Gaurav1*, S.K. Verma1, R.K. Meena2, V.K. Verma1 and R.N. Meena1

 

1Department of Agronomy, I. Ag. Sc., Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi – 221 005, Uttar Pradesh, India.
2Department of Agronomy, S.K. Rajasthan Agricultural University,Bikaner – 334 006, Rajasthan, India.

ABSTRACT

An field experiment was conducted during kharif seasons of 2013-14 at Varanasi, UP to evaluate the effect of weed management practices in zero-till direct seeded rice. Results revealed that weed free treatment resulted the highest yield; however, it was not economical due to high cost of cultivation.  Pre-emergence application of pendimethalin (1.0 kg ha-1) fb (followed by) early post-emergence application of bispyribac (0.025 kg ha-1) at 18 days after sowing (DAS) was recorded significantly the highest number of  effective tillers, grain yield (4290 kg ha-1) and straw yield (5750 kg ha-1), biological yield, harvest index (42.71 %) and  NPK uptake as compared to  Sesbania co-culture + residue incorporation, Sesbania co-culture fb 2, 4-D and pretilachlor fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and it were at par with the application of pendimethalin fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and pretilachlor fb bispyribac. Application of pretilachlor fb bispyribac at 18 DAS recorded maximum net returns ( 45586) and benefit cost ratio (2.7). None of the treatment as effective as weed free with respect to reduction of density and dry weight of weeds, crop growth, yield attributes and yield, and nutrients uptake.

 

Keywords:  Rice, NPK uptake, Net return, Pendimethalin, Pretilachlor.

INTRODUCTION

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the world’s most important crop and is a staple food for more than half of the world’s population. In India, rice is grown in an area of 43.9 m ha with a total production of 104.80 mt and average productivity of 2390 kg ha-1 (Anonymous, 2015). DSR occupies 26 per cent of the total rice area in South Asia. (Gupta et al., 2006), to meet the global rice demand, it is estimated that about 114 million tons of additional milled rice need to be produced by 2035, which is equivalent to an overall increase of 26% in the next 25 years. The possibility of expanding the area under rice in the near future is limited. Due to resource constraints, especially water and labours, direct seeding under dry condition is now emerging new trend in rice cultivation. In recent years, due to severe water and labour scarcity, farmers are changing their rice establishment method from transplanting to direct seeding (Walia et al., 2012). Direct seeding offers such advantages as faster and easier planting, reduced labour and less drudgery, earlier crop maturity by 7-10 days, more efficient water use and higher tolerance of water deficit, less methane emission and often higher profit in areas with an assured water supply (Singh et al., 2014). Low productivity of direct seeded rice is mainly due to heavy crop-weed competition due to early emergence of weeds along with crop seedling due to favorable soil conditions and their rapid growth result in severe competition for nutrients, space, and light. Thus, integration of herbicides and cultural practices, controlled weeds effectively and made available more nutrients to crop and consequently resulted in higher yield (Kumar et al., 2010). Herbicide use becomes more important because weeds and rice seedling emerge simultaneously in DSR and start crop weed competition (Raj et al., 2013). Post-emergence application (15-25 DAS) of bispyribac 25 g ha-1 is effective in controlling of grasses, sedges and broadleaved weeds. Brown manuring in DSR reduces weed population by nearly half without any adverse effect on rice yield. Also, Sesbania surface mulch decomposes very fast to supply N and other re-cycled nutrients (Gopal et al., 2010). Thus, keeping the above facts in view the present investigation was undertaken to study the effect of integrated cultural and chemical weed management practices on yield, economics and nutrient uptake under zero-till direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.)

