) 11.49(145)

ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT 5.15(28) 7.32(65) 6.53(51) 11.25(144) 7.29(55) 7.25(58) 5.85(39) 11.99(153)

Sem±(Ti) 0.64 0.82 0.83 0.96 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.48

CD (p=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS 1.81 1.58

Weed control

RH 4.74(23) 5.06(29) 5.98(38) 9.37(91) 6.05(37) 5.83(35) 5.07(27) 9.90(99)

IWM 5.25(29) 4.77(27) 5.40(30) 9.14(85) 6.28(41) 5.17(27) 5.19(28) 9.76(97)

WC 6.78(46) 11.15(126) 10.63(115) 16.88(288) 8.05(65) 11.05(122) 10.39(109) 17.18(296)

Sem±(W) 0.55 1.07 0.59 0.68 0.46 1.06 0.46 0.74

CD (p=0.05) 2.17 4.21 2.30 2.65 1.82 4.16 1.82 2.89

Interaction

Sem 0.55 1.07 0.59 0.68 0.46 1.06 0.46 0.74

CD NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

CV% 16.53 25.84 22.14 13.81 18.56 12.45 13.85 9.33

Treatments

Weed dry matter (g/m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS

Tillage NL BL S Total NL BL S Total

CT-CT 4.81(27.02)) 4.47(20.05) 4.38(19.55) 7.99(66.61) 4.35(19) 5.54(31) 5.50(30) 8.89(80)

CT-ZT-ZT 4.80(24.47) 4.07(17.28) 4.55(20.69) 7.78(62.43) 4.44(20) 5.71(33) 5.60(32) 9.14(85)

ZT-ZT-ZT 4.06(18.46) 3.90(15.59) 4.24(17.59) 7.06(51.64) 4.60(22) 4.63(22) 5.33(29) 8.40(73)

ZT-ZT+R-ZT 4.25(18.48) 4.28(18.06) 4.55(20.43) 7.54(56.96) 4.34(19) 5.26(28) 4.84(24) 8.33(71)

ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT 4.38(19.12) 4.42(19.44) 4.55(20.41) 7.70(58.97) 4.28(18) 5.09(26) 4.85(23) 8.19(67)

SEm± 0.41 0.30 0.25 0.29 0.28 0.22 0.22 0.32

CD (p=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS 0.71 0.72 1.04

Weed control

RH 3.71(13.93) 3.69(13.49) 4.15(17.30) 6.68(44.71) 4.01(16) 4.93(25) 4.69(22) 7.87(62)

IWM 3.69(13.94) 4.01(16.13) 4.38(18.94) 7.00(49.01) 4.20(17) 4.42(19) 4.77(23) 7.70(59)

WC 5.98(36.66) 4.99(24.64) 4.82(22.95) 9.16(84.25) 5.01(25) 6.38(41) 6.22(38) 10.20(104)

SEm± 0.49 0.55 0.19 0.40 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.56

CD (p=0.05) 1.92 NS NS 1.57 NS 1.30 NS 2.21

Interaction

Sem 0.49 0.55 0.19 0.40 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.56

CD 1.46 NS NS 1.20 NS NS NS NS

CV% 18.79 15.09 17.45 7.93 11.87 10.37 9.08 7.86

51

Table: WS 3.6.5: Effect of conservation tillage and weed control methods on yield attributes and yield

of maize yield attributes and yields of maize

Yield attributes and yields of maize

Zero tillage - Zero tillage sequence recorded 13.42% more number of grains/cob (457.78), 13.06%

number of grains/row (34), 11.82% more number of rows/cob (13.11) being similar to conventional-zero

tillage (CT-ZT), Zero tillage - Zero tillage + residue (ZT-ZT+R) and Zero tillage + residue- Zero tillage +

residue(ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT) sequence compared to conventional- conventional tillage (CT-CT) sequence.

ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT sequence recorded 46.47% more grain and straw (13270.76 kg/ha) yield compared to

conventional- conventional tillage (CT-CT) sequence.

(CT-ZT-ZT, ZT-ZT+R-ZT and ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT)

Among weed control methods integrated weed management being similar to recommended herbicide

recorded 14.23%more number of grains/cob(442.87), 13.48% number of grains/row (33.67), 15.43% more

100 seed weight (22.3)and 49.66% more grain yield (3097.53 kg/ha) compared to weedy check.

Treatments Grains/cob

Grains/row

Rows/cob

Cob length (cm)

100 seed weight (g)

yield kg/ha

Stone kg/ha

Straw yield kg/ha

stone+ stover kg/ha

Tillage

CT-CT 396.33 29.56 11.56 15.45 19.68 1676.97 1222.91 3389.23 17004.35

CT-ZT 443.89 32.89 12.44 15.94 19.41 1871.95 1604.09 3996.87 17835.78

ZT-ZT 457.78 34.00 13.11 15.98 21.46 2693.83 1717.03 5587.99 11885.68

ZT-ZT+R 414.44 32.00 12.67 16.39 22.02 2838.83 1526.25 5892.28 12637.36

ZT+R-ZT+R 380.56 31.67 13.11 15.83 20.45 3132.63 1762.82 6676.40 15033.58

Sem(Ti) 21.97 1.24 0.38 0.56 0.79 434.68 278.8 807.56 1107.33

CD 71.64 4.06 1.22 NS 2.58 1417.34 NS 2633.19 3610.65

Weed control

RH 433.07 33.27 12.80 16.09 20.66 2671.70 1648.35 5548.88 16089.74

IWM 442.87 33.67 13.07 16.33 22.30 3097.53 1936.81 6517.28 17802.20

WC 379.87 29.13 11.87 15.33 18.86 1559.29 1114.70 3259.50 10746.11

Sem(W) 17.66 1.07 0.50 0.57 1.20 299.58 296.27 1093.06 2182.37

CD 69.33 4.19 1.97 NS 4.72 1175.93 1162.92 4290.56 8566.36

Interaction

Sem 17.66 1.07 0.50 0.57 1.20 299.58 296.27 1093.06 2182.37

CD NS NS NS NS 3.60 NS NS 3276.65 NS

CV% 11.37 8.94 9.48 6.30 6.22 25.75 26.99 13.98 15.54

52

Integrated Weed management by intercropping Black gram Weedy check in maize under C.Agric.

Weed seed bank studies: Weed seed bank studies of different treatments was performed by taking

measured composit soil samples and were placd in petri dish as well as in plastic tray size 40 cm X 40 cm

and 15 cm high. The soi was kept near field capacity by pouring measured quantity of water in each petri

dish as well as in tray. The weed started germinating in tray after 10-15 days after filling with soil but the

weeds in tray did not germinate. The weed density in tray was counted t 40 days after filling the tray with

soil. However the study was undertaken on germination of weed seeds in tray.

The results are as hereunder:

Table: WS 3.6.5: Weed seed bank as influenced by tillage and weed control methods W1: recommended herbicide W2: Integrated weed management W3: Weed y check

Treatments Weed density in 40X40 cm area at 40DAS

Tillage Weed control grassy BLW Total

T1 CT-CT W1 5 8 13

T2 CT-CT W2 7 1 8

T3 CT-CT W3 8 4 12

T4 CT-ZT-ZT W1 4 8 12

T5 CT-ZT-ZT W2 5 9 14

T6 CT-ZT-ZT W3 8 8 16

T7 ZT-ZT-ZT W1 8 12 20

T8 ZT-ZT-ZT W2 7 5 12

T9 ZT-ZT-ZT W3 12 20 32

T10 ZT-ZT+R-ZT W1 8 23 31

T11 ZT-ZT+R-ZT W2 10 8 18

T12 ZT-ZT+R-ZT W3 13 10 23

T13 ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT W1 14 8 22

T14 ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT W2 10 6 16

T15 ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT W3 22 9 31

53

Table: WS 3.6.6: Efect of treatmsents on weed seed bank

Grassy

W1 W2 W3 Total Avg

CT-CT 5 7 8 20 6.67

CT-ZT-ZT 4 5 8 17 5.67

ZT-ZT-ZT 8 7 12 27 9.00

ZT-ZT+R-ZT 8 10 13 31 10.33

ZT+R-ZT+R-

ZT 14 10 22 46 15.33

Total 39 39 63 141 Average 7.8 7.8 12.6 28.2

BLW

W1 W2 W3 Total Avg

CT-CT 8 1 4 13 4.33

CT-ZT-ZT 8 9 8 25 8.33

ZT-ZT-ZT 12 5 20 37 12.33

ZT-ZT+R-ZT 23 8 10 41 13.67

ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT 8 6 9 23 7.67

Total 59 29 51 139 Average 11.8 5.8 10.2 27.8

Total

W1 W2 W3 Total Avg

CT-CT 13 8 12 33 11.00

CT-ZT-ZT 12 14 16 42 14.00

ZT-ZT-ZT 20 12 32 64 21.33

ZT-ZT+R-ZT 31 18 23 72 24.00

ZT+R-ZT+R-ZT 22 16 31 69 23.00

Total 98 68 114 280 Average 19.6 13.6 22.8 56

54

Photographs showing effect of treatments on weed seed Bank in Conservation agriculture

CT – CT Weedy check CT – CT Recommended herbicide

ZT – ZT Weedy check ZT – ZT Recommended herbicide

55

ZT + ZT – R ZT + R Rec. Herb. ZT + ZT – R ZT + R IWM

ZT+R – ZT+R IWM ZT+R – ZT+R WC

56

WS3.3. Additional: To find out the effect of tillage and weed control on weed diversity in rice

Wheat cropping system

Treatments First Crop Second crop Tillage (Main Plot) Zero Zero Zero Conventional Conventional Zero Conventional Conventional Weed Control (Sub Plot) Weedy Check Weedy Check Rec. Herb. Rec.Herb Hand Weeding Hand weeding Design :Split Plot Wheat: Variety : K9107

D/S 1. Zero Tillage – 9.12.13 2. Conventional – 10.12.13 D/H 1. Zero Tillage – 6.05.14 2. Conventional – 6.05.14

Materials and Methods:

A field experiment was conducted on agronomical research farm of Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi

during winter season 2013-14 with objective to study the effect of tillage on weed diversity in rice – wheat

cropping system. The treatments comprised of four tillage combinations in main plots viz. zero – zero, zero

– conventional, conventional – Zero, and Conventional – Conventional in kharif and rabi seasons

respectively. While, weed control in sub plots viz. weedy check – weedy check, recommended herbicides –

recommended herbicides, and hand weeding – hand weeding in rice and wheat crops respectively. The

recommended herbicides for rice were Butachlor 50% @ 1.5 kg/ha + 2,4-D 80% @0.5kg/ha and Isoproturon

0.75kg/ha + 2,4-D @ 0.5 kg/ha in wheat crop respectively. The experimental soil was sandy loam in texture

with poor in organic carbon (0.23%) and available nitrogen (170 kg/ha) and medium in available phosphorus

(21 kg/ha) and potash (175 kg/ha). The experiment was laid out in split plot design with four replication.

