Weed Management in Pulses: A Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheeja K. Raj ◽  
J. K. Sinchana
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Abiotic Stresses ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Threshold Level ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Initial Growth ◽  
Biotic And Abiotic Stresses

Pulses are the important crop after cereals and is the cheapest source of dietary protein. After the Green revolution, the production of pulses in India remain stagnant over the years due to various biotic and abiotic stresses. Among the various biotic stresses, weeds are the major one which causes severe yield loss in pulses. Due to initial slow growth of pulses, weeds emerge first and gain competitive advantage over the crop and exhibit smothering effect on crop. Moreover, major area of pulses (84 per cent) are under rainfed condition and grown in combination with non-legume crop. As a result, pulses are subjected to various types of biotic and abiotic stresses. Weeds besides causing direct loss in yield also hinder farm activities and serve as alternate host to many pests. Weed management in pulses is essential to bring the weeds below the threshold level to maximize the seed yield and quality. The literature regarding the importance of weed management in pulses, weed flora, critical period of crop weed competition and different weed management methods of weed control are collected and presented in this paper.Weeds are the predominant biological constraint in pulse production due to the slow initial growth of the crop. Strategies’ of weed management depends on the weed competition, types of weeds present and weed control method adopted. In general, critical period of weed competition for short duration pulses is up to 30 days and for long duration pulse crops it is up to 60 days. The major three types of weeds viz., grasses, broad leaved weeds and sedges were found in association with pulses. Intensity of weed infestation varies with agroecological conditions and crop management practices followed. A system approach is necessary to maintain the weed population below the economic threshold level thereby reducing the yield loss. Integrated weed management (IWM) which has been proved to be more effective than any single method in alleviating the buildup of weeds in pulse crop.

scholarly journals The Critical Period for Weed Control (CPWC) in Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dogan ISIK ◽  
Adem AKCA ◽  
Emine KAYA ALTOP ◽  
Nihat TURSUN ◽  
Husrev MENNAN
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Control Period ◽  
Relative Yield ◽  
Yield Data ◽  
Weed Interference

Accurate assessment of crop-weed control period is an essential part for planning an effective weed management for cropping systems. Field experiments were conducted during the seasonal growing periods of potato in 2012 and 2013 in Kayseri, Turkey to assess critical period for weed control (CPWC) in potato. A four parameter log-logistic model was used to assist in monitoring and analysing two sets of related, relative crop yield. Data was obtained during the periods of increased weed interference and as a comparison, during weed-free periods. In both years, the relative yield of potato decreased with a longer period of weed-interference whereas increased with increasing length of weed free period. In 2012, the CPWC ranged from 112 to 1014 GDD (Growing Degree Days) which corresponded to 8 to 66 days after crop emergence (DAE) and between 135-958 GDD (10 to 63 DAE) in the following year based on a 5% acceptable yield loss. Weed-free conditions needed to be established as early as the first week after crop emergence and maintained as late as ten weeks after crop emergence to avoid more than 5% yield loss in the potato. The results suggest that CPWC could well assist potato producers to significantly reduce the expense of their weed management programs as well as improving its efficacy.

Effect of Weed Management Practices on Weed Dynamics, Nutrient Depletion, Productivity and Profitability of Summer Mungbean (Vigna radiata) under Zero Tillage Condition

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kuldeep Singh ◽  
Hardev Ram ◽  
Rakesh Kumar ◽  
R.K. Meena ◽  
Rakesh Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Zero Tillage ◽  
Yield Attributes ◽  
Net Returns ◽  
Free Treatment ◽  
Crop Weed Competition