MATERIALS   AND  METHODS

An experiment was conducted in kharif seasons of 2013-4 at the Agricultural Research Farm, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi. The soil of the experimental field was Gangetic alluvial having sandy clay loam in texture with pH 7.51, respectively. It was moderately fertile, being low in available organic carbon (0.57 %) and available nitrogen (175.55 kg ha-1), and medium in available phosphorus (21.2 kg ha-1) and potassium (225.6 kg ha-1). The experiment was laid out in RBD design with three replication. The treatments comprised eight weed management methods viz., weedy, weed free, Sesbania co-culture + cutting and residue incorporation, Sesbania co-culture fb 2,4 D 0.5 kg ha-1at 35 DAS, pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 (pre-emergence) fb hand weeding at 30 DAS, pretilachlor 0.5 kg ha-1fb hand weeding at 30 DAS, pendimethalin 1.0 kg ha-1 (pre-emergence) fb bispyribac-Na 0.025 kg ha-1 (early post-emergence) at 18 DAS and pretilachlor 0.5 kg ha-1fb bispyribac-Na 0.025 kg ha-1 (early post-emergence) at 18 DAS. A uniform dose of 120 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 60 kg K2O ha-1a was applied to all the treatments. Half dose of N and full dose of P and K were applied as basal at sowing. Remaining dose of N was top-dressed in two equal splits at active tillering and panicle initiation stage. The sources of N, P and K were urea, di- ammonium phosphate and murate of potash, respectively. Seeds of paddy were placed in moist soil with the help of zero-til- drill at a spacing of 20 cm between rows. Rice variety ‘MTU-7029’ was sown at the rate of 30 kg ha-1during the last week of June. Sesbania was sown in between rows of rice at the rate of 20 kg ha-1. At 25 DAS, it was knock down by using 2, 4-D for brown manuring. The required quantity of pre-emergence and post-emergence herbicides were applied as per treatment with spray volume 600 l ha-1 using knap sack sprayer fitted with flat fan nozzle. Total weed population (m2) and their dry weight were recorded at 60 DAS under each treatment with the help of 0.25 m2 quadrate randomly from three places. Data on weed density and weed biomass were transformed using “X+0.5 for comparison of treatments. Growth parameters were recorded at 60 DAS, yield attributes and yield was recorded at the harvest of crop. Collected data was statistically analyzed as per standard procedure to draw a valid conclusion.

RESULTS   AND  DISCUSSION

Density and dry weight of weed

The weed population was significantly reduced by adoption of weed management treatments over weedy (Table 1). Among weed management practices, pre-emergence application of pendimethalin fb bispyribac recorded significantly the lowest density and dry weight of weeds over Sesbania co-culture + residue incorporation, Sesbania c-o-culture fb 2, 4-D and pretilachlor fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and it was at par with the application of pendimethalin fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and pretilachlor fb bispyribac, respectively. Pre- and post-emergent herbicides in sequential herbicide application were more effective in controlling initial as well as later flushes of weeds, respectively. This is the main reason of reducing weed density under sequential application of herbicides (Mahajan et al., 2009 and Gaurav et al., 2015). Pendimethalin have been reported to be effective against most of grassy weeds and up to some extant to other weeds also. Sesbania co-culture + cutting residue incorporation was not effective in reducing the population of grasses, sedges and broadleaf which were the dominant weed species in DSR, thus resulting in highest weed population over other weed management practices (Jabran et al., 2012).

Yield attributes and yield

Among the weed management treatment, application of pendimethalin fb bispyribac recorded significantly the highest number of  effective tillers m-1 (55.40), grain yield (4290 kg ha-1) and straw yield (5750 kg ha-1), biological yield  (10040 kg ha-1)  and harvest index (42.71 %) as compared to Sesbania co-culture + residue incorporation, Sesbania co-culture fb 2, 4-D and pretilachlor fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and it was at par with the application of pendimethalin fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and pretilachlor fb bispyribac, respectively. This result could be attributed due to lower density and dry weight of weeds under sequential herbicide application which reduces crop weed competition and consequently led to enhanced growth, development and yield of rice. None of the treatments were comparable to weed free in respect to yield and harvest index of rice. However, all the weed management treatment were significantly superior over weedy. These results are in accordance with findings of walia et al (2008).

Nutrient uptake by crop

The maximum uptake of NPK by crop varied significantly due to weed control practices. The maximum uptake of NPK by crop was recorded in weed free and minimum in weedy.   Among weed management practices, application of pendimethalin fb bispyribac recorded significantly the highest NPK uptake (105.31 kg ha-1), (84.22 kg ha-1) (90.39 kg ha-1) respectively, in comparison to Sesbania co-culture + residue incorporation, Sesbania co-culture fb 2, 4-D and pretilachlor fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and it was at par with the application of pendimethalin fb hand weeding at 30 DAS and pretilachlor fb bispyribac, respectively. None of the treatments were comparable to weed free in increasing total NPK uptake by crop. However, all the herbicidal treatment was significantly superior in increasing NPK uptake over weedy. This is owing to lower nutrient depletion by weeds under these treatments. These were in close conformity with the research findings of Prakash et al. (1995) and Brar and Bhullar (2013).