The wheat crop under Zero tillage was sown on 9.12.13, under conventional method on 10.12.13.The wheat

crop was harvested on 06.05.2014.

57

Result and Discussion:

Weed:

Weed density, dry matter & weed control efficiency:

Tillage method did not influence the weed density and weed dry matter. While among weed control

methods, hand weeding performed at 25 and 40 days after sowing being similar to application of

recommended herbicides in wheat recorded 41.67% & 41.85% reduced density of broad leaved, 42.99% &

43.53% total weeds and 41.16% & 57.83% reduced dry matter at 30 and 60 days after sowing respectively

to their respective values under weedy checks. Hand weeding also recorded maximum weed control

efficiency i.e., 42.25% and 59.06% respectively at 30 and 60 days after sowing.

Yield attributes, yield and economics:Yield attributes, yield,net return and B:C ratio werenot affected

significantly by tillage method. Among weed control methods, hand weeding at 25 and 40 days after sowing

being similar to application of recommended herbicides in wheat recorded 13.94% higher total tillers

(466/m2), 13.79% effective tillers (429/m

2), 13.38% grains per spike (39.33), 3.5% 1000 grain weight

(45.21 g), 25.2% grain yield (4812.5 kg/ha),18.87% straw yield (7875 kg/ha) as well as27.04% higher net

return (Rs. 61684/ ha) compared to weedy checks.

Soil fertility: Zero-zero tillage sequences recorded maximum soil microbial count (220.53ppm),

Dehydrogenase (10.34 ppm TPF/hr) and acid phosphotage (15.22 ppm/hr), whereas, pH, organic carbon

Azotobactor and total bacterial population were not affected by different tillage methods.

Among weed control methods, hand weeding recorded highest pH (5.37). Hand weeding recorded higher

Azotobactor count (3.63 x103cfu) being similar to weedy check. Weedy check recorded higher organic

carbon (5.59 g/kg soil) and Dehydrogenase (9.38 ppm TPF/hr) being similar to hand weeding. Weedy check

recorded maximum acid phosphotage (15.68 ppm/hr). Weedy check being similar to recommended

herbicide recorded higher bacterial population (62.69x105cfu) compared to hand weeding.

Conclusion:

Tillage: Different tillage either as zero or conventional method adopted in wheat did not influence weed

density as well as weed dry matter accumulation resulting similar mean grain (4229&4667 kg/ha), straw

yield (7042 &7854kg/ha), net return (Rs.54305/-&59972/-), B:C ratio (3.52&3.61) of zero tillage and

conventional tillage respectively.

Weed Control: Hand weeding at 25 and 40 days after sowing produced maximum grain (4812.5 kg/ha) and

straw yield (7875 kg/ha) there by recording maximum net return (Rs. 61684/ ha) as compared weedy check.

58

Table: WS3.(3).1 Effect of tillage and weed control methods on weed count at wheat (2013-14)

Treatments Weed Density/m2

Dry matter accumulation

by weeds(g/m2

)

Weed Control Efficiency %

30 DAS 60DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

Grassy Broad Total Grassy Broad Total

Tillage Methods

Z –Z 1.61 (2.58)

5.52 (34.94)

5.78 (37.53)

1.99 (5.17)

8.49 (83.17)

8.82 (88.33)

3.13 (10.43)

3.70 (16.80) 20.37 34.22

Z – C 1.35 (1.50)

4.91 (26.48)

5.06 (27.98)

1.53 (2.5)

7.56 (63.33)

7.72 (65.83)

2.77 (7.89)

3.05 (10.36) 26.93 38.76

C – Z 1.35 (1.83)

5.40 (31.44)

5.53 (33.27)

1.53 (3.33)

8.32 (75.17)

8.46 (78.5)

3.00 (9.19)

3.48 (12.95) 24.38 31.42

C – C 1.20 (1.17)

4.52 (22.16)

4.65 (23.32)

1.38 (2.08)

6.96 (53.17)

7.10 (55.25)

2.55 (6.50)

2.79 (9.00) 36.96 43.90

SEm+- 0.21 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.67 0.69 0.03 0.35

CD at 5 % NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

Weed Control methods

RH – RH

1.29 (1.31)

4.79 (24.00)

4.92 (25.32)

1.39 (1.81)

7.38 (57.56)

7.51 (59.38)

2.69 (7.10)

2.94 (9.33) 39.23 52.16

HW – HW 1.22 (1.13)

4.51 (22.94)

4.64 (24.06)

1.40 (1.87)

6.92 (54.63)

7.05 (56.5)

2.56 (6.82)

2.75 (8.16) 42.25 59.06

WC – WC 1.62 (2.88)

5.97 (39.33)

6.20 (42.20)

2.04 (6.13)

9.20 (93.94)

9.52 (100.06)

3.34 (11.59)

4.08 (19.35) 0.00 0.00

SEm+- 0.15 0.33 0.33 0.24 0.51 0.51 0.17 0.33

CD at 5% NS 0.95 0.95 NS 1.48 1.47 0.49 0.96

Interaction

SEm+- 0.20 0.41 0.33 0.16 0.63 0.54 0.17 0.17

CD at 5% NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

CV % 43.40 25.71 24.87 60.53 25.92 25.18 23.32 40.39

59

Table: WS3.(3) 2: Effect of tillage and weed control methods on Yield Attributes and

yield of wheat during 2013-14

Treatments Tillers/m

2

No. of grains /spike

1000 grain

weight

Yield (kg/ha) Cost of Cultiva

tion (Rs/ha)

Net Return (Rs. /ha)

B:C

Tillage Methods Total Effective Grain Straw

Z –Z 422 385 36.08 44.07 4083 6667 15436 51389 3.33

Z – C 455 419 38.17 44.90 4500 7625 16636 57681 3.47

C – Z 444 406 36.99 44.36 4375 7417 15436 57222 3.71

C – C 464 429 39.18 45.17 4833 8083 16636 62264 3.74

SEm+- 12.86 11.50 0.78 0.34 212 275

2507 0.16

CD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Weed Control methods

RH – RH

463 424 38.80 44.99 4688 7844 15688 61181 3.9 HW – HW

466 429 39.33 45.21 4813 7875 17710 61684 3.48 WC – WC

409 377 34.69 43.68 3844 6625 14710 48553 3.30 SEm+-

11.10 9.96 1.10 0.32 215 360

3037 0.18 CD at 5%

32.40 29.06 3.21 0.94 627 1050

8865 NS Interaction 4688 7844

SEm+- 9.07 6.88 1.23 0.29 4813 7875 1388 0.10

CD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS

NS NS

CV %

9.95 9.72 11.71 2.89 19.31 19.32

21.27 20.7

6

60

Table: WS3.(3) 3:Effect of tillage and weed control methods on soil fertility after

harvest of wheat (2013-14)

Treatments pH O.C. (g/kg soil)

SMBC (ppm)

Dehydrogenase (ppm TPF/hr)

Acid phosphotage (ppm/hr)

Azotobactor x10

3cfu

Total Bacterial Population x10

5cfu

Tillage Methods

Z –Z 5.38 5.48 220.53 10.34 15.22 4.00 61.92

Z – C 5.27 5.49 198.72 9.35 14.15 3.00 61.33

C – Z 5.27 5.49 183.77 8.20 12.48 2.83 61.08

C – C 5.22 5.33 186.21 6.67 13.69 2.92 61.25

SEm+- 0.04 0.07 3.84 0.33 0.29 0.24 0.43

CD (P=0.05)

NS NS 12.26 1.04 0.93 NS NS

Weed Control methods RH – RH

5.22 5.31 204.08 7.35 11.69 2.44 60.94 HW – HW

5.37 5.44 190.95 9.19 14.28 3.63 60.56 WC – WC

5.26 5.59 196.89 9.38 15.68 3.50 62.69 SEm+-

0.02 0.05 3.71 0.29 0.26 0.25 0.62 CD at 5%

0.06 0.15 NS 0.83 0.77 0.73 1.82

Initial 5.3 5.2 167.5 63

Zero tilled

Wheat Conventional till

wheat

61

WS 3.9 To find out the effect of long term herbicide on weed dynamics and crop productivity in rice

- wheat cropping system

Treatments Kharif

Rabi

W1 Butachlor 1.5 kg/haPE Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha

W2Butachlor 1.5 kg/haPE Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha +2,4-D 0.5kg/ha

W3 Almix4g/ha PoE Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha

W4 Almix4g/ha PoE Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha +2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha

W1 + W4 Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha

W1 + W4 Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha +2,4-D0.5kg/ha

HW HW

Weedy Check Weedy Check

D/S D/H Variety Design

23.12.13 8.05.14 K9107 R.B.D.

Weed:

Weed density, dry matter & weed control efficiency:

Tillage method not influenced the weed density and weed dry matter. While among weed control methods,

hand weeding performed at 25 and 40 days after sowing being similar to application of recommended

herbicides in wheat recorded significantly 41.67% & 41.85% reduced density of broad leaved, 42.99% &

43.53% total weeds and 41.16% & 57.83% reduced dry matter at 30 and 60 days after sowing respectively.

Hand weeding also recorded maximum weed control efficiency i.e., 42.25% and 59.06% respectively at 30

and 60 days after sowing.

Application of Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoEin wheat

recorded 93.67% reduced weed density of grassy, 93.05% broad leaf, 93.27% reduced total weed being

similar to all weed control methods except weedy check at 30 days after sowing. At 60 days after sowing

application of Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoEin wheat being

similar to all weed control methods except application of Almix4g/haPoE in rice and application of

Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha in wheat and weedy check treatment recorded 94.27%, 93.7% and 93.92% reduced

grassy, broad leaf and total weeds.

62

Application of Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoEin wheat

recorded 93.2% and 93.92% reduced dry matter accumulation of weeds at 30 and 60 days after sowing.

