This site uses cookies for learning about our traffic, we store no personal details. ACCEPT COOKIES DECLINE COOKIES What are cookies?
univerge site banner
Original Article | Open Access | Int. J. Agric. Vet. Sci, 2022; 4(1), 01-12 | doi: 10.34104/ijavs.022.01012

Determination of Herbicide (Gramoxone 20 Ls) for Weed Control as Pre-sowing Application on Wheat

Md Ahsan Ali Mail Img ,
Golam Faruk Mail Img ,
Rabiul Islam Mail Img ,
Panjarul Haque Mail Img ,
Mohammad Afzal Hossain* Mail Img Orcid Img ,
Md Abdul Momin Mail Img

Abstract

During two successive rabi seasons 2019-20 and 2020-21, a field experiment was undertaken at the Regional Station of Bangladesh Wheat and Maize Research Institute (BWMRI), Gazipur to establish the optimum amount of herbicide application (Gramoxone) before sowing wheat under late-planted conditions. Four optimum doses of application were applied as pre-emergence. Herbicide (Gramoxone) spraying at 6 liter/ha for 5 days before sowing provided the best weed control. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with 3 replications. The major weeds in the experimental plot such as Biskatali (Polygonium hydropiper), Chapra (Elusine indica), Bathua (Chenopodium album), Banpalong (Sanchus arvensis) and Banmasure (Vicia sativa) were found. Weed count was 92 m2 and 89 m2 in 2019-20 and 2020-20 respectively, when herbicide (Gramoxone) was sprayed @ 12 liter/ha at 5 days before sowing (DBS). Highest weed monitoring efficiency (78%) in T2=herbicide (Gramoxone) treatment @ 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS. Grain yield and wheat biological yield were statistically diverse, while the other metrics were insignificant. When herbicide (Gramoxone) was treated at 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS, a numerically greater average grain yield (2.57 t/ha) was obtained. The control plot produced a numerically lower average grain yield (1.56 t/ha). When herbicide (Gramoxone) was administered at 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS, the maximum benefit-cost ratio (BCR) was 1.30 which is the best method for weed management prior to wheat application.

INTRODUCTION

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is a leading cereal crop that is widely farmed almost the world; in Bangladesh, it is the second most important cereal crop after rice. Wheat output and area are expanding in Bangladesh due to farmers growing interest in the crop, a shift away from boro rice (dry season) agriculture, and changes in consumer habits (Hossain and Silva, 2013). Wheats lower production costs and less variable prices, compared to irrigation-dependent boro rice, are encouraging farmers to plant additional wheat crops on their property. Despite the fact that boro rice is the main crop during the dry season. The farming of boro rice is getting less viable (Ahmed et al., 2011). Farmers in Bangladesh typically pump off large volumes of groundwater for boro rice farming, resulting in de-creasing groundwater tables, which is fitting a great matter in the Barind tract (north-west) and the exalted Ganges River Floodplains (south-west) areas (Shamsudduha et al., 2009). 

Wheat is one of the finest Possibilities for replacing boro rice in Bangladeshs medium-high to high land. Depending on soil types, cultivars used, sowing time, management strategies, and weather, wheat crops require 1-3 irrigations for successful crop growth and output. Wheat yield is severely influenced by environmental and management conditions, accounting for up to 77 % of the variation in its yield potential (Joshi et al., 2007; Mahmood et al., 2012; Usman and Khan, 2009). Uncontrolled weeds and pathogens, in particular in South Asia, have been recognized as key biotic reasons for low wheat yields (Waddington et al., 2010). Plant disease is a rare occurrence in wheat production, although weeds are a common issue. Wheat yield de-creases of 48-52% were observed (Khan and Haq, 2002), 20-40% (Mishra, 1997), 40-50% (Ranjit, 2002), and 29-47% (Khan and Haq, 2002; Mamun and Salim, 1989). Though, the amount of production loss caused by weeds is highly dependent on the cultivar utilized, weed demography consistence and other factors like weed species types, agricultural and weed administration practices, (Ahmed et al., 2014). Weeds degrade the quality and bazaar standard of wheat grain, beside facilitate the expansion of illnesses by offering a safe haven for pests as an alternate host. For a result, wheat weed monitoring is essential for improving output and quality. Weed monitoring in wheat is frequently done using physical, mechanical, and chemical methods. In wealthier countries, herbicide-based weed control is ubiquitous, whereas hand weeding is still practiced in several developing countries in South Asia (Bangla-desh, Nepal, and India). Weed competition does not impact wheat crop yields if hand weeding is conducted at suitable periods (Hossain et al., 2009; (Yousif and Mohamed, 2022; Safdar et al., 2011). 