Nutrient depletion by weeds

Significantly the lowest NPK depletion by weeds was recorded with the application of pendimethalin fb bispyribac and pretilachlor fb bispyribac as compared to other weed management practices. The maximum NPK depletion by weeds was observed in weedy due to maximum weed growth and their dry weight. Among weed management treatment, the highest NPK depletion by weeds was recorded under Sesbania co-culture + cutting residue incorporation treatment. It was due to maximum total weed dry matter under the treatment as nutrient depletion is positively correlated with weed dry matter accumulation. Maity and Mukherjee (2011) and Brar and Bhullar (2013) also recorded similar findings.

Economics

A perusal of data on economic analysis of different weed management practices in direct seeded rice suggested that the maximum and minimum cost of cultivation and net returns were noted under weed free and weedy, respectively. The treatment pretilachlor + bispyribac recorded highest net returns ( 45586) followed by pendimethalin + bispyribac ( 45167). The benefit cost ratio was maximum with pretilachlor + bispyribac (2.7) followed by pendimethalin + bispyribac (2.6). Highest net returns among these treatments was primarily due to better plant stand as a result highest yield with low toxicity and effective weed control.

Table 1: Yield and economics of direct seeded rice as influenced by integrated weed management practices under zero-till condition

Treatment Effective tillers

 (No. m-1)

Grain yield

(kg ha-1)

Straw

Yield

(kg ha-1)

Biological yield

(kg ha-1)

Harvest index

(%)

Cost of cultivation (  ha-1) Net return

(ha-1)

B:C ratio
Weedy 42.40 1593.33 3340.00 4933.33 32.25 23698 7034 1.3
Weed free 60.00 4920.00 6650.00 11570.00 42.55 40198 43711 2.1
Sesbania co-culture + cutting residue incorporation at 35 DAS 48.70 3180.00 4600.00 7780.00 40.87 25098 30041 2.2
Sesbania co-culture fb 2,4 D 0.50 kg ha-1 at 35 DAS 48.80 3360.00 4723.33 8083.33 41.61 24563 33286 2.4
Pendimethalin  1 kgha-1fb hand weeding at 30 DAS 53.60 3888.27 5400.00 9288.27 41.92 27397 39350 2.4
 Pretilachlor  0.5 kg ha-1fb hand weeding at 30   DAS 52.40 3570.00 5050.00 8620.00 41.42 26838 34721 2.3
Pendimethalin  1  kg ha-1fb bispyribac  0.025  kg ha-1at 18 DAS
55.40 4290.00 5750.00 10040.00 42.71 27852 45167 2.6
Pretilachlor  0.5  kg ha-1fb bispyribac  0.5  kg ha-1 at 18 DAS 54.75 4280.00 5740.00 10020.00 42.67 27273 45586 2.7
SEm ± 1.62 158.01 231.64 328.25 1.17
C.D. (P=0.05) 4.73 462.34 677.76 960.44 3.43

 

 

Table 2: Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake (kg ha-1) by crop and associated weeds of direct seeded rice under zero-till condition.

Treatment Nitrogen uptake (kg ha-1) Phosphorus  uptake (kg ha-1) Potassium uptake (kg ha-1)
Crop at harvest Weed at 60 DAS Crop at harvest Weed at 60 DAS Crop atharvest Weed at 60 DAS
Weedy 41.06 5.97 19.71 4.73 46.07 6.10
Weed free 125.13 0.00 35.9 0.00 131.78 0.00
Sesbania co-culture + cutting residue incorporation at 35 DAS 67.96 2.43 20.26 1.73 69.01 2.10
Sesbania co-culture fb 2,4 D 0.50 kg ha-1 at 35 DAS 72.43 1.27 21.47 1.40 76.57 1.70
Pendimethalin 1  kgha-1fb hand weeding at 30 DAS 92.93 1.93 24.84 0.73 94.77 1.27
Pretilachlor  0.5  kgha-1fb hand weeding at 30 DAS 84.64 1.90 22.45 0.67 87.63 1.30
Pendimethalin1  kgha-1fb bispyribac 0.025  kgha-1at 18 DAS 105.31 1.48 28.22 0.53 107.39 1.13
Pretilachlor 0.5  kgha-1fb bispyribac 0.025  kgha-1at 18 DAS 103.82 1.63 27.05 0.57 104.15 1.97
SEm ± 3.0 0.05 2.64 0.03 2.11 0.03
C.D. (P=0.05) 9.01 0.15 8.66 0.09 8.29 0.11