Application of Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoEin wheat

recorded maximum weed control efficiency 93% and 94% respectivelyat 30 and 60 days after sowing.

Yield attributes, yield and economics: Hand weeding at 25 and 40 days after sowing being similar to

application of Almix 4g/ha PoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5 kg/haPoE in wheat,

Butachlor1.5kgPE +Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha in wheat and Butachlor1.5kgPE

+Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5 kg/haPoE in wheat recorded 22.07%

higher total tillers (299/m2) and 21.31% effective tillers (291/m

2).Application of Butachlor1.5kgPE

+Almix4g/haPoE in rice and Pendimethaline PE 1 kg/ha+ 2,4-D 0.5 kg/haPoE in wheat recorded 23.08%

grains per spike (26), 50% grain (3000 kg/ha) and 50% more straw yield (4050 kg/ha) as compared to weedy

check.

WS 3.9.1: Effect of weed control methods on weed count at different crop stages (2013-14)

Treatments 30 DAS (no. /m2) 60 DAS (no. /m2) Dry matter

(g/m2

)

Weed control efficiency %

Rice Wheat Narrow

Broad

Total Narrow

Broad Total 30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

W1 Butachlor1.5kgPE

Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha

2.06 (4.00)

2.55 (6.32)

3.20 (10.23)

2.31 (5.05)

2.86 (7.99)

3.60 (13.04)

2.55 (6.31)

3.31 (10.96)

81.18 82.37

W2 Butachlor1.5kgPE

Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha +2,4-D 0.5kg/ha

1.90 (3.33)

2.33 (5.22)

2.92 (8.55)

2.13 (4.23)

2.62 (6.64)

3.30 (10.87)

2.33 (5.22)

3.03 (9.14)

84.43 85.30

W3 Almix4g/haPoE

Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha

2.43 (5.67)

3.05 (9.21)

3.83 (14.88)

2.79 (7.78)

3.50 (12.61)

4.42 (20.39)

3.05 (9.22)

4.05 (16.98)

72.52 72.69

W4 Almix4g/haPoE

Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha +2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha

1.27 (1.33)

1.52 (2.32)

1.81 (3.660

1.36 (1.65)

1.64 (2.88)

1.97 (4.53)

1.51 (2.28)

1.83 (3.78)

93.21 93.92

W1+ W4 Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha 2.39

(5.33)

3.00 (8.870

3.77 (14.20)

2.72 (7.12)

3.43 (11.790)

4.32 (18.91)

3.00 (8.82)

3.95 (15.75)

73.70 74.67

W1 + W4 Pendimethaline 1 kg/ha +2,4-D 0.5kg/ha

1.29 (1.33)

1.55 (2.26)

1.85 (3.59)

1.44 (1.83)

1.75 (3.09)

2.11 (4.92)

1.55 (2.25)

1.95 (4.08)

93.30 93.44

H.W. H.W. 2.16 (4.33)

2.67 (6.84)

3.36 (11.18)

2.43 (5.55)

3.02 (8.77)

3.81 (14.32)

2.67 (6.84)

3.50 (12.03)

79.61 80.67

Weedy Check Weedy Check

4.53 (21.00)

5.70(33.39)

7.25 (54.39)

5.23 (28.8)

6.59 (45.73)

8.38 (74.53)

5.71 (33.55)

7.67 (62.20)

SEm+- 0.41 0.51 0.68 0.51 0.64 0.83 0.52 0.76

CD at 5% 1.18 1.49 1.96 1.47 1.84 2.42 1.50 2.20

CV %

31.33

31.70 33.47 34.49 34.64 36.23 32.10 35.78

63

WS 2.9.2 Effect of weed control methods on Yield Attributes and Yield (2013-14)

Tretments Plant height(cms)

Tillers/m2

No. of grains

/panicle

1000 grain

weight

Yield (kg/ha)

Rice Wheat

Total Effective Filled

Grain Straw

W1 Butachlor1.5kgPE Isoproturon 1.0kg PoE 82.13 239 236 24 38.77 2000 2700

W2 Butachlor1.5kgPE Isoproturon 1.0kg PoE+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoE

74.13 258 254 25 38.73 2100 2835

W3 Almix4g/haPoE Isoproturon 1.0kg PoE 77.00 233 230 26 38.50 1933 2610

W4 Almix4g/haPoE Isoproturon 1.0kg PoE+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoE

80.13 285 281 22 38.19 2600 3510

W1+ W4 Isoproturon 1.0kg PoE 79.67 273 268 20 38.99 2000 2700

W1 + W4 Isoproturon 1.0kg PoE+ 2,4-D 0.5kg/haPoE

78.80 280 275 26 39.17 3000 4050

H.W. H.W. 83.00 299 291 25 39.17 2167 2925

Weedy Check Weedy Check 83.67 233 229 20 38.37 1500 2025

SEm± 3.00 12.85 12.66 1.30 0.47 269.52 371.23

CD at 5% NS 37.28 36.73 3.76 NS 782.01 1077.12

CV % 6.52 8.47 8.50 9.53 2.10 21.59 22.02

WS 3.8 : Station trials based on location specific problems

WS 3.8.3: Weed control in carrot

Methodology: A field experiment was conducted in agronomical farm of Birsa Agricultural University,

Ranchi during winter season of 2014-15 to study the efficacy of herbicides on weed density and weed dry

matter and crop productivity of carrot. The treatments comprised of Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant

burn down (T1), Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2), Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

(T3), Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4), oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) and Weedy Check

(T6). The experimental soil was low in nitrogen (123 kg/ha), phosphorus (17 kg/ha) and medium in potash

(245 kg/ha). The plot size was 2.0 m X 2.0 M .. The experiment was laid out in randomized block design

with three replications. The trial was sown on 5.11.2014.

64

Result:

Weed density:

Application of oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) being similar to Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

(T4) and Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T1) in case of broad leaf and also with

Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T1), Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2),

Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T3), Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) in case of sedges

recorded significantly reduced weed density at 30 and 60 days after sowing. The reduction in broad leaf

(2.33/m2) and sedges ( 2.67/m

2) density was at 30 days after planting was 90.80 and 70.33% ; 90.45 and

70.28% compared to their respective weedy checks (25.33 and 9.0/m2), while the reduction at 60 days after

planting was 90.45 and 70.28% compared to their respective weed density under weedy checks (34.58 and

11.98/m2). Application of Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2) similar to Pendimethalin 0.95

kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) a reduced grassy weed density (5.3/m2) compared to weedy check (29.3/m

2) at 30 days

after planting while at 60 days after planting application of s T5 the similar to Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre-

plant burn down (T2) and Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) recorded reduced grassy weed density

(6.68/m2) to the tune of 82.22% compared to weedy check (37.58/m

2). A reduction in total weed density at

30 and 60 days after planting was recorded to the 83.77 and 83.90% compared to weedy checks (63.57 and

84.14 % respectively).

Weed dry matter: Application of oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) being similar to Glyphosate 0.5

kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2) and Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) recorded 82.90 and 82.78%

reduced grassy weed dry matter accumulation compred to weedy check at 30 (10.82 g/m2) and 60 (14.41

g/m2) days after sowing. Application of oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) being similar to Carfentrazone

0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T1), Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) in case of broad leaf weeds

and and also Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2) and Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

(T3) in case of sedgesrecorded 85.1 and 69.49% reduced dry matter compared to weedy check at 30 days

after sowing and 89.17 and 70.45% compared to weedy checks at 60 days after sowing.

Phytotoxicity on carrot plant: No phytotoxicity on carrot plant was visible.

Yield attributes and yield: The crop is still in the field. Hence yield data could not be recorded.

65

Table WS 3.8.3.1: Weed density (no./m2) as influenced by Weed control methods in Carrot

TREATMENT Weed density (no./m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

Grassy BLW Sedges

Grassy BLW Sedges Total Total

T1 Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

4.12 (16.7)

2.57 (6.33)

2.00 (3.67)

4.62 (21.09)

2.95 (8.51)

2.24 (4.73)

5.18 (26.67)

5.86 (34.33)

T2 Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

2.38 (5.3)

3.57 (12.33)

1.93 (3.33)

2.64 (6.72)

4.14 (16.83)

2.14 (4.15)

4.61 (21.00)

5.28 (27.70)

T3 Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

4.39 (19.7)

3.41 (11.33)

2.02 (3.67)

4.91 (24.63)

3.94 (15.25)

2.25 (4.66)

5.91 (34.67)

6.69 (44.55)

T4 Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

2.90 (8.0)

2.28 (5.00)

2.21 (4.67)

3.24 (10.10)

2.61 (6.67)

2.50 (6.20)

4.23 (17.67)

4.80 (22.97)

T5 oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

2.40 (5.3)

1.49 (2.33)

1.76 (2.67)

2.67 (6.68)

1.69 (3.30)

1.98 (3.56)

3.25 (10.33)

3.71 (13.54)

T6 Weedy Check 5.40 (29.3)

4.98 (25.33)

3.04 (9.00)

6.07 (37.58)

5.79 (34.58)

3.46 (11.98)

7.93 (63.67)

9.10 (84.14)

SEm± 0.36 0.47 0.26 0.42 0.56 0.31 0.42 0.50 CD (P=0.05) 1.13 1.48 0.84 1.31 1.76 0.98 1.34 1.56 CV% 17.18 26.70 21.24 17.86 27.41 22.27 14.18 14.52

66

Table WS 3.8.3.1: Weed dry matter (g/m2) as influenced by Weed control methods in Carrot

TREATMENT Weed dry matter (g/m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

Grassy BLW Sedges Grassy BLW Sedges Total Total T1 Carfentrazone 0.030

kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

2.52 (5.96)

1.75 (2.70)

1.59 (2.08)

2.88 (7.95)

1.77 (2.72)

1.40 (1.53)

3.31 (10.74)

3.53 (12.20)

T2 Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

1.53 (1.89)

2.39 (5.37)

1.54 (1.90)

1.72 (2.52)

2.42 (5.50)

1.34 (1.31)

3.06 (9.16)

3.10 (9.33)

T3 Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

2.66 (6.86)

2.23 (4.46)

1.60 (2.08)

3.05 (9.16)

2.27 (4.66)

1.40 (1.49)

3.70 (13.40)

3.95 (15.32)

T4 Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

1.82 (2.84)

1.56 (2.03)

1.75 (2.70)

2.06 (3.79)

1.57 (2.06)

1.55 (2.05)

2.81 (7.57)

2.87 (7.91)

T5 oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

1.53 (1.85)

1.21 (1.25)

1.44 (1.62)

1.72 (2.48)

1.21 (1.24)

1.27 (1.17)

2.26 (4.72)

2.30 (4.89)

T6 Weedy Check 3.29 (10.82)

3.36 (11.75)

2.38 (5.31)

3.78 (14.41)

3.38 (11.73)

2.07 (3.96)

5.26 (27.89)

5.45 (30.10)

SEm± 0.23 0.31 0.20 0.27 0.31 0.17 0.31 0.31 CD (P=0.05) 0.74 0.99 0.62 0.84 0.98 0.53 0.97 0.97 CV% 18.19 26.18 19.90 18.22 25.69 19.24 15.61 15.04

Field trial on weed control in carrot

67

WS 3.8.4: Weed management in egg plant

Methodology: A field experiment was conducted in agronomical farm of Birsa Agricultural University,

Ranchi during winter season of 2014-15 to study the efficacy of herbicides on weed density and weed dry

matter and crop productivity of carrot. The treatments comprised of Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant

burn down (T1), Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2), Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

(T3), Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4), oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) and Weedy Check

(T6). The experimental soil was low in nitrogen (123 kg/ha), phosphorus (17 kg/ha) and medium in potash

(245 kg/ha). The plot size was 2.0 m X 2.0 M .. The experiment was laid out in randomized block design

with three replications. The trial was sown on 5.11.2014.