In practice, however, crop lands are rarely fully weeded manually because it is difficult and time-consuming. Daily paying farmers are not always available during the important weeding time, which is typically completed late, resulting in significant output losses. For improving the economic efficacy of weed management, the captious period of weed administration is tight. The captious period of weed administration gives an indication of when weeding should be done and for how long. This could collaboration with post-emergence herbicide arrangement, besides mechanical and human weeding. The duration of the key times of weed administration is affected by several parameters such as weed emergence time (Wilson and Westra, 1991), soil dampness, soil heat (Mclachlan et al., 1993), and harvest-weed mix (Swinton et al., 1994). Herbicides are the most cost-effective and expert weed administration agents, and their conduct in agriculture is rapidly rising to combat weeds in different crops, like wheat. Herbicides are utilized on 57 percent of wheat land in India (Sharma and Singh, 2010), 63 percent in Pakistan (Fahad et al., 2013), 5-10 percent in Nepal (Reynolds et al., 2008). Herbicides are rarely conducted by cultivator in Bangladesh to depress weeds in wheat fields; nevertheless, one common hand extirpator at 15-25 days after wheat sowing (DAS) is usual. Herbicide use to depress weeds in wheat is probably to rise in the near future due to current trends in agricultural labor shortages. Chemical weed administration is widely initiated in numerous wheat-growing countries, although it is stand in the experimental stage in Bangladesh. Carfentrazone ethyl  (afenite) and 2,4-D amine are the herbicides of choice in wheat, according to earlier research (Hossain et al., 2009; Hossain et al., 2010; Mustari et al., 2014). 

This is post emergence herbicide but no recommended pre emergence herbicide in Bangladesh. Broadleaf weeds are controlled by post-emergence herbicides, and broadleaf weeds plants are the most common tares in wheat crops in Bangladesh, according to earlier studies (Hossain et al., 2010; Kamrozzaman et al., 2015). But dont have any research about the pre herbicide for depress of weeds to get more yields in Bangladesh. Dicot weeds plants are a stubborn and productive weed that can be hard to monitoring with human or machine weeding. Only pre-emergence herbicides are effective in opposition to this type of weed. Pre-emergence herbicides, such as Gramoxone (Paraquet), are the sole feasible choice for regulating weeds plants of wheat in Bangladesh. To boost wheat yield, an exam was done to determine the efficacy and selectivity of pre-herbicide application for weed depress, taking into account decrease owing to weed infestation, the high cost of manual labor, and the toxic effects of narrow and broad spectrum herbicides.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experiment location and Weather condition

During the rabi season An experiment was done at the Regional Station of the Bangladesh Wheat and Maize Research Institute (BWMRI), Gazipur (Latitude 23. 10”N. longitude 90.42”E), Bangladesh, in the years 2019-20 and 2020-21. (From December 26 to March 25 in 2019-2020, and from December 26 to March 25 in 2020-2021). The soil type of the Agro-Ecological Zone is silky soil loam with a ph of 6.1 (AEZ, 28). During the indicated time periods, the humidity ranged from 65% to 92 percent. We discovered that the aver-age temperature extent from 14 to 220 degrees Celsius in January, November 2019 precipitation in the research region was around 23mm, and January 2mm, while March 2020 precipitation was around 1mm and April 4mm. The rainfall in March 2019 was 10mm and April 85mm, while the rainfall in November 2020 was 23mm and January 1mm. Both years, in November have highest relative humidity. The insignificant and maximum levels of sunlight occurred in January and April in two years.

Experiment Design

During the 2019-20 and 2020-21 Rabi seasons, researchers used (RCBD) design (randomized complete block design) with five treatments and three replications to perform their study. Plant to plant spacing in the main field is 1 inch, and line to line spacing is 20 cm. The experiment plot is 5m x 4m in size. BARI Gom 30 generated stable grain yields under watered normal and late planted conditions.

Experiment procedure

For experiment, BARI Gom 30 (seed rate 120 kg/ha) was employed as the tested variety. Cow dung (5 ton/ha) and NPKSZB (230-150-100-110-20-10 Kg/ha) were applied to fertilize the crop. When the land was being prepared, cow dung was applied. At the last cultivation of land preparation, two-thirds of N was applied, along with other chemical fertilizer.  At 17-21 days after sowing, i.e. CRI (crown root initiation) stage after irrigation, the remaining one-third of N was used as a top dressing. Weed specimen were culled at 25 and 50 DAE from four randomly selected locations using a 1m×1m quadrate from every plot. The number of weeds, their green weight, and their oven dry weight were all recorded. A weed sample were oven dried at 700c at 72 hour and till the weight was fixed. Relative weed density were counted by number of specific weed variety divided by total number of weed multiplied by hundred (A/B X 100) where (A=specific number of weed, B=total number of weed), WCE (weeds control efficiency) was calculated according to following formula WCE%=(A-B)/AX100, where A= dry weight of weeds in no weeding plot and B =dry weight of weeds in treated plots. On March 25, 2020 and 2021 the crops were harvested.

Grain yield and contributing character were recorded and statistically assessed using statistic-10 software. The LSD value test was used to modify the mean values at a 5% level of significance.