Background: Weeds are prime factor that adversely effects on growth, quality and yield of mungbean during summer and rainy season. Being a short duration crop, it faces heavy weed competition right from the early growth stages to harvesting. The critical period of crop weed competition in mungbean was initial 25-30 days, yield may be reduce up to 50-90% if weeds not manage at this stage. Hence, there is a need to find out the successful weed management strategies to realize higher growth and yield. The progressive transformation of agriculture concerning intensive use of herbicides is gaining status in recent years due to easy, lower cost, timeliness and successful controlling weeds. Therefore, keeping above information in view, the present study was undertaken to assess the effect of different weed management practices in summer mungbean under zero tillage condition to find out the better weed management, higher productivity and profitability.Methods: In this field-laboratory investigation during summer season, 2019, different herbicides were applied to manage weeds in mungbean. Eight treatments were applied based on various application windows. In the field and laboratory, the collected samples were determined for crop weed competition, yield attributes, yields and net returns. Result: The results revealed that weed free treatment was recorded lowest weed population at 30 DAS and harvest (1.8 and 2.9), weed dry weight (1.1 and 1.9g) and highest weed control efficiency (96.3 and 94.9%) followed by Pendimethalin (PE) fb one HW and Shaked (Propaquizafop + Imezathyper) application. The similar results also observed in nutrients removed by weeds. Among yield attributes, weed free treatment recorded the longest pod length, no. of pods/plant, no. of seeds/pod and test weight (7.9, 21.0, 9.7 and 43.0g, respectively) which was at par with Pendimethalin (PE) fb one HW and Shaked (Propaquizafop + Imezathyper) application. The magnitude of seed yield was increased under weed free (10.1 q/ha) and Shaked (Propaquizafop + Imezathyper) (9.5 q/ha) treatments by 127.9 and 113.8%, respectively over weedy check. Application of Shaked (Propaquizafop + Imezathyper) recorded highest net returns (Rs 55,079/ha) and B: C (2.8) over rest of the treatments. It can concluded that application of Shaked (Propaquizafop + Imezathyper) @ 2 L/ha at 20 DAS recommended for better weed control, higher yield and net returns of summer mungbean under zero tillage condition.

Light Quality and the Critical Period for Weed Control in Soybean

Weed Science ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Green-Tracewicz ◽  
Eric R. Page ◽  
Clarence J. Swanton
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Light Quality ◽  
Morphological Changes ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Leaf Number ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Shade Avoidance

The critical period for weed control (CPWC) is an integral component of integrated weed management strategies. Several studies have defined the CPWC in soybean under varying agronomic conditions, yet none have described the mechanisms involved in crop yield losses caused by weed competition. We hypothesized that under nonresource-limiting conditions, morphological changes resulting from the expression of shade avoidance could be used to define a period of developmental sensitivity to low red-to-far-red ratio (R : FR) that would overlap with the defined CPWC in soybean. Two experiments (a sequential harvest and a weed addition/removal series) were conducted in 2008 and 2009 under controlled environmental conditions to address this hypothesis. Two light-quality treatments were used: (1) high R : FR ratio (i.e., weed-free), and (2) low R : FR ratio (i.e., weedy). The low R : FR ratio treatment induced shade avoidance responses in soybean, which included increases in height, internode length, and the shoot : root ratio, as well as a reduction in biomass accumulation and leaf number. Using the morphological changes in biomass and leaf number observed in the weed addition/removal series, a period of developmental sensitivity to low R : FR was defined between the first trifoliate (V1) and third trifoliate (V3) stages of soybean development. This period was found to be very similar to the CPWC previously defined by field studies of soybean–weed competition.

scholarly journals Weed Management in Corn

EDIS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason A. Ferrell ◽  
Gregory E. MacDonald ◽  
Pratap Devkota
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Weed Seed ◽  
Corn Production ◽  
Late Season ◽  
Equipment Operation ◽  
Good Management

Successful weed control is essential for economical corn production in Florida. Weeds reduce corn yields by competing for moisture, nutrients, and light during the growing season and interfere with harvest. Producing a good corn crop is only half the battle and will not be profitable unless the corn can be harvested. Late-season weeds can result in excessive yield loss, inefficient equipment operation, and provide a source of weed seed for the following season. Weeds can be controlled in corn; however, this involves good management practices in all phases of corn production.https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/wg007

Weed management in onion: A review

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Dhananivetha ◽  
M. Mohammed Amnullah ◽  
P. Murali Arthanari ◽  
S. Mariappan
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Growth Period ◽  
Threshold Level ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Important Species ◽  
Bulb Formation ◽  
Mechanical Methods ◽  
Hand Weeding ◽  
The Cost