Result:

Weed density:

Application of oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) being similar to Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

(T4) in case of grassy and also Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T1), Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha

Pre- plant burn down (T2) and Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T3) in case of broad leaf weeds

recorded significantly reduced weed density to the tune of 83.84 and 75.34% at 30 days and 83.54 and

60.73% at 60 dys after planting of egg plant compared to weedy checks i.e. 33.00 and 25.67/m2 respectively.

Application of Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T3)being similar to Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha

Pre- plant burn down (T1), Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2), Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2

DAP (T4) and oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) at 30 and 60 days recorded reduced density of sedges

weeds to the extent of 59.22 and 58.99% compared to weedy checks i.e. 9.0/m2 and 12.17/m

2 respectively.

So far as total weeds density is considered it was noted that application of oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

(T5) similar to Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) at 30 days and also similar to Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha

Pre- plant burn down (T2) at 60 days recorded 77.35 and 77.33% reduced density compared to that recorded

at 30 (67.67/m2) and at 60 (91.97/m

2) days after sowing.

Weed dry matter:

Application oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T5) being similar to Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4)

in case of grassy, and also similar to Carfentrazone 0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T1), Glyphosate 0.5

kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T2), Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T3) and Pendimethalin 0.95

kg/ha 0-2 DAP (T4) in case of broad leaf aat 30 and 60 days after recorded 83.85 and 75.34 at 30 days after

68

sowing and 83.54 % at 60 days after sowing compared to their respective densities under weedy checks i.e.

33.00 and 25.67/m2 at 30 and 60 DAP. Application of Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down (T3)

recorded reduced dry matter by sedges weeds at 30 and 60 days after plantingand was similar to all

treatments except weed y checks. The extent of reduction was to the tune of 69.37, and 63.16% compared to

weedy checks recorded at 30 and 60 days after planting of egg plant.

Yield:

The crop is still in the field hence yield data could not be recorded.

WS 3.8.4.3: Weed density (no./m2) as influenced by Weed control methods in Brinjal

TREATMENT Weed density (no./m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

Grassy BLW Sedges Grassy BLW Sedges Total Total T1 Carfentrazone

0.030 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

4.37 (18.67)

2.83 (7.67)

2.45 (5.67)

5.09 (25.45)

3.28 (10.39)

2.82 (7.70)

5.68 (32.00)

6.63 (43.54)

T2 Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

3.80 (14.33)

3.00 (8.67)

2.16 (4.33)

4.47 (20.45)

3.49 (12.00)

2.48 (5.90)

5.22 (27.33)

6.13 (38.36)

T3 Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

4.11 (16.67)

3.71 (13.67)

1.81 (3.00)

4.76 (22.37)

4.33 (19.02)

2.08 (4.14)

5.81 (33.33)

6.77 (45.53)

T4 Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

3.13 (9.33)

2.60 (6.33)

2.66 (6.67)

3.65 (13.02)

3.01 (8.63)

3.07 (9.02)

4.78 (22.33)

5.58 (30.67)

T5 oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

2.31 (5.33)

2.59 (6.33)

2.02 (3.67)

2.67 (7.29)

2.99 (8.58)

2.31 (4.99)

3.94 (15.33)

4.58 (20.85)

T6 Weedy Check 5.74 (33.00)

5.01 (25.67)

3.06 (9.00)

6.66 44.31

5.86 (35.49)

3.54 (12.17)

8.22 (67.67)

9.56 (91.97)

SEm± 0.39 0.43 0.28 0.44 0.51 0.33 0.40 0.48 CD (P=0.05) 1.22 1.35 0.89 1.40 1.62 1.03 1.25 1.52 CV% 17.19 22.54 20.69 16.86 23.29 20.87 12.23 12.72

69

WS 3.8.4.4: Weed dry matter (g/m2) as influenced by Weed control methods in Brinjal

TREATMENT Weed dry matter (g/m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS 30 DAS 60 DAS

Grassy BLW Sedges Grassy BLW Sedges Total Total T1 Carfentrazone 0.030

kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

3.11 (9.27)

2.04 (3.67)

1.77 (2.67)

3.21 (9.85)

2.18 (4.36)

1.99 (3.53)

4.01 (15.60)

5.50 (29.81)

T2 Glyphosate 0.5 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

2.76 (7.47)

2.19 (4.47)

1.63 (2.30)

2.88 (8.33)

2.33 (5.17)

1.85 (3.17)

3.75 (14.23)

5.19 (27.74)

T3 Paraquat 1.0 kg/ha Pre- plant burn down

2.92 (8.13)

2.70 (7.20)

1.36 (1.43)

3.00 (8.52)

2.85 (8.11)

1.53 (2.00)

4.13 (16.77)

5.80 (33.39)

T4 Pendimethalin 0.95 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

2.27 (4.73)

1.90 (3.13)

1.92 (3.20)

2.36 (5.22)

1.99 (3.48)

2.17 (4.21)

3.40 (11.07)

4.49 (19.77)

T5 oxyfuorfen 0.05 kg/ha 0-2 DAP

1.73 (2.73)

1.88 (3.03)

1.49 (1.73)

1.72 (2.59)

2.00 (3.57)

1.66 (2.31)

2.81 (7.50)

3.75 (13.65)

T6 Weedy Check

4.05 (16.10)

3.62 (13.50)

2.24 (4.67)

4.17 (16.91)

3.96 (15.38

) 2.55

(6.27) 5.84

(34.27) 8.16

(66.56) SEm± 0.26 0.33 0.20 0.27 0.27 0.23 0.31 0.38 CD (P=0.05) 0.82 1.03 0.63 0.84 0.86 0.72 0.97 1.20 CV% 16.11 23.64 19.80 15.97 18.46 20.05 13.30 12.05

70

Photo showing impact of oxyfluorfen on weed control

WS 3.8.10: Effect of different herbicide combination on weed and yield of maize

S.N. Treatments Dose Time of application

1. Pretilachlor 0.5 kg /ha Pre- emergence

2. Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha Pre- emergence

3. Pendimethalin 1.0 Kg /ha Pre- emergence

4. Metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha Pre- emergence

5. Pretilachlor + metribuzin 0.75+0.175 kg/ha Pre- emergence

6. Atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha Pre- emergence

7. Pretilachlor 1.0 kg/ha 15 DAS

8. Metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha 15 DAS

9. Atrazin + 2,4-D 0.50+0.50 kg/ha 30 DAS

10. Green manuring fb 2,4-D 0.625 kg/ha) 30 DAS

11. Hand weeding (2) 20 and 40 DAS

12. Weedy check

The treatment with Alachlor has been replced with Pretilachlor as it was not available in market

Replication: 03 Design: RBD D/S : 26.06.14; D/H : 06.10.14

71

WS 3.8.10.1: Weed density as influenced by different tillage and weed management methods

Treatments

Weed Density (No./m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS

NL BL S Total NL BL S Total T1 Pretilachlor 0.5 kg/ha PE 6.34

(40) 7.38 (56)

7.55 (57)

12.37 (153)

6.85 (47)

7.42 (55)

6.53 (43)

12.00 (144)

T2 Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE 4.88 (24)

3.21 (10)

5.35 (31)

7.99 (65)

5.75 (33)

5.83 (37)

4.76 (23)

9.48 (93)

T3 Pendimethalin 1.0 Kg /ha

PE 5.58 (31)

5.51 (32)

5.99 (39)

10.08 (101)

6.43 (43)

6.74 (46)

5.96 (35)

11.13 (124)

T4 Metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha PE 6.91 (47)

11.08 (123)

11.61 (135)

17.46 (305)

8.41 (70)

11.06 (122)

11.33 (128)

17.91 (320)

T5

Pretilachlor + metribuzin

0.75+0.175 kg/ha PE 5.41 (29)

5.10 (28)

5.88 (36)

9.55 (93)

5.95 (36)

6.37 (41)

5.08 (27)

10.13 (103)

T6

Atrazin + pendimethalin

0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE 4.04 (16)

2.39 (5)

4.73 (23)

6.68 (44)

4.47 (20)

4.87 (23)

4.07 (16)

7.73 (60)

T7

Pretilachlor 1.0 kg/ha 15

DAS 5.59 (31)

6.61 (47)

6.66 (44)

11.01 (122)

6.69 (45)

7.20 (51)

6.42 (41)

11.75 (138)

T8

Metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha 15

DAS 5.28 (29)

5.55 (32)

5.99 (39)

9.70 (100)

6.14 (37)

6.61 (43)

5.48 (31)

10.56 (111)

T9

Atrazin + 2,4-D 0.50+0.50

kg/ha 30 DAS 6.47 (41)

10.16 (104)

8.77 (80)

14.97 (225)

7.26 (53)

10.67 (113)

9.82 (96)

16.20 (262)

T10

Green manuring fb 2,4-D

0.625 kg/ha) 30 DA 6.70 (45)

10.34 (113)

10.20 (104)

16.13 (262)

7.45 (55)

10.80 (116)

10.05 (101)

16.51 (273)

T11

Hand weeding (2)20 and

40 DAS 4.11 (17)

3.12 (9)

5.23 (27)

7.33 (53)

5.53 (31)

5.70 (33)

4.32 (18)

9.04 (82)

T12 Weedy check 7.29 (53)

12.61 (159)

12.36 (154)

19.10 (366)

8.71 (76)

12.70 (161)

11.68 (136)

19.31 (373)

Sem± 0.49 0.96 0.88 0.85 0.54 0.50 0.47 0.58

CD (p=0.05) 1.41 2.79 2.56 2.48 1.58 1.44 1.37 1.67

CV% 13.04 16.39 17.40 9.88 13.00 8.08 8.33 6.15

72

WS 3.8.10.2: Weed dry matter as influenced by different tillage and weed management methods

Weed dry Matter:

Application of atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE (T2),

metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha PE (T4), pretilachlor + metribuzin 0.75+0.175 kg/ha PE (T5), pretilachlor 1.0 kg/ha

15 DAS (T7) , metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha 15 DAS (T8) and hand weeding (2) 20 and 40 DAS (T11) recorded

71.43% reduced narrow leaf dry matter accumulation (6/m2) compared to weedy check (21/m

2) at 30 DAS.

However, atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) was also similar to above treatments except

(T7) and significantly reduced total weed dry matter to the extent of 59.54% (26.55/m2) compared to weedy

check (65.63/m2).

Treatments

Weed dry matter (g/m2)

30 DAS 60 DAS

NL BL S Total NL BL S Total T1 Pretilachlor 0.5 kg/ha

PE 3.81(15) 3.96(18) 4.35(19) 7.04(52.07) 4.46(20) 5.99(36) 5.51(30) 9.28(86) T2 Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE 3.03(9) 3.44(11) 4.02(16) 6.05(36.25) 4.01(16) 4.40(19) 4.68(21) 7.51(56) T3 Pendimethalin 1.0 Kg

/ha PE 4.43(20) 4.05(16) 4.36(19) 7.39(54.53) 4.18(17) 4.96(24) 4.97(24) 8.11(65) T4 Metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha

PE 3.34(11) 4.65(21) 4.55(20) 7.27(52.61) 5.12(26) 6.54(42) 6.35(40) 10.41(108) T5

Pretilachlor +

metribuzin

0.75+0.175 kg/ha PE 3.06(9) 3.55(12) 4.12(17) 6.18(38.62) 4.07(16) 4.51(20) 4.69(22) 7.64(58) T6

Atrazin +

pendimethalin

0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE 2.48(6) 3.07(9) 3.41(12) 5.19(26.55) 3.57(12) 3.60(13) 4.04(16) 6.44(41) T7

Pretilachlor 1.0 kg/ha

15

DAS 3.56(13) 4.14(17) 4.36(19) 6.94(47.83) 4.20(17) 5.11(26) 5.17(26) 8.35(69) T8

Metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha

15

DAS 3.21(10) 3.61(13) 4.29(18) 6.42(41.17) 4.15(17) 4.72(22) 4.76(22) 7.85(61) T9

Atrazin + 2,4-D

0.50+0.50

kg/ha 30 DAS 4.16(18) 4.53(20) 4.46(20) 7.57(57.47) 4.56(21) 6.14(38) 6.11(37) 9.79(96) T10

Green manuring fb

2,4-D

0.625 kg/ha) 30 DA 4.32(18) 4.51(21) 4.48(20) 7.69(58.93) 5.00(25) 6.49(42) 6.21(38) 10.27(105) T11

Hand weeding (2)20

and 40 DAS 2.87(8) 3.22(10) 3.60(14) 5.65(31.93) 3.87(15) 4.13(17) 4.24(18) 7.04(49) T12 Weedy check 4.63(21) 4.70(22) 4.73(22) 8.08(65.63) 5.94(35) 6.82(46) 6.66(44) 11.21(125)

Sem± 0.44 0.49 0.43 0.55 0.28 0.31 0.33 0.21

CD (p=0.05) 1.27 NS NS 1.58 0.81 0.90 0.97 0.62

CV% 18.23 18.60 16.63 12.49 10.62 8.71 9.43 3.75

73

At 60 DAS, application of atrazine + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to

Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE (T2), Pendimethalin 1.0 Kg /ha PE (T3), Pretilachlor + metribuzin 0.75+0.175 kg/ha

PE (T5), Metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha 15 DAS (T8) and Hand weeding (2) 20 and 40 DAS (T11) in case of

narrow (12.00/m2) and also Metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha 15 DAS (T8) in case of Sedges (16.00/m

2) recorded

significantly reduced weed dry matter to the extent of 54.29 and 63.63% respectively compared to weedy

check Weedy check (T12) recorded under narrow (35.00/m2) and sedges(44.00/m

2) weeds. Application of

Atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE (T2) and Hand

weeding (2) 20 and 40 DAS (T11) also recorded 71.74% reduced dry matter of broad leaf weed (13.00/m2)

and 67.20% reduced total weed dry matter (41.00/m2) similar to Hand weeding (2) 20 and 40 DAS (T11)

compared to weedy check ( 46 and 125.00/m2

respetively).

Yield attributes and yields of maize: Pre emergence application of Atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50

kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to pre emergence application of Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE (T2), Pretilachlor +

metribuzin 0.75+0.175 kg/ha PE (T5)two hand weeding at 20 and 40 days after sowing (T11) recorded

19.48% higher plant height (255.33 cm) than weedy check (T12)(204.67 cm).Application of Atrazin +

pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to all weed control treatments except pre emergence

application of Pretilachlor 0.5 kg/ha PE(T1), Metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha PE Metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha PE (T4) ,

Green manuring fb 2,4-D 0.625 kg/ha) 30 DAS (T10) and two hand weeding at 20 and 40 days after sowing

(T11) recorded 16.77% more number of grains per cob(495) as compared to weedy check (412). Application

of Atrazin + pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to pre emergence application of Atrazin

1.0 kg/ha PE (T2)and two hand weeding at 20 and 40 days after sowing (T11) recorded 31.43%more 100

seed weight (24g) as compared to weedy check (16.46g). Pre emergence application of Atrazin +

pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) recorded significantly 65.58% maximum grain yield (3802.47

kg/ha)as compared to weedy check (1308.64 kg/ha). Whereas, Pre emergence application of Atrazin +

pendimethalin 0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE (T6) being similar to two hand weeding at 20 and 40 days after sowing

(T11) recorded 65.57% more straw yield (8648.77 kg/ha)as compared to weedy check (2977.40 kg/ha).

74

Table WS 3.8.10: Yield attributes and yields of maize as influenced by weed control(2014)

TREATMENT

Plant height (cm)

No. of grains/cob

100 Seeds weight (g)

Yield (Kg/ha)

Grain Stover T1 Pretilachlor 0.5 kg/ha PE 213.27 371 20.84 2123 4783 T2 Atrazin 1.0 kg/ha PE 241.73 470 23.10 2938 6659 T3 Pendimethalin 1.0 Kg /ha PE 229.57 450 21.09 2321 5293 T4 Metribuzin 0.35 kg./ha PE 207.33 412 18.11 1580 3654 T5

Pretilachlor + metribuzin

0.75+0.175 kg/ha PE 240.00 449 21.70 2568 5762 T6

Atrazin + pendimethalin

0.50+0.50 kg/ha PE 255.33 495 24.00 3802 8649 T7

Pretilachlor 1.0 kg/ha 15 DAS 214.47 429 20.20 2296 5212

T8

Metribuzin 0.25 kg/ha 15 DAS 237.70 427 21.11 2370 5279

T9

Atrazin + 2,4-D 0.50+0.50 kg/ha 30

DAS 209.73 444 19.28 1753 3881 T10

Green manuring fb 2,4-D 0.625 kg/ha)

30 DAS 210.07 373 19.04 1753 4004 T11

Hand weeding (2)20 and 40 DAS 246.03 415 23.32 3062 6802

T12 Weedy check 204.67 412 16.46 1309 2977 SEm± 5.32 23.74 0.71 245.07 652.03 CD (P=0.05) 15.43 68.87 2.07 711.07 1891.89

CV% 4.39 9.27 6.41 24.21 29.10

WS 4: Management of problematic weeds

WS 4.1b: Management of Cuscuta

Crop: Niger

Cooperating centres: Bhubaneswar and Parbhani

Treatments

1. Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha – pre-em 2. Stale seedbed fb pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha – pre-em 3. Imazethapyr 75 g/ha as PPI 4. Seed treatment fb foliar spray with metalaxyl MZ 0.2 % 5. Weedy check

75

Methoology:

A field experiment was conducted at a farmer’s field to find out the efficacy of herbicide on weed

dynamics, phytotoxicity and productivity of Niger crop. The crop was sown on 28.09.14 in the field of

farmer name Khurshid village Jaher of Mander block of Ranchi district. The herbicides were applied as per

treatments.The herbicide metalaxyl MZ 0.2 % was not available hence this treatment was omitted.

Result: Application of pendimethalin as pre emergence did not influence niger plant adversely. However

application of Imazathapyre affected not only cuscuta but also affected plant germination as well as growth

of niger.The pendimethalin did not show adverse effect on niger.

Table WS 4.1b.1:: Effect of weed control on cuscuta infestation in niger crop

Treatments Germination of cuscuta (DAS)/ m2

Yield of niger (kg/ha)

Phytotoxicity on niger (%) *

1. Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha – pre-em

Not visible 350 2

2. Stale seedbed fb pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha – pre-em

not visible 423 3

3. Imazethapyr 75 g/ha as PPI

Not visible 045 7

4. Weedy check 25 to 30 days after sowing 332 0

Phytotoicity on the effect of herbicide on niger crop was in the scale of 1 to 10 scale Result: Application of Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha and stale bed Pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha reduced appearence of cuscuta in niger.

76

Farmer spraying pre emergence herbicide in niger field under supervis uion of scientist

WS 4.1c: Intensive Survey on the incidence of Orobanchi/Striga/Cuscuta/Loranthus

An exhaustive survey of Ranchi and around was done during October month to find out the infestation of

cuscuta in Niger crop. Farmers affected by Cuscuta infestation told the scientists that this is a problematic

weed and affect niger crop primarily besides some other crop like onion and gram .