Experiment treatments

Five treatment T1= Gramoxone application @ 3 liter/ ha at 5 days before sowing (DBS), T2=Gramoxone application @ 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS, T3= Gramoxone application @ 9 liter/ha at 5 DBS, T4= Gramoxone application @ 12 liter/ha at 5 DBS, and T5= No Gramoxone application (Control)

Experiment sail types

Soil specimens were obtained from the plots experimental field area and evaluated for physiochemical features in the physio-chemical laboratory at the beginning of the experiment. The soil in the plots experiment field was somewhat acidic (ph 6.3). Low organic matter position (5 g kg soil). Phosphorus (4.5 g kg soil) total nitrogen (4.5 g kg soil) and Potassium (7mg kg soil)

Weather informations of the experimental area 

All meteorological data was attained from the BARI campuss weather observation center in Gazipur. Weekly mean maximum, minimum air temperature, rainfall, sunlight hour, and humidity were all comprised in the data (Fig. 1).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Weed flora

Weed species, number of weeds/m2, and weed con-sistence (%) were calculated using varied herbicide doses and application times (Table 1). At the regional wheat research center field, Bathua (Chenopodium album), Biskatali (Polygonium hydropiper), Maloncha (Alternanthera phetoxeroides), Banpalong (Sonchus arvensis), chapra (Elusin indica) and Banmasur (Vicia sativa) were discovered to be the greater simple domi-nant weeds. However, we noticed that Biskatali (Poly-gonium hydropiper) was the most widespread weed, and that none of the treatments were effective in con-trolling it. Paraquet herbicide was shown to kill succ-essfully after a week, however after 25-30 days of appeal; all weeds reappeared with little growth. The large amount of Biskatali weed in all treatments may be observed in the graph. On the other hand, Paraquets inability to kill Biskatali could be due to a variety of variables that I am unaware of. The experiments out-comes in terms of weed species, number of weeds per m2, and weed density are listed below (after herbicide application) (Table 2). Herbicidal treatments consis-tently slowed the improvement of many weeds. In plots where Gramoxone was fruitful at 12 liter/ha at 5 DBS, weed density (125m2 and 120m2) was obtained at 25 and 50 DAS in 2019-20 and (113m2 and 109m2 in 2020-21 respectively. Weed density (140 m2 and 131 m2) at 25 and 50 DAS in 2019-20 and (135m2 and 117m2) in 2020-21 year respectively, followed by Gra-moxone application @ 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS. At 25 and 50 DAS, the maximum tares consistence was (560 m2 and 504 m2) in 2019-20 and (538m2 and 422m2) in 2020-21 when no Gramoxone was fruitful as a control. 9 liter/ha at 5 DBS, weed density (203m2 and 196m2) was obtained at 25 and 50 DAS in 2019-20 and (168m2 and 163m2 in 2020-21. These findings showed that Gramoxone treatment at 6 litre/hectare at 5 DBS is most effective method for weed monitoring in wheat fields. The quantity of weeds per specified area is the most effective parameter for determining the effects of interventions on weed control. More nutrients deg-raded from the soil as a result of increased weed infes-tation in the plot and greater competition with crop plants.

Weed dry weight and weed control efficiency (%) (WCE)

In this experiment, several doses and specific times of gramoxone herbicidal treatment were applied to see how effective they were at controlling weeds. The control plots have highest weed consistence and infestation. In treated plot, the appeal of 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS was most cost-effective. The application of gra-moxone herbicide at 6 liter/ha at 5 DBS resulted in fewer weed and weed biological yield, beside highest weed control efficiency (78%) of all experiment treat-ments (Table 2). Weed heights dry weight were 146g/ m2 at 25 DAE and 141g/m2 at 50 DAE in the control plot in 2019-20 year and 145g/m2 at 25 DAE and 140g/m2 at 50 DAE in 2020-21year. Treatment T4 had lowest dry weed weight, with 23 g/m2 at 25 DAE and 23 g/m2 at 50 DAE and 28 g/m2 at 25 DAE and 27 g/m2 at 50 DAE. Followed by treatments T3 T2, and T1 in Table 2. Weed control efficiency (WCE) was great when the proper amount of herbicide was sprayed at the right time. Different pesticide doses had a dif-ference in weed control efficiency (WCE).Overall situ-ation we can say weeds were controlled in the plot where Gramoxone application @ 6 liter/ha was used at 5 DBS, followed by treatment = T3Gramoxone appli-cation @ 9 liter/ha at 5 DBS, T4= Gramoxone appli-cation @ 12 liter/ha at 5 DBS, and T1= Gramoxone application @ 3 liter/ha at 5 days before sowing (DBS), respectively at 25 and 50 DAE. It was observed that Gramoxone had better results in position of WEC (%) in the range of 76-78 at what time compared to control plots, which may be attributable to herbicide efficacy. In their study, Sharma and Sing, (2012) found that spraying Gramoxone Inteon provided 100% control efficacy at what time compared to different herbicide doses. Gramoxone treatment eliminated more than 80% of weeds. In this experiment, we found that Gra-moxone spraying at 3 liter/ha 5 days before sowing had a minimum weed monitoring ability of 76% (DBS). We also found that non-selective herbicides (Gramox-one 6 litre/ha at 5 DBS) were becoming more success-ful and significant for weed regulation in the countrys wheat production.