The bulbous vegetable onion Allium cepa Var. aggregatum L. (2n=16) is the most important species of Allium group and is regarded as the single most important vegetable spices as it forms an indispensable part of many diets, both vegetarian and non-vegetarian. Onion is valued for its bulbs having characteristic odour, flavor and pungency. Onion is regarded as a highly export oriented crop and earns a valuable foreign exchange for the country. Weeds are of great menace as they interfere with production of crop and add to the cost of cultivation. The reduction in crop yield has direct correlation with weed competition. Onion exhibits greater susceptibility to weed competition as compared to other crops due to its inherent characteristics such as their slow growth, small stature, shallow roots and lack of dense foliage. The effective weed control involves identification of weed flora, method of weed control and judicious combination of effective weed control methods. Hand weeding in onion is a common practice in India, but it is a tedious, expensive and time consuming task due to closer spacing and shallow root system. Non-availability of labourers during critical period of crop makes hand weeding difficult leading to heavy yield losses. Spraying of pre-emergence herbicides keeps the crop in weed free conditions during the early stages. At later stage, second flush of weeds will affect the bulb formation. Hand weeding helps to keep the weed population below economic threshold level throughout the crop growth period. Pre-emergence combined with hand weeding may be costly because of the reduced labour availability and higher labour cost. After bulb formation manual or mechanical methods of weed control will damage the bulb. Application of early post emergence may be helpful to reduce damage to the bulb, weed competition and cost of weeding. Hence a brief review was presented to find out the effect of different weed management method in onion.

scholarly journals A REVIEW ON NON-CHEMICAL WEED MANAGEMENT IN MAIZE (ZEA MAYS L.)

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
A. Duwadi ◽  
A. Acharya ◽  
S. Gautam
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Chemical Application ◽  
Organic System ◽  
Sustainable Solutions ◽  
Weed Population ◽  
Mechanical Methods ◽  
Crop Weed Competition

Weed is omnipresent species that compete with major crops for light, nutrients, space, and water for their growth and development and ultimately deteriorate the ideal environment for crops growth. In the present context, herbicide application is the easiest and seemingly economical approach for weed control in south-Asian countries. In contrary, the side effects of herbicide on health and environment impose to adopt for the non-chemical method of weed management. This paper reviewed the menace of herbicide, crop weed association, the critical period of crop-weed competition, and different methods of organic weed control implemented especially for maize. The main objective of this review is to maneuver a weed control strategy for maize other than the chemical application. The findings of different research suggested that a critical period of crop-weed competition in maize lies between 2 to 8 weeks after crop sowing. Many mechanical methods for weed control in maize proved efficient but seemed labour intensive and biological methods provided maximum security against specific weed species. The cultural method in combination with other methods effectively reduced the weed population in the maize field. It was found that, if various components of non-chemical weed management are implemented systematically, we can control the weed population with higher economic return and achieve the goal of organic food production with sustainable solutions. Weed control in the organic system focuses on management techniques designed to prevent weed emergence, give a competitive advantage to the main crop, and act for sustainable solutions. The non-chemical integrated weed management system is recommended to reduce the use of herbicide and for sustainable production. A review of non-chemical weed management in maize could be helpful for researchers to provide useful, sustainable, and environmentally friendly solutions to farmers to solve the problem of weed infestation in the maize crop along with substantial yield improvement.

A Systems Comparison of Contrasting Organic Weed Management Strategies

Weed Science ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan Brown ◽  
Eric R. Gallandt
Keyword(s):  
Seed Production ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Weed Seed ◽  
Period System ◽  
Organic Weed Management

Weed management strategies differ in their ability to control weeds, and often have unique agroecological implications. To provide growers with an improved sense of trade-offs between weed control and ecological effects, we implemented several prominent organic weed management strategies in yellow onion in 2014 and 2015. Strategies included cultivation of weed seedlings during the early, weed-sensitive “critical period” of the crop; frequent cultivation events to ensure “zero seed rain”; and weed suppression with polyethylene or natural mulches. As expected, end-of-season weed biomass and weed seed production were greatest in the critical period system and nearly zero for the zero seed rain system. Weeds were also well controlled in natural mulch systems. Average onion yield per treatment was 50.7 Mg ha−1. In 2014, the critical period system and the polyethylene mulch systems demonstrated yield loss, likely due to weed competition and excessive soil temperature, respectively. Onion soluble solids content was also diminished in these systems in 2014, but bulb firmness was greatest in unmulched systems. Carabid beetles, earthworms, soil compaction, soil nitrate, and microbial biomass were affected by weed management strategy, with natural-mulched systems generally performing most favorably. However, these effects were not substantial enough to affect yield of a subsequent sweet corn crop grown in weed-free conditions. In contrast, sweet corn managed with only early-season cultivations demonstrated yield loss (P=0.004) in plots where the critical period treatment was implemented the prior year, indicating that weed competition resulting from abundant weed seed production in that system was the most influential legacy effect of the weed management strategies.