77

WS 4.2: Making of Parthenium free campus:

Difference can be seen as effort of Making Parthenium Free Campus in Deptt. of Soil Science, BAU

Earlier View

Earlier View

Parthenium free campus

Parthenium free campus

78

Effort was made to clean the campus near by Department of Soil Science and Agric. Chemistry, Birsa

Agricultural University, Ranchi to clean the campus free from Parthenium. The result showed that due to

integrated approach and on community basis the parthenium can be controlled and the area can be

brought under beautiful garden can.

WS 4.3: Biological control of water hyacinth by Neochetina bruchi

Neochetina bruchi beetle was provided by Directorate of weed Science Research in order to infest them for

control of Water hycicinth. Accordingly the beetle was spread on the water hyacinth plants. In Jharkhand we

have very few ponds where water stagnat for long time and the water do not recede. The applied beetle on

water hyacinth did not show its activity and the impact was not visible

WS 6: On-farm research and impact assessment

WS 6.1: On-Farm Research:

5 on farm trials were conducted at farmers field on vegetable crops to find out the efficacy of

pendimethalin @1.0 kg/ha in following crops in approximately 1000 squire meter plot:

1. Brinjal

2. Tomato

3. Okra

Name of farmers District Block Village

Kishan Saraikela Gamharia Burudih

Sukharam Saraikela Gamharia Burudih Chetan Saraikela Gamharia Burudih Raibu Gope Saraikela Saraikela Dharamdha

Vegertable 5 Saraikela – Kharsawan Saraikela Chotabaram

ari

Bandhih

Gamharia dharamdiha

79

WS 6.2: Front Line Demonstration (FLD)

The front line demonstrations have been conducted in Saraikela – Kharsawan district. The detail of

demonstration is as follows:

Name of FLD:

1. Demonstration of effective weed control methods in direct seeded and transplanted rice

Treatment: Application of Pretilachlore Pre emergence @ 0.5 kg/ha

2. Demonstration of effective weed control methods in direct seeded and transplanted rice

Treatment: Application of Atrazine Pre emergence @ 1.0 kg/ha

3. Demonstration of fruit based land use system for suppressing weeds by intercropping in mango

orchard

1.

Front line

demonstrati

on

No. of

farmers

benefitted

District

Block Panchaya

t

Village

Demonstratio

n

1. Rice 15 Saraikela – Kharsawan Kharsaw

an

Haribhanj

a

Pradhandih

2. Maize 12 Saraikela – Kharsawan Gamharia Burudih Burudih

4 Saraikela – Kharsawan Kharsaw

an

Haribhanj

a

Pradhandih

3.Vegertable 5 Saraikela – Kharsawan Saraikela Chotabaram

ari

Bandhih

Gamharia dharamdiha

80

FRONT LINE DEMONSTRATION, KHARIF, 2014

Technology:

1. Demonstration on weed management in direct seeded rice

Improved Practice: Application of pretilachlor 400 ml/ acre

Farmers practice: Hand weeding at 30 DAS

Variety 1. Hazari Dhan- 4.0 quintal for 10 acre 2. Sahbhagi – 3.5 quintal DSR – Dry – No. of demonstrations- 15 Location: Village: Pradhandih Panchayat-Haribhanja Block – Kharsawan Distt.Saraikela Kharsawa Rice Yield (kg/ha)

Sl. No. Name of farmers Variety Yield (kg/ha)

IP FP

1. Rupai Soren Hazari Dhan 3.8 2.8

2. Konda Mahanti Hazari Dhan 4.1 3.2

3. Tulsi Murmu Hazari Dhan 3.2 2.8

4. Diku Hansada Hazari Dhan 3.2 2.6

5. Mohan Hansada Hazari Dhan 3.8 3.0

6. Mono Soren Hazari Dhan 4.2 3.5

7. Tofe Manjhi Hazari Dhan 3.8 3.0

8. Chunu Manjhi Hazari Dhan 4.0 3.2

9. Subash Hansada Hazari Dhan 3.0 2.8

10. Budhu Lohar Hazari Dhan 2.8 2.0

11 Sakella Hansda Sahbhagi 3.0 2.5

12 Lugu Hansda Sahbhagi 3.0 2.0

13 Rohina Mahato Sahbhagi 3.5 3.0

14 Raju Mardi Sahbhagi 3.0 2.5

15 Somray Mardi Sahbhagi 3.0 2.0

Averge 3.4 2.7

81

82

2. Demonstration on weed management in maize

Application of atrazine 800 gm/ acre PE

Farmers practice: Hand weeding at 25 DAS

Variety: Suwan (40 kg) for 5 acre.

Location:

Village. Burudih Panchayat-Burudih Block – Gamharia Distt.Saraikela Kharsawa

Sl. No.

Name of farmers Variety Yield (t/ha)

IP FP

1. Gopal Murmu Suwan 3.5 3.0

2. Raghunath Murmu Suwan 3.0 2.5

3. Manik Majhi Suwan 2.8 2.0

4. Bhadhu Besra Suwan 3.5 3.0

5. Kisan Murmu Suwan 3.0 2.5

6. Chitan Murmu Suwan 2.8 1.0

7. Sukram Hansda Suwan 3.8 2.5

8. Harendra Nath Hansda Suwan 2.8 2.0

9. Amir Soren Suwan 3.0 2.0

10. Suresh Hansda Suwan 3.0 2.5

11 Pradeep Majhi Suwan 4.0 3.5

12 Nitai Besra Suwan 3.0 2.5

Average 3.28 2.4

Village: Pradhandih

Panchayat-Haribhanja

Block – Kharsawan

Distt.Saraikela Kharsawa

Sl. No.

Name of farmers Variety Yield (t/ha)

13. Turi Hansda Suwan 3.0 2.5

14. Fote Majhi Suwan 2.8 2.0

15. Durga Murmu Suwan 3.5 2.8

16 Sam Majhi Suwan 3.0 2.8

Average 3.1 2.5

The average yield because of application of herbicides in maize crop was 3.2 t/ha compared to farmers

practice which involved two manual weeding at 25 days after sowing.

83

Economics of front line demonstration: Perusal data on economics of front line demonstration it was noted

that farmers demonstrated with improved weed control method in rice crop by applying pretilachlor @

1.0kg/ha (formulation) recorded higher gross return and B:C ratio (Rs34,000.00 and 1.88) compared to

farmers practice of one hand weeding at 25 days after sowing (Rs 27,000.00 and 1.05).

Similarly in case of demonstration on maize it was found that under improved practice of weed control i.e.

application of atrazine 2.0 kg/ha (formulation) recorded higher gross return and B:C ratio (37,920.00 and

2.26) compared to farmers practice of one hand weeding at 25 days after sowing (29,280.00 and 1.4)

Economics of front line demonstration on weed control methods in rice and maize

Name of crop

Number of farmers

Cost of production (Rs/ha) Average yield (t/ha) Gross return (Rs/ha)

B:C ratio

Improve technology Application of

Farmers technology (H.W. 25 DAS)

Improved F.P. Improved F.P. Improved

F.P.

1. Rice

Rice (15) 18110.00 25650.00 3.4 2.7 34,000.00 27000.00 1.88 1.05

2. Maize

Maize (16) 16,765.00 20445.00 3.16 2.44 37,920.00 29280.00 2.26 1.4

Maize selling price: Rs12000/ T

Rice selling price: Rs 10000/T

Sl. No

Cost of item Rate (Rs/unit) Quantity per ha

Cost of weed control

Total cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)

1. Cost of production of rice without weed control

17650.00

2. Cost of weed control by farmers 200/-labour 40 8000.00 25650.00

3. Pretilachlor 460 1.0 kg/ha 460.00 18110.00

Sl. No

Cost of item Rate (Rs/unit) Quantity per ha

Cost of weed control

Total cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)

4. Cost of production of maize without weed control

15445

5. Cost of weed control by farmers Rs200/- labour 25 labour 5000.00 20445.00

6. Atrazine Rs.660/-kg 2.00 kg 1320.00 16765.00

84

PART-A

Basic information to be recorded for each FLD

1. Farmer’s Name : Sl. No. 1 to 15 of demonstration on Rice

And 1 to 16 of demonstration on Maize

2. Address : Rice Demonstration: 1. Village: Pradhandih

Panchayat-Haribhanja Block – Kharsawan Distt.Saraikela Kharsawa

Maize Demonstration: 2. Village. Burudih

Panchayat-Burudih Block – Gamharia Distt.Saraikela Kharsawa

3. Size of holding

a. Irrigated land b. Unirrigated land

1. Varying from 3 to 5 acres

2. Un irrigated

4. Family size Varying from 3 to 7 members per family

5. Educational status Illiterate to Primary school

6. Total income

a. Agriculture b. Other sources

1. From agriculture source varying from 3,000 to

5,000/- PM

2. As labour 1,800 to 2,500 PM

7. Major cropping pattern followed Rice – Fallow

8. Tick major constraints in respect to weed management

1. Most of the lands are un irrigated. 2. Access to agricultural input shops is very difficult owing to remotely located villages 3. Social and law and order problems due to naxals 4. Transport and communication problems 5. illiteracy

9. Response of farmers to the demonstrated technology:

Satisfied

Unsatisfied/Partially Satisfied/Fully Satisfied

85

10. Economic analysis: Average of 15 farmers demonstration on rice

Particulars Farmers Practice Demonstrated technology (t/ha)

1. Cost of production (Rs/ha) 18,500/- 21,000

2. Yield (q/ha) 27 34

3. Net profit (Rs/ha) 8,500/- 13,000/-

4. B:C ratio (Gross) 1:1.5 1.62

10. Economic analysis: Average of 15 farmers demonstration on Maie

Particulars Farmers Practice Demonstrated technology (t/ha)

1. Cost of production (Rs/ha) 18,500/- 21,000

2. Yield (q/ha) 27 34

3. Net profit (Rs/ha) 8,500/- 13,000/-

4. B:C ratio (Gross) 1:1.5 1.62

Price of paddy Rs. 100/- q

86

VII.TSP programme:

Under tribal development programme a Fruit Based Land use System was developed with following

objective:

1. To acquaint farmers about improved method of orchard development

2. To introduce intercropping in orchard to utilize interspace for cultivation of field crops

3. To suppress weeds by intercropping in newly developed orchard

4. To evaluate the economics of farmers

Introduction: Tribal farmers of the region are dependent on conventional method of cultivation of rice on

their land. Even uplands where the productivity of rice is quite low they grow rice thus get poor return. If

such lands are brought under fruit crop and intercropped with leguminous crops like black gram, gram or

even ginger and turmeric, the economic as well as general health of farmers will improve. Besides, the

cultivation of crops in between rows of fruit plants will suppress weed growth.