Wheat Yield and Yield contributing characters of wheat

Except for wheat grain yield and biological yield, other parameters such as plant population/m2, Heading, anthesis (days), plant height, spike/m2spike length, maturity (date), spike let/spike, 1000 grain weight, and harvest index of wheat did not show any significant differences when influenced by different doses and specific times of herbicide application presented in the study (Table 3)

Plant population/m2

Different weed monitoring attitude concentrations app-lied prior to sowing had little effect on wheat germin-ation and development. At the CRI (Crown Root Initi-ation) stage, the sprayed herbicide has no substantial actuality on crop development (Table 3). In the treat-ment t4, the minimum value of PP (55 m2 day-1) was counted in 2019-20 and (51 m2 day-1) in 2020-21. Treatment t1 and t3 were same (58 m2 and 51 m2) in both years. 

Effective treatment in this experiment was used at a rate of 6 litre/hectare at 5 DBS (64 m2 day-1 and 59m2 day-1) in two years. Maximum plant population/m2 (65 m2 and 60 m2) was observed in treatment T5 (Control) in two years, which may be cause to no Gramoxone application, whereas minimum plant population/m2 (55 m2 and 51 m2) was observed in T4 treatment in two years (though those results were not statistically dif-ferent), which may be cause to the harmful effect be-side aerial intentness of maximum doses of Gramo-xone application. (Khaliq et al., 2014) came to similar conclusions. He found that varying herbicide concen-trations produced in a lower plant population than an untreated wheat control plot.

Plant heading

The actuality of various weed control methods on wheat enhancement and improvement were good. The crop growth rates of the herbicide-treated plants dif-fered at the heading stage. In the case of Gramoxone application at 6 litres/ha, at 5 days before sowing (DBS) the maximum value of heading (54 day) was recorded (Table 3). Control plots in two years obt-ained the lowest plant heading (50 day-1) within her-bicide conducts. Treatment t1 was the same (51 day-1) in two years. Gramoxone application at @ 9 and 12 litre/ha, at 5 days before sowing (DBS) in treated plot, was closely followed by (51day-1). Due to high tem-perature and herbicide stress on days to heading and maturity, early heading and shorter crop duration were observed (Ray et al., 2022; Mason et al., 2010).

Plant Anthesis

The therapy groups did not disagree in period of days to anthesis (Table 3) Plant anthesis was lowest. In con-trolplots (54 day) in two years. The largest value of heading (57 day) was reported in 2020-21 in the event of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS). In 2020-21, Gramoxone application at 9 and 12 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS) in trea-ted plots, was closely followed by (56 day-1). Physio-logy of days to wheat cultivar displays anthesis vari-ance because to various inheritance patterns amongst wheat (Shahzad et al., 2007).

Plant height

Plant height, number of spikes, spike length, spikelet/ spike, Anthesis, maturity, and biological yield are all direct growth regulators of cereal crop plant growth. In our study we observed maximum plant tallness was (78cm) in the treatment T2 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS) (Table 3). Plant height could be a precise type of weed grip by crops at the correct moment in air, space, light, mois-ture, and nutrients (Ahmed et al., 1995). Treatment T1 (75cm and 76cm) were observed in 2019-20 and 2020-21. Subsequently followed by treatment T3 (77cm), treatment T4 (75cm) and Treatment T1 (75cm) in 2019-20. Lowest plant height (74cm) in 2019-20 and (75cm) in 2020-21 was counted in the monitoring plots. Her-bicide has a considerable preclusive effect wheat plant height, according to (Cheem & Akhter, 2005), (Quim-by and Nalewaja, (1966), and (Bibi et al., 2008).

Spike/m2

We observed in both years of study the highest spike/m2 (291) in 2020-21 and (268) in 2019-20 was observed in treatment T2 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS) (Table 3). Sub- sequently followed by treatment T1 (230, 242), T3 (220, 241) and T4 (205, 223) in 2019-20 and 2020-21 years. The lowest spike/m2 (111) in both years was found in control plots. The increased number of spikes observed in the study could be linked to excellent weed moni-toring, which allows for more translocation and more diversified photosynthetic activities due to less weed competition. (Malik et al., 2009) and (Khan et al., 2009) both use the same discourse (2000)

Length/spike

In the experiment we found that the maximum spike length (12cm) in two years was observed in treatment T1 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days be-fore sowing (DBS) (Table 3). Followed by treat-ment T3 (11cm) in 2020-21 and (10cm) in 2019-20, T4 (10cm) in two years and T1 (9cm) in 2020-21 and (8cm) in 2019-20. The lowest spike length (8cm) in two years was observed in the conduct of control plots. In the monitoring plots, more competition with weeds plants gets less light, water, oxygen, CO2 from other as result short spike length. Low weed antagonism in treated fields allows plants to acquire more air, light, space, moisture, and nutrients, which promotes healthy plant development and increases spike length, as pro-ven by (Ahmad et al.,1989; Verma and Kumar, 1986), and (Bhan, 1987) respectively.

