Paper · 2010 · Indian Journal of Agronomy

Weed control for yield and profit maximization in wheat (Triticum aestivum) in Indian Himalayas.

Narendra Kumar; B. L. Mina; Kuldeep Singh; et al.

6
claims
13
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during winter season of 2003–06 at Almora, Uttarakhand to evaluate the productivity, profitability and energetics under different weed management practices in wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend Fiori & Paol). Two improved intercultural tools viz., wheel hoe and long handle khurpi along with tank mix isoproturon (0.75 kg/ha) + 2, 4 D (0.5 kg/ha) and farmers’ practice (2 manual weedings with kutla at 30–35 & 55–60 days after sowing) were studied for their effectiveness as compared to a weedy check management practice. The maximum decrease in weed population (86.9%) and weed dry matter (78.8%) was recorded with isoproturon + 2, 4-D application. However, it failed to enchance wheat productivity markedly over farmers practice. Net return and B:C ratio were significantly more under weed management through isoproturon + 2, 4-D, however, energy use efficiency was highest under long handle khurpi.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon plus 2, 4-D gave the maximum 86.9% decrease in weed population.

Treatment
isoproturon + 2, 4-D applicatione0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed populatione0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
86.9%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e0

“The maximum decrease in weed population (86.9%) and weed dry matter (78.8%) was recorded with isoproturon + 2, 4-D application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 554–681 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Isoproturon plus 2, 4-D gave the maximum 78.8% reduction in weed dry matter.

Treatment
isoproturon + 2, 4-D applicatione0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed dry mattere0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
78.8%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e0

“The maximum decrease in weed population (86.9%) and weed dry matter (78.8%) was recorded with isoproturon + 2, 4-D application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 554–681 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The herbicide mixture did not markedly enhance wheat productivity over farmer practice.

Treatment
isoproturon + 2, 4-D applicatione1
Outcome
wheat productivitye0
Direction
failed to enchancee0
Comparator
farmers practicee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it failed to enchance wheat productivity markedly over farmers practice.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 691–763 · show in text ↑
e1

“isoproturon + 2, 4-D application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 648–681 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide weed management significantly raised net return.

Treatment
weed management through isoproturon + 2, 4-De0
Outcome
Net returne0
Direction
moree0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e0

“Net return and B:C ratio were significantly more under weed management through isoproturon + 2