Considering above views, a comprehensive plan for alternative use of land by developing orchard

at five tribal farmers of Ranchi district were selected. Based on land situation lay out plan was developed in

the month of April and May , of 2014.The lay out plan for orchard was prepared with the help of farmers.

The farmers were advised to dig pits of 3 feet wide, 3 feet length and 3 feet deep and . The spacing from one

pit to another was maintained at 5 meter. The pits were exposed in sun for 3 months.The top soil of the pits

were mixed with karanj cake and FYM. Thereafter they were put in lowest side of the pit. The pits were

filled with rest of the soil and were raised to an height of of 1 to 1.5 feet. The pits were left for 15 to 30 days

to be soaked and settled by pre monsoon shower. As soon as monsoon started 200 plants to each farmer

were transported and planted by showing the correct method of planting. The plants are now settled and

appears healthy.

Orchard

Development

Name of farmers Area

(Sq meter)

District Block Village

1. Raju Oraon 2960 Ranchi Bero Dubalia

2. Fulchand Kujur 4000 Ranchi

3. Manoj Kumar

Lakra

4000 Ranchi Ratu Hochar

4. BagRay Munda 3191 Ranchi Ratu Lovahatu

5. Lacchoo Munda 2000 Ranchi Ratu Ratu

87

D

Digging, filling of pits and Planting of mango saplings

88

Intercropping in mango Orchard

89

OTHER ACTIVITY : CONTEST ON WEED SCIENCE

REPORT: A weed science contest was organised by Department of Agronomy, Birsa Agricultural University,

Ranchi in collaboration with Indian Society of Weed Science, Jabalpur, from 17th to 22nd December, 2014.

The purpose of this contest was to generate interest and awareness among students about weed science

in general. Altogether four events were organised in this programme namely quiz, debate, essay and

exhibition competition.

Quiz CompetitionThe quiz competition of 100 marks was organised in which altogether 16 students

participated. The performance of students was evaluated on the basis of correct answers of the questions.

Essay Competition: The students were assigned a topic for essay writing. The topic of essay was “ Non

chemical method of weed control in crops ” In this event 16 students participated.

Debate Cpmpetition: The debate competition was held on 19th December, 2014. In this event 7 studnts

participated. The topic of competition was “Chemical weed control is boon/menace to the society”.

Exhibition copetition: An exhibition competition was organised in which altogether 19 students

participated in different groups. The theme of exhibition was “Utilization of Weed” The students showed

uses of weeds through posters, models and show pieces. The students worked very hard for this.

A list of succesful candidte is as below:

Events First Second Third

Quiz Competition

Varunesh Kumar; BSc. Hons Ag semester vth

Nishar Akhtar; BSc. Hons Ag semester vth

Puja Singh; Bsc. Hons Ag semester vth

Debte Competition

Ms. Mohsina Anjum; BSc. Ag viith Sem

Ms. Reshu Bhardwaj; Msc. Ag Ist Sem.

Shashank Jha; BSc.Hons. Ag 1st

Sem

Exhibition Competition

Mr. Sidharth Gupta, Ms. Suraj Mani Kumari, Mr. Shashi Kumar, Ms. Pranshu Arunima & Ranveer kumar students of B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester III

rd

Mr. Rishu Kumar, Mr. Sadanand, Mr. Ashish Kumar, Mr. Deo Kumar & Yogesh Kumar Yogesh students of B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester V

th

1. Mr.Nishar Khatar, Mr. Varunesh Kumar & Mr. Kamal Kartik Kenny Kundra students of B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester V

th

2. Ms. Shruti Bharty, Ms. Samina Perween & Ms. Khushboo Paswan Students of M.Sc.Ag. Semester III

rd

Essay Competition

Ms. Suraj Mani Kumari student of B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

1.Mr. Nishar Akhtar student of B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

Mr. Sidharth Guptta student of B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester IIIrd

2. Ms. YOGESH KUMAR YOGESH B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

90

List of participants

Quiz Name Class

1 Varunesh Kumar BSc. Hons Ag semester vth

2 Nishar Akhtar BSc. Hons Ag semester vth

3 Puja Singh BSc. Hons Ag semester vth

4 Ms. Pratibha Hembrom B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

5 Ms. Swati Singh B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

6 Mr. Vivek Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. IIIrd semester

7 Mr. Yogesh Kumar Yogesh B.Sc. Ag. Hon. Vth semester

8 Mr. Rishu Kumar B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

9 Mr. Tanmai Dutta B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

10 Ms.Sonika Deep B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

11 Mr. Suryanshu Yadav B.Sc.Ag.Hon.semester Vth

12 Ms. Snigdha Manav B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

13 Mr. Sidharth Gupta B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

14 Mr. Ranveer Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

15. Mr. Raviranjan Kr. Bharti B.Sc.Ag.Hon. IIIrd semester

16. Debate Mr. Sharv pushan minz B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Ist

17 Mr. shashank jha B.Sc.Ag.Hon. Ist semester

18 Ms. Mohsina anjum B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester VIth

19 Mr. Vivek Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

20 Mr. Varunesh Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

21 Ms. Reshu bhardwaj M.Sc.Ag. semester Ist

22. Mr. Nishar Akhtar B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

23. Exhibition Ms. Sushma Majhi Ph.D(Agronomy) semester IIIrd

24 Mr. Nishar Akhatar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

25 Mr. Varunesh Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon.Vth semester

26 Mr. Kamal Kartik Kenny Kundra B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester Vth

27 Mr. Rishu Kumar B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

28 Mr. Sadanand B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

29 Mr. Ashish Kumar B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

30 Mr. Deo Kumar B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

31 Mr.Yogesh Kumar Yogesh Mr. Deo Kumar, Mr. Ashish Kumar, Mr. Sadanand & Mr. Rishu Kumar

B.Sc.Ag. Hon. semester Vth

32 Mr. Vivek Kumar & Mr. Anshu Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

33 Mr. Anshu Kumar & Mr. Vivek Kumar B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

34 Mr. Sidharth Gupta, Ms. Suraj Mani Kumari, Mr. Shashi Kumar, Ms. Pranshu Arunima & Ranveer Kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

35 Mr. Sidharth Gupta, Ms. Suraj Mani Kumari, Mr. Shashi Kumar, Ms. Pranshu Arunima & Ranveer Kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

91

36 Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR, MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA & Ranveer Kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

37 Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR, MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

38 Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR, MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

39 MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA, Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

40 MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA, Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

41 MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA, Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

42 MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA, Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

43 MS. PRANSHU ARUNIMA, Mr. SIDHARTH GUPTA, MS. SURAJ MANI KUMARI, Mr. SHASHI KUMAR & ranveer kumar

B.Sc.Ag.Hon. semester IIIrd

Concluding Session: The concluding session of Weed Science contest was held on 22.12.12. The

programme was chaired by senior professor of Faculty Of agriculture, Dr M K singh, University Professor

and Chief Scientist. The session was also attended by judges, participants, and oher faculty members. The

participants were distributed with certificates who stood first, second and third in different events. The

winners were also gifted with books mainly related to General Knowledge, Essy and Gardening. The

students expressed their opinion about holding such type of events which give them opprtunity to speak

on certain topic. Dr M K Singh, the chief guest appreciated the way the contest was held. He also suggested

for participation of more students. .

92

ACTIVITIES OF WEED SCIENCE CONTEST

Debate on “Chemical weed control is boon/menace to the society”

Glimpses of exhibition on utilization of weeds

Prize distribution to successful candidates of different events

93

List of Papers and Symposia Attended:

Upasani R.R., Barla S., 2014. Weed control methods in direct seeded rice under medium land condition.

Journal of Crop and Weed, 10(2):445-450.

Upasani R.R., Barla Sheela and Singh M.K..2014. Tillage and weed management in direct seeded rice

(oryza sativa) - wheat (Triticumaestivum) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 59 (2): 75-

79.

Barla Sheela, Upasani R.R., Kulshrestha S.K. and Thakur R. 2013. Effect of age and number of seedlings on

weed dynamics, productivity and nutrient uptake of rice (Oryza Sativa). Current Advances in

Agricultural Sciences. 5(2): 197-200.

Kumari Niru, Pal S.K. and Barla Sheela. 2013. Effect of organic nutrient management on productivity and

economics of scented rice. Oryza 50 (3): 249-252.

Surin Sushma Saroj, M.K.Singh, R R Upasani, R.Thakur. 2013. Weed Management in rice (Oryza sativa–

wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system under conservation tillage. Indian Journal of Agronomy

58(3) 288-291..

Abstract :

Barla Sheela, Upasani R.R. and Puran, A. N. 2014.Growth and yield of turmeric (Curcuma longa L.) under

different weed management. In Proceedings of International Seminar on “Integrating Agriculture &

Allied Research: Prioritizing Future Potentials for Secure Livelihoods (ISIAAR)” on 6-9 Nov. 2014 at

CHRD, BCKV, Kalyani, Mohanpur-741252, W.B. pp. 63.

Upasani R.R. and Sheela Barla. 2014. Effect of weed control on upland rice. In Proceedings of International

Seminar on “Integrating Agriculture & Allied Research: Prioritizing Future Potentials for Secure

Livelihoods (ISIAAR)” on 6-9 Nov. 2014 at CHRD, BCKV, Kalyani, Mohanpur-741252, W.B. pp. 176.

Upasani R.R. and Sheela Barla. 2014. Weed control methods in direct seeded rice under medium land

condition. In Proceedings of International Seminar on “Integrating Agriculture & Allied Research:

Prioritizing Future Potentials for Secure Livelihoods (ISIAAR)” on 6-9 Nov. 2014 at CHRD, BCKV,

Kalyani, Mohanpur-741252, W.B. pp. 26.

94

Upasani R.R., Barla Sheela and Puran A.N. 2014. Pignut- a weed of concern. In: Proceedings of Biennial

Conference of ISWS on “ Emerging challenges in weed management” from 15-17th

February 2014 at

DWSR, Jabalpur. pp:51.