Plants maturity

We observed the study (Table 3) the highest maturity (87 and 86days) in two years was founded in treatment T2 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS). Followed by treatment T3 (85 days) in both years, T1 (83 days) in 2020-21 and (86 days) in 2019-20 years & T4 (82 days) in 2019-20 and (83 days) in 2020-21 years. The lowest maturity (80 days) was observed in control plots in two years. In control plots more weeds competition gets less nutria-tional elements become wheat sick and get early matu-rity. (Fisher, 1990) stated that in late seeded condi-tions, the crop plants expedite growing development, minimize life cycle and yield from sowing to harvest by imposing high temperatures and high concentrated herbicides.

Spikelets/spike

In the experiment we founded the highest spikelet (12) in 2019-20 and (13) in 2020-21 was observed in the conduct T2 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS) (Table 3). May be good kind of weeds control by appropriate concentration of herbicide. Followed by treatment T3 and T1 (10) in 2019-20 and (11) in 2020-21years. T4 (10) in 2020-21 and (9) in 2019-20. The lowest spikelet (9) in 2020-21 and (8) in 2019-20 was observed in monitoring plots. Crop weed competition was superior in unwedded plot, result in production of smallest number of spikelets/ spike-1 (Parvez et al., 2013) reported a similar finding for T. aman rice.

Grains/spike

The maximum figure of grains/spike (47) in 2020-21and (46) in 2019-20 was gained from treatment T2 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS) (Table 3). The lowest grains/spike (28) in 2020-21 and (27) in 2019-20 was produce in treat-ment T5 of control plots. Followed by subsequently treatment T3 (39) in two years, treatment T4 (35) in 2020-21 and (37) in 2019-20, treatment T1 (31) in 2020-21 and (32) in 2019-20. The appearance of more nutrients owing to tares population decrease may cal-culation for the significantly higher number of grains/ spike in different conducts likened to weedy control (Jarwar et al., 1999).

1000-grain weight (g)

Different concentration dose of weeds control influ-enced 1000-grain weight of wheat. The highest 1000-grain weight (48) in 2020-21 and (47) in 2019-20 was obtained from treatment T2 of Gramoxone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS) (Table 3). The lowest 1000-grain weight (28) in 2020-21 and (30) in 2019-20 was gained from control plots those co-operated less than other treatment. Followed by treat-ment T1 (41) in 2020-21 and (40) in 2019-20, T3 (40) in two years, T4 (39) in 2020-21 and (38) in 2019-20. Weed monitoring at the right time and with the right treatment might have given a healthy environment for the grain, out coming in a higher 1000-grain weight. (Kumari and Prasad, 2003) have also reported com-parable findings.

Grain yield (t/ha)

Over the research parts, all of the conducts signify-cantly growned wheat grain yield (Table 3). The maximum grain yield (2.96 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (2.19) in 2019-20 was obtain from treatment T2 of Gramo-xone application at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS). Followed by treatment T3 (2.23 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (2.08 t/ha) in 2019-20, treatment T4 (2.10 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (2.00 t/ha) and treatment T1 (1.99 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (2.01 t/ha) in 2019-20. The abominable grain output (1.68 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (1.44 t/ha) in 2019-20. Owing to the maximum number of effective tillers, numbers of spikelets spike, number of filled grains/spike, and 1000-corn weight, treatment T2 yiel-ded the highest grain production. (Rahman, 1985), (Mamun and Salim, 1989; Phogat et al., 1991; Malik et al., 1992). Higher grain yields in herbicide-treated plots can be owing to more feasible weed monitoring (Abbas et al., 2009; Marwat et al., 2005; Tunio et al., 2004; Hassan et al., 2004) all used the same discourse (2003).

Biological yield (t/ha)

Data from (Table 3) displayed that highest biological yield (9.29 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (9.18 t/ha) in 2019-20 was obtained from treatment T2 of Gramoxone appli-cation at 6 litre/ha, 5 days before sowing (DBS).This parameters were statistically significant than others. Followed by T3 (8.04 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (8.43 t/ha) in 2019-20, T4 (7.07 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (7.51 t/ha) in 2019-20, T1 (6.24 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (6.78 t/ha) in 2019-20. The lowest biological yield (3.96 t/ha) in 2020-21 and (3.58 t/ha) in 2019-20 was documented in control plots due to without herbicide, high infestation of weeds, deficiency of nutritional element, less ger-mination and finally consequence in minor biological to other treatment. Herbicide improved wheat biologi-cal yield, according to (Malik et al., 2009; Abbas et al., 2009; Marwat et al., 2008; Roslon and Fogelfors, 2003).

