Abstract
A field experiment was conducted during rainy season of 2005 and 2006 under rainfed condition at Faizabad on a silty-loam soil to find out the most effective weed control measure in maize (Zea mays L.). Pre-emergence application of alachlor (2.0 kg/ha), pendimethalin (1.0 kg/ha) and atrazine (1.0 kg/ha) alone and in combination with one hand-weeding (30 DAS), two hand-weedings (20 and 40 DAS), smother crop (blackgram and Dhaincha) and earthing-up were compared with weed-free and weedy check treatments. Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS proved most effective (weed-control efficiency, WCE 60.74 and 71.78%) followed by alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS (WCE 55.86 and 68.31%) and they reduced the weed density and weed biomass significantly, which in turn increased yield compared with weedy check. The highest grain yield of 3.70 and 3.63 t/ha was recorded under weed-free treatment during 2005 and 2006 respectively, which was on a par with two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS. The highest net returns were obtained under weed-free treatment, but highest benefit: cost ratio was recorded under earthing-up and two hand-weedings.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 10
Claim · model-written summary
Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS produced weed-control efficiency of 60.74 and 71.78%.
- Treatment
- Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DASe0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed-control efficiencye0
- Direction
- most effectivee0
- Value
- 60.74 and 71.78%e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS proved most effective (weed-control efficiency, WCE 60.74 and 71.78%) followed by alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS (WCE 55.86 and 68.31%) and they reduced the weed density and weed biomass significantly, which in turn increased yield compared with weedy check.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS produced weed-control efficiency of 55.86 and 68.31%.
- Treatment
- alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DASe0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed-control efficiencye0
- Direction
- followed bye0
- Value
- 55.86 and 68.31%e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS proved most effective (weed-control efficiency, WCE 60.74 and 71.78%) followed by alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS (WCE 55.86 and 68.31%) and they reduced the weed density and weed biomass significantly, which in turn increased yield compared with weedy check.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The leading weed-management treatments reduced weed density compared with weedy check.
- Treatment
- Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DASe0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed densitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS proved most effective (weed-control efficiency, WCE 60.74 and 71.78%) followed by alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS (WCE 55.86 and 68.31%) and they reduced the weed density and weed biomass significantly, which in turn increased yield compared with weedy check.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The leading weed-management treatments reduced weed biomass compared with weedy check.
- Treatment
- Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DASe0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS proved most effective (weed-control efficiency, WCE 60.74 and 71.78%) followed by alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS (WCE 55.86 and 68.31%) and they reduced the weed density and weed biomass significantly, which in turn increased yield compared with weedy check.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The leading weed-management treatments increased yield compared with weedy check.
- Treatment
- Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DASe0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS proved most effective (weed-control efficiency, WCE 60.74 and 71.78%) followed by alachlor 2.0 kg/ha + hand-weeding at 30 DAS (WCE 55.86 and 68.31%) and they reduced the weed density and weed biomass significantly, which in turn increased yield compared with weedy check.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed-free maize had the highest grain yield of 3.70 t/ha in 2005.
- Treatment
- weed-free treatmente0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 3.70 and 3.63 t/hae0
- Qualifier
- 2005e0
- Comparator
- two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DASe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest grain yield of 3.70 and 3.63 t/ha was recorded under weed-free treatment during 2005 and 2006 respectively, which was on a par with two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed-free maize had the highest grain yield of 3.63 t/ha in 2006.
- Treatment
- weed-free treatmente0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 3.63 t/hae0
- Qualifier
- 2006e0
- Comparator
- two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DASe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest grain yield of 3.70 and 3.63 t/ha was recorded under weed-free treatment during 2005 and 2006 respectively, which was on a par with two hand-weedings at 20 and 40 DAS.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed-free treatment yielded the highest net returns.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest net returns were obtained under weed-free treatment, but highest benefit: cost ratio was recorded under earthing-up and two hand-weedings.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
earthing-up achieved the highest benefit: cost ratio.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest net returns were obtained under weed-free treatment, but highest benefit: cost ratio was recorded under earthing-up and two hand-weedings.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
two hand-weedings achieved the highest benefit: cost ratio.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest net returns were obtained under weed-free treatment, but highest benefit: cost ratio was recorded under earthing-up and two hand-weedings.”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
alachlor · weed · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
28 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →herbicide · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
359 papers in the same direction as this paper · 36 in the opposite direction · 10 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
402 papers more in this group
See all 406 papers →herbicide · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
499 papers in the same direction as this paper · 127 in the opposite direction · 24 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
647 papers more in this group
See all 651 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.