 

References

  1. Anonymous, 2015. Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. 2015. Directorate of economics and statistics, department of agriculture and cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi.
  2. Brar, Singh, H. and Bhullar, M.S. 2013. Nutrient uptake by direct seeded rice and associated weeds as influenced by sowing date, variety and weed control. Indian J. Agric. Res., 47 (4): 353 – 358.
  3. Gaurav, Singh, M. K., Verma, S. K., Verma, V. K. and Tyagi, V. 2015. Integration of cultural and chemical methods for weed management in zero-till direct seeded rice. The Ecoscan, 9(1&2):381-384.
  4. Gopal, R., Jat, R. K., Malik, R. K., Kumar, V., Alam, M. M., Jat, M. L., Mazid, M. A., Saharawat, Y. S., Andrew, M. and Gupta, R. 2010. Direct dry seeded rice production technology and weed management in rice based systems, Technical Bulletin, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, New Delhi, India, p- 28.
  5. Gupta, R., Jat, M.L., Singh, S., Singh, V. P. and Sharma, R. K. 2006. Resource conservation technologies for rice production. Indian Farming, 56(7): 42-45.
  6. Jabran, K., Farooq, M., Hussain, M., Khan, E., Shahid, M. B. and Lee, D. J. 2012. Efficient weeds control with penoxsulam application ensures higher productivity and economic returns of direct seeded rice. Int. J.Agri. Biology, 14(6): 901-907.
  7. Kumar, J., Singh, D., Puniya, R. and Pandey, P. C. 2010. Effect of weed management practices on nutrient uptake by direct seeded rice. Oryza, 47:291-94.
  8. Mahajan, G., Chauhan, B. S. and Johnson, D. E. 2009. Weed management in aerobic rice in north western Indo-Gangetic Plains. J. Crop Imp., 23(4): 366-382.
  9. Maity, Kumar, S. and Mukherjee, P. K. 2011. Effect of brown manuring on grain yield and nutrient use efficiency in dry direct seeded kharif rice. Ind. J. Weed Sci., 42(1&2): 61-66.
  10. Prakash, P., Nanjappa, H. V. and Ramachanrdappa, B. K. 1995. Chemical weed control in direct seeded puddled rice. Crop Res., 9(2):197-202.
  11. Raj, S. K., Jose, N., Mathew, R. and Kumary. L. S. 2013. Chemical management of non-grassy weeds in direct-seeded rice. Ind. J. Weed Sci., 45(3): 159-162.
  12. Singh, R., Pal, R., Singh, T., Singh, A. P., Yadav, S. and Singh, J. 2014. Management of weeds in direct-seeded rice by bispyribac-sodium. Ind. J. Weed Sci., 46(2): 126-128.
  13. Walia, U. S., Bhullar, M. S., Nayyar, S. and Walia, S. S. 2008. Control of complex weed flora of dry-seeded rice with pre- and post-emergence herbicides. Ind. J. Weed Sci., 40: 161- 164.
  14. Walia, U. S., Walia, S. S., Sidhu, A. S. and Nayyar, S. 2012. Bioefficacy of pre- and post-emergence herbicides in direct-seeded rice in Punjab. Ind. J. Weed Sci., 44(1): 30-33.

 

Open Access

Insert author here

1Author address
2Author address
J Pure Appl Microbiol. 2016;10(4):xx-xx
https://doi.org/10.22207/JPAM.10.4.00 | © The Author(s). 2016
Received: 01/03/2016 | Accepted: 01/05/2016 | Published: 31/12/2016
Abstract

Abstract here

Keywords

Insert Key words here

Introduction

Insert Introduction here

Materials and Methods

Insert Material & Method here

Blue colour

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Insert Results & Discussion here

Blue colour

CONCLUSION

Insert Conclusion here

Blue colour

Declarations

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


CONFLICT OF INTEREST


AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTION

FUNDING

ETHICS STATEMENT

AVAILABILITY OF DATA

References

Insert Reference here

Article Metrics

Article View: 0

Share This Article

© The Author(s) 2016. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License which permits unrestricted use, sharing, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.