Harvest index (%)

The treatment T5 had the maximum harvest index (42%). T3 had the abominable harvest index (27%) of all the conducts (Table 3). (Salek, 2014) published an anti-research finding, stating that weed regulation stra-tegies had the maximum harvest index when likened to unwedded condition.

Economic analysis

An economic analysis was carried out. Land prepar-ation, labor, seed, fertilizer, and irrigation expenditures were mentioned to as fixed costs since they were cor-relative completely all dispositions. The prices of urea, triple super phosphate (TSP), murate of patash (MoP), gypsum, Born, and zinc sulfate were all considered variable costs. Farm gate prices of the product were profit from farmers and local market locations to com-pute gross return, net return, and benefit cost ratio (BCR). The remainder of the managements received the equivalent conduct. Total cost was calculated by adding fixed and variable costs together (Total cost= Fixed cost + Variable cost). The gross return was cal-culated founded on the farm gate selling price of main product. By dividing the gross return by the total price, the BCR was computed. The data (Table 4) clearly show that varied doses of Gramoxone application treatments altered the net return from wheat to an important degree. T4 (Tk. 42200/ha), followed by T3 (Tk. 41000/ha), had maximum production cost. Treat-ment T2 yielded the highest gross return of (Tk. 51400/ ha), followed by T3 (Tk. 42000/ha). The maximum benefit cost ratio (BCR) for T2 treatment was (1.30), followed by T1 treatment (1.03). T5 therapy yielded the abominable BCR (0.83) (Control).

The best treatment in position of economic returns and BCR for reducing weeds and increasing wheat pro-duction is Gramoxone application @ 6liter/ha at 5 DBS, according to this trial.

CONCLUSION

The farmer prefers to employ herbicide as a pre-sow-ing application of Gramoxone for weed management. This method offers a convenient value for weed moni-toring. Days to plant heading, maturity, shorter crop duration, promotes healthy plant development, increa-ses spike length, increase spikelets/spike, significantly higher number of grains/ spike, higher 1000-grain weight, higher grain yield and improved biological yield were found to have some good benefits. Accor-ding to the findings of the experiment, applying Gra-moxone at a rate of 6 liters per hectare 5 days before sowing may be appropriate for weed control and eco-nomic return in late-sown wheat in agriculture.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We are very much grateful to the authority of Regional Station (RS), BWMRI, Gazipur, Bangladesh, for their efforts in conducting the experiment, like financial support given by RSs Chief Scientific Officer.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

This research was carried out because the appropriate amount and days of Gramoxone would be used in wheat fields in Bangladesh for weed control.

Article References:

  1. Abbas., Ali. G., Abbas. M., Aslam, and Akram, Z. M., (2009). Impact of different herbicides on broadleaf weeds and yield of wheat. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Re., 15, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2017/30.4.346.355   
  2. Ahmed S, Chauhan B.S., (2014). Performance of different herbicides in dry-seeded rice in Bangla-desh. World. J. 729418. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/729418  
  3. Ahmed. S., Alam M.M., et al., (2011). Rice production and profitability as influenced by integrated crop and resources management. Eco-frie. Agri. J. 11,720-725. https://www.academia.edu/36003796  
  4. Bhan, V. M., (1987). Effect of methods of application of Isoproturon on wheat yield. In: Proc. Pak-Indo-Us Weed Control Workshop cum 1st annals Conference Pakistan Society Islamabad. NARC. Weed Sci. P: 80–6. 
  5. Bibi. S,. Hasan. G. and Khan N. M., (2008). Effect of herbicides and wheat population on control of weeds in wheat. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res., 14, 111-120. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2013.46152  
  6. Cheema. M. S., Akhter. M., (2005). Efficacy of different post emergence herbicides and their application methods in controlling weeds in wheat. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res. 11, 23-29.
  7. Fahad S., Rahman A., et al., (2013). Comparative efficacy of different herbicides for weed management and yield attributes in wheat. Amer. J. Pol. Sci. 4, 1241-1245.
  8. Hassan. G. B., Faiz. K. B., Marwat and. Khan M., (2003). Effects of planting method and tank mixed Herbicides on controlling grassy and broad leaf weeds and their effect on wheat cv Fakhr-e-Sarhad. Pakistan. J. Weed. Sci. Res., 9, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2013.46159 
  9. Hossain. A., Malaker P.K., et al., (2010). Efficacy and economics of herbicides against narrow and broad-leaved weeds of wheat. Ban. J. Weed. Sci., 1(1), 71-79.
  10. Hossain A., Silva J.A.T.D., (2013). Wheat production in Bangladesh: its future in the light of global warming. AoB Plants. 5, pls 042. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/pls042  
  11. Hossain M. I, Islam A. T. M. R., et al., (2009). Effect of newly developed herbicides on the growth and yield of wheat. Int. J. Sus. Crop. Prod. 4, 1-4.
  12. Hossain, A. Chodhuray, M. A. S. & Sarker, M. A. Z. (2010). Efficacy and Economics of herbicide against narrow broad-leaved weeds of wheat. Ban. Weed. Sci., 1(1), 282-285. https://www.academia.edu/56319683  
  13. Jarwar. A. D., Tunio. S. D., and Kaisrani. M. A. (1999). Efficasy of different weedicides in con-trolling weeds of wheat. Pak. J.Agri. Agri. Eng. Vat.Sci., 15, 17-20. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2013.46152  
  14. Joshi A. K., Mishra. B., Singh. R. P. (2007). Wheat improvement in India: present status, emerging challenges & future prospects. Euphytica, 157(3), 431–446.
  15. Kamrozzaman. M.M., Khan. M.A.H., Ahmed. S., Ruhul. A.F.M.Q. (2015). Effect of herbicide in controlling broad leaf and sedge weeds in wheat (T. aestivum L.). Agricultural, 13(2), 54-61. https://doi.org/10.3329/agric.v13i2.26588  
  16. Khali Abdul., Matloob Amar., et al., (2014). Weed growth, herbicide efficacy indices, crop growth, and yield of wheat are modified by herbicide and cultivar interaction. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Re., 20(1), 91-109. https://www.academia.edu/7683738   
  17. Khan. M., Haq. N. (2002). Wheat crop yield loss assessment due to weeds. Sarhad. J. Agri. 18, 449-453.
  18. Khan. A., M. Rahim., & Khan. M., (2000). Performance of mid duration soybean as affected by various pre-emergence herbicides. Pak. J. Bio. Sci. 3(4), 658-659. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2000.658.659   
  19. Kumari, N. & Prasad, K., (2003). Effect of cropping system and weed management on production potential and economics of wheat based intercropping system. J. Res, Bir. Agri. Uni., 15, 9-12.
  20. Mahmood. A., Iqbal. J., Ashraf. M. (2012). Comparative efficacy of post emergence herbicides against broad leaved weeds in wheat (T. Aestivum L.) under rice-wheat cropping system. J. Agri. Res. 50, 71-78. https://apply.jar.punjab.gov.pk/upload/1374743344_94_545__1p1%287%29.pdf  
  21. Malik. A. U., H. A. Baksh., et al., (2009). De-monstration and evaluation of effect of weedi-cides on broad leaved weeds on wheat yield. J. Anim. Pl. Sci, 19,193-196. http://www.thejaps.org.pk/  
  22. Malik, R.K., Panwar, R.S. & Malik, R.S., (1992). Chemical control of broad leaf and grassy weeds in wheat. Ind. J. Agro. 37(2), 324–326.
  23. Mamun, A. A. and Salim M. (1989). Evaluation of Isoproturon, selective herbicides, for weed control in Wheat. Ban. J. Agri. Sci., 16, 93-99. https://agron.bau.edu.bd/profile/AGRON1004  
  24. Marwat. K. B., Saeed. M., Gul. B and Noor. S. (2005). Chemical weed management in wheat at higher altitudes-i, Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res., 11(1-2), 1-6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292712209  
  25. Marwat. K. B. B., Gul, M., Saeed. and Hussain. Z. (2005). Efficacy of different herbicides for controlling weeds in onion in higher altitudes. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res. 11, 61-68.
  26. Mason. R. E., Pacheco A., et al., (2010). QTL associated with heat susceptibility index in wheat (T. aestivum L.) under short-term reproductive stage heat stress. Euphyt. 174, 423-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-011-0349-6  
  27. McLachlan. S.M., Swanton. C. J. Weise. S.F. (1993). Effect of temperature and irradiance on the rate of leaf appearance (RLA) in redroot pig-weed (A. retroflexus L.). Weed Sci. 37, 84-92.
  28. Mishra. J. S. (1997). Critical period of weed competition and losses due to weeds in major field crops. Far. Parlia., 23, 19-20.
  29. Mustari. S., Bari. M. N., Islam. M. R., Karim. A. J. M. S., (2014). Evaluation of selected herbicides on weed control efficiency and yield of wheat. J. Sci. Found., 12, 27-33. https://doi.org/10.5455/faa.34774    
  30. Parvez. M. S., Salam. M. A., and Begum. M. (2013). Effect of cultivar and weeding regime on the performance of transplant aman rice. Int. J. Agri and Crop. Sci., 6(11), 654–666. 
  31. Phogat. B. S., Bhan. U. M. and Balbir. S. (1991). Efficacy of some pre-emergence herbicides alone or in combinations for weed control in wheat. Ind. J. Agro., 36 (1), 102–103. 
  32. Quimby. P. C., J D Nalewaja. J. D., (1966). Effect of dicamba on wheat and wild buckwheat at various stages of development. Weeds. 14(3), 229-232.
  33. Rahman. M. M. (1985). Duration of weed competition on the performance of wheat. An M. Sc (Ag.) Thesis. Department of Agronomy, Bangla-desh Agricultural University. pp. 24–26. 
  34. Ranjit. J. D., (2002). Response of wheat weeds to straw mulch in mid plants. Proceedings of International Seminar on Mountains- Kathman-du, March 6-8. pp. 372-377.
  35. Ray BP, Nath UK, and Azad MAK. (2022). Genetic analysis of submergence tolerance rice genotypes by introgression of Sub1 QTL to In-dica HYV through breeding populations (F2) with marker assay. Am. J. Pure Appl. Sci., 4(1), 10-21. https://doi.org/10.34104/ajpab.022.010021   
  36. Reynolds. M. P., Pietragalla. J., Braun. H. J., (2008). International symposium on wheat yield potential: challenges to international wheat breeding. CIMMYT, Mexico. p. 197. https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=QY2016800247   
  37. Roslon. E., Fogelfors. H., (2003). Crop & Weed Growth in a Sequence of Spring Barley and Winter Wheat Crops Established Together from a Sprinter Sowing (Relay Cropping). J. Agro & Crop. Sci., 189, 185-190. 
  38. Safdar. M.E., Ali. A., et al., (2011). Comparative efficacy of different weed management strategies in wheat. Chi. J. Agri. Res., 7, 195-204. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392011000200003  
  39. Salek. A. (2014). Effect of age of seedling and weed management on the performance of boro. MS Thesis, Department of Agronomy, Bangla-desh Agricultural University, Mymensingh.
  40. Shahzad. M.A., Sahi.  S. T., et al., (2007). Effect  of  sowing dates  and  seed treatment on  grain  yield  and  quality  of  wheat. Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 44, 581-583.
  41. Shamsudduha. M., Taylor. R.G., Ahmed. K.M., (2009). Recent trends in groundwater levels in a highly seasonal hydrological system: The Gan-ges-Brahmaputra-Meghna delta. Hydro. Earth. Sys. Sci., 13, 2373-2385. https://doi.org/10.5194/hessd-6-4125-2009  
  42. Sharma. S.N., Singh, R.K., (2010). Weed management in rice-wheat cropping stem under conservation tillage. Ind. J. Weed. Sci. 42, 23- 29.
  43. Swinton. S.M., Forcella. F., et al., (1994). Estimation of crop yield loss due to interference by multiple weed species. Weed. Sci. 42, 103–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043174500084241  
  44. Tunio. S. D, A. D., Jarwar., and Wagan. M. R. (2004). Effect of integrated management practices on wheat. Pak. J. Agric. Eng. Vat. Sci., 20(1), 5-10.https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=PK2006000056   
  45. Yousif AAA., and Mohamed IA. (2022). Prediction of compaction parameters from soil in-dex properties case study: dam complex of upper Atbara project. Am. J. Pure Appl. Sci., 4(1), 01-09. https://doi.org/10.34104/ajpab.022.01009   
  46. Usman. K., Khan. M.A. (2009). Economic evaluation of weed management through tillage, herbicides and hand weeding in irrigated wheat. Pak. J. Weed. Sci. Res. 15, 199-208.
  47. Verma. R. S. and V. Kumar, (1986). Effect of Variable Tillage and Weed Control Method on the Growth, Yield and Weed Intensity in Wheat. Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science, Weed Abst., 35, 1083). http://www.fspublishers.org/published_papers/24090_..pdf  
  48. Waddington. S. R., Li. X., Vicente. C.M., (2010). Getting the focus right: production constraint for fix major food crops in Asian and Afri-can farming systems. Food Security, 2, 27-48.
  49. Wilson. R.G., Westra. P., (1991). Wild-proso millet (Paniucummiliaceum) interference in corn (Zea mays). Weed Science. 39, 217–220. https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordD=US9156683  

Article Info:

Academic Editor

Md. Ekhlas Uddin Dipu, Managing Editor, Universe Publishing Group (UniversePG), Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Received

December 1, 2021

Accepted

January 20, 2022

Published

January 30, 2022

Article DOI: 10.34104/ijavs.022.01012

Corresponding author

Mohammad Afzal Hossain*

Senior Scientific Officer, Bangladesh Rice Research Institute, BRRI, Gazipur 1701, Bangladesh.

Cite this article

Ali MA, Faruk G, Islam R, Haque P, Hossain MA, and Momin MA. (2022). Determination of herbicide (Gramoxone 20 Ls) for weed control as pre-sowing application on wheat. Int. J. Agric. Vet. Sci, 4(1), 01-12. https://doi.org/10.34104/ijavs.022.01012

Views
253
Download
685
Citations
Badge Img
Share