Critical period for weed control in field pea

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mainpal Singh ◽  
Rakesh Kumar ◽  
Satish Kumar ◽  
Virender Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Crop Growth ◽  
Field Pea ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Growth And Yield ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Weed Density

Field studies were conducted during 2008-09 and 2009-10 at Hisar, India to assess the effect of weed competition on crop growth and yield of field pea. Weed density increased up to 60 days and then decreased at later stages of crop growth. Seed yield of field pea was decreased by 50% when weeds were allowed to compete for the entire season. The critical period for weed control was 21-63 days in year 1 and 20-70 days in year 2 to achieve 95% of weed-free yield. It is therefore concluded that, to minimize yield loss due to weed competition in field pea, weed control measures should be targeted to avoid weed competition between 20-70 days after sowing.

Competition and control of weeds in soybean

Weed Science ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajender Singh Chhokar ◽  
Rajender Singh Balyan
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Broad Spectrum ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Single Application ◽  
Reduced Rate ◽  
And Control

Two field experiments were carried out from 1993 to 1995 to evaluate the critical period of weed control and to develop suitable weed management practices for jungle rice, horse purslane, and cockscomb in soybean. Horse purslane was more competitive during early growth stages (up to 45 days after sowing [DAS]) and cockscomb was more competitive during later growth stages, whereas jungle rice was competitive throughout the growing season. The critical period of weed control was found to be 30 to 45 DAS. Weed-free maintenance up to 45 DAS resulted in a 74% increase in grain yield of soybean over the unweeded control. Keeping soybean weed free for 45 d or allowing weeds to remain in the crop for less than 30 d resulted in no significant yield loss. Sequential application of a reduced rate of soil-applied trifluralin 1.0 kg ha–1(0.67 ×) with postemergence fluazifop 0.75 kg ha–1(0.75 ×) or a reduced rate of soil-applied trifluralin or pendimethalin at 1.0 kg ha–1(0.67 ×) followed by hand hoeing 35 DAS provided better control of a broad spectrum of weeds than a single application of a postemergence herbicide applied at reduced or recommended rates. Integration of reduced rates of soil-applied herbicides with post-emergence herbicides or hand hoeing 35 DAS produced soybean yields similar to the hand-weeded treatment. Compared to the weed-free or integrated weed control, a single application of soil-applied or postemergence herbicide did not control a broad spectrum of weeds and reduced soybean yield.

scholarly journals Critical Period of Weed Control in Aerobic Rice

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. P. Anwar ◽  
A. S. Juraimi ◽  
B. Samedani ◽  
A. Puteh ◽  
A. Man
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Aerobic Rice ◽  
View Point ◽  
Weed Interference ◽  
Economic View

Critical period of weed control is the foundation of integrated weed management and, hence, can be considered the first step to design weed control strategy. To determine critical period of weed control of aerobic rice, field trials were conducted during 2010/2011 at Universiti Putra Malaysia. A quantitative series of treatments comprising two components, (a) increasing duration of weed interference and (b) increasing length of weed-free period, were imposed. Critical period was determined through Logistic and Gompertz equations. Critical period varied between seasons; in main season, it started earlier and lasted longer, as compared to off-season. The onset of the critical period was found relatively stable between seasons, while the end was more variable. Critical period was determined as 7–49 days after seeding in off-season and 7–53 days in main season to achieve 95% of weed-free yield, and 23–40 days in off-season and 21–43 days in main season to achieve 90% of weed-free yield. Since 5% yield loss level is not practical from economic view point, a 10% yield loss may be considered excellent from economic view point. Therefore, aerobic rice should be kept weed-free during 21–43 days for better yield and higher economic return.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document