Upasani R.R., Barla Sheela and Puran A.N. 2014. Viability regeneration potential of glyphosate- treated nut

grass. In: Proceedings of Biennial Conference of ISWS on “ Emerging challenges in weed management”

from 15-17th

February 2014 at DWSR, Jabalpur. pp:70.

Barla Sheela and NiruKumari, 2013. “Effect of green manuring crops on weed management in medium land

direct seeded rice”. ARRW Golden jubilee International Symposium on Sustainable rice production

and livelihood security: Challenges & Opportunities from March 02-05, 2013 at CRRI Cuttack

Odisha India, organized by Association of rice research workers, Cuttack. Pp.

Seminar/Symposia/Conferences attended:

1. International Seminar on “Integrating Agriculture & Allied Research: Prioritizing FuturePotentials

for Secure Livelihoods” (ISIAAR) organized by Crop and weed science society (6-9 November,

2014) held at BCKV, Kalyani, W.B. Poster presentation on “Growth and yield of turmeric (Curcuma

longa L.) under different weed management”.

2. Review meeting of AICRP on weed control at DWSR Jabalpur (M.P.) from 12th

-14th

February, 2014.

3. Biennial conference on “Emerging challenges in weed management” organized by Indian society of

weed science at DWSR, Jabalpur (M.P.) from 15-17 Feb, 2014

95

APPENDIX

Weekly weather data fron 12th

November, 2013 to 1st April, 2014

Temperature(°C)

SS(hr) Rain Evapo. Rainfall

WK. No Max. Min.

7:00 AM

2:00 PM

(mm) (mm) Average

46 24.2 7.4 84.4 70.6 2.1 60 27.9 0

12th Nov- 18th Nov, 2013

47 24.9 9.8 84.6 70 1.9 64 32.3 0 19th Nov- 25th Nov

48 24 6.5 85.1 71 2.5 65.7 27.2 0 26th Nov - 2nd Dec

49 24.5 6.8 83.7 71.7 2.7 67.2 30.3 0 3rd Dec- 9th Dec

50 26 11.9 83.3 73.6 2.5 55.2 24.9 17.4 10th Dec- 16th Dec

51 22.9 6.3 83.1 72.1 3.1 64.9 26.8 0 17th Dec -23rd Dec

52 19.5 1.8 82.3 70 2.9 73.2 30 0 24th Dec- 31st Dec

1 23.0 6.4 80.1 66.9 57.9 10.2 25.5 2.5 1st Jan-7th Jan, 2014

2 20.2 5.6 82.6 70.0 44.3 8.0 13.7 3.3 8th Jan-14th Jan

3 23.6 7.6 83.4 69.7 60.1 0.0 26.1 3.6 15th Jan-21st Jan

4 21.3 5.9 82.9 67.0 58.4 0.0 23.7 5.6 22nd Jan-28th Jan

5 22.7 6.2 82.6 67.1 62.4 0.0 25.6 5.9 29th Jan-4th Feb

6 25.8 11.3 82.6 63.7 64.9 0.0 29.9 8.9 5th Feb-11th Feb

7 21.9 8.4 83.7 62.1 33.2 6.2 11.5 7.5 12th Feb-18th Feb

8 24.7 9.6 83.0 49.7 55.9 4.0 21.2 5.4 19th Feb-25th Feb

9 23.2 13.2 85.4 62.1 33.2 30.9 15.8 7.2 26th Feb- 4th Mar

10 25.7 11.7 83.6 48.3 45.2 16.0 20.6 4.2 5th Mar-11th Mar

11 28.6 14.5 83.1 63.6 60.8 0.0 27.5 5.1 12th Mar-18th Mar

96

12 32.3 14.1 83.0 68.6 64.7 0.0 32.4 6.5 19th Mar-25th Mar

13 33.8 18.0 84.0 58.0 62.8 0.0 35.7 6.9 26th Mar-1st Apr

24.64 9.16 83.33 65.79 36.08 525.5 25.43

Weekly Weather Data for the year of 2014

Date

R. H.(%)

2014 Temperature(°C)

SS(hr) Rain Evapo. Rainfall

WK. No Max. Min. 7:00 AM

2:00 PM

(mm) (mm) Average

1 23.0 6.4 80.1 66.9 57.9 10.2 25.5 2.5

1 1st Jan-7th Jan

2 20.2 5.6 82.6 70.0 44.3 8.0 13.7 3.3

2 8th Jan-14th Jan

3 23.6 7.6 83.4 69.7 60.1 0.0 26.1 3.6

3 15th Jan-21st Jan

4 21.3 5.9 82.9 67.0 58.4 0.0 23.7 5.6

4 22nd Jan-28th Jan

5 22.7 6.2 82.6 67.1 62.4 0.0 25.6 5.9

5 29th Jan-4th Feb

6 25.8 11.3 82.6 63.7 64.9 0.0 29.9 8.9

6 5th Feb-11th Feb

7 21.9 8.4 83.7 62.1 33.2 6.2 11.5 7.5

7 12th Feb-18th Feb

8 24.7 9.6 83.0 49.7 55.9 4.0 21.2 5.4

8 19th Feb-25th Feb

9 23.2 13.2 85.4 62.1 33.2 30.9 15.8 7.2

9 26th Feb- 4th Mar

10 25.7 11.7 83.6 48.3 45.2 16.0 20.6 4.2

10 5th Mar-11th Mar

11 28.6 14.5 83.1 63.6 60.8 0.0 27.5 5.1

11 12th Mar-18th Mar

12 32.3 14.1 83.0 68.6 64.7 0.0 32.4 6.5

12 19th Mar-25th Mar

13 33.8 18.0 84.0 58.0 62.8 0.0 35.7 6.9

13 26th Mar-1st Apr

14 35.0 17.7 83.6 67.9 68.4 0.0 38.0 3.9

14 2nd Apr- 8th Apr

15 34.6 17.9 82.4 69.1 66.1 0.0 36.4 3.3

15 9th Apr- 15th Apr

16 34.8 18.0 83.4 65.6 68.4 2.0 34.6 6.0

16 16th Apr- 22nd Apr

17 37.0 19.3 83.4 63.9 68.0 0.0 34.0 7.6

17 23rd Apr- 29th Apr

18 36.6 18.6 82.6 66.1 61.8 11.8 31.8 8.2

18 30th Apr- 6th May

19 35.1 21.5 80.9 51.1 53.9 0.0 27.0 10.8

19 7th May- 13th May

20 37.1 21.1 80.7 51.4 68.0 0.0 36.2 13.6

20 14th May- 20th

97

May

21 36.2 22.3 84.0 62.6 57.9 14.4 33.3 13.2

21 21st May- 27th May

22 33.4 21.5 83.9 60.6 46.1 29.5 22.0 12.5

22 28th May- 3rd Jun

23 38.5 24.8 83.0 54.3 64.7 0.0 36.2 28.9

23 4th Jun - 10th Jun

24 35.3 24.8 85.6 55.1 65.5 44.3 33.8 38.6

24 11th Jun- 17th Jun

25 29.6 21.0 83.3 69.9 26.0 48.7 15.9 70.1

25 18th Jun- 24th Jun

26 32.7 22.2 83.0 65.4 44.3 35.4 24.5 77.1

26 25th Jun- 1st Jul

27 27.9 22.8 85.9 74.4 18.6 119.8 14.1 65.0

27 2nd Jul-8th Jul

28 32.0 23.3 82.1 68.3 48.2 9.3 25.8 82.0

28 9th Jul-15th Jul

29 30.3 23.3 82.4 72.0 14.6 19.8 9.3 87.1

29 16th Jul-22nd Jul

30 31.5 22.2 82.9 74.0 37.2 16.2 20.0 90.9

30 23rd Jul-29th Jul

31 30.8 22.2 82.4 73.6 35.1 79.0 7.5 77.4

31 30th Jul-5th Aug

32 27.9 22.5 81.9 73.3 12.4 69.6 8.2 73.6

32 6th Aug- 12th Aug

33 29.8 23.0 83.4 73.4 40.4 32.0 19.9 71.7

33 13th Aug- 19th Aug

34 30.8 23.0 82.1 72.1 49.4 16.5 21.2 65.1

34 20th Aug- 26th Aug

35 28.3 22.1 83.9 71.4 42.4 29.0 17.0 68.8

35 27th Aug-2nd Sep

36 28.7 21.3 82.0 73.0 42.1 45.9 14.5 72.0

36 3rd Sep- 9th Sep

37 32.0 22.3 82.3 73.7 56.2 80.3 24.3 75.0

37 10th Sep-16th Sep

38 29.8 22.6 81.4 71.7 47.0 36.5 13.2 50.9

38 17th sep-23rd Sep

39 29.8 19.5 84.6 72.0 57.5 0.0 26.0 40.4

39 24th Sep- 30th Sep

40 30.4 19.9 80.9 71.7 61.6 0.0 31.7 28.6

40 1st Oct-07th Oct

41 29.7 20.1 81.4 71.4 44.3 36.3 17.7 21.2

41 8th Oct-14th Oct

42 26.5 15.2 81.1 70.9 57.8 0.0 25.5 13.7

42 15th Oct- 21st Oct

43 27.9 14.9 81.1 68.9 33.0 3.1 16.3 11.9

43 22nd Oct- 28th Oct

44 27.7 13.2 81.6 57.6 60.1 0.0 25.9 7.7

44 29th Oct- 4th Nov

45 26.4 11.7 81.4 69.1 64.9 0.0 22.5 3.6

45 5th Nov- 11th Nov

46 26.0 10.5 82.0 70.7 65.5 0.0 22.9 2.0

46 12th Nov- 18th Nov

47 24.0 4.7 83.0 63.0 59.9 0.0 21.9 2.2

47 19th Nov- 25th Nov

48 25.0 5.8 81.4 69.3 61.6 0.0 21.9 3.3

48 26th Nov - 2nd

98

Dec

49 25.8 5.7 80.9 68.3 57.5 0.0 26.6 0.7

49 3rd Dec- 9th Dec

50 24.6 6.0 84.3 68.3 43.8 0.0 17.7 1.7

50 10th Dec- 16th Dec

51 18.0 2.7 82.1 69.1 39.2 0.0 24.0 0.5

51 17th Dec -23rd Dec

52 17.3 2.4 81.5 70.0 68.9 0.0 23.5 5.1

52 24th Dec- 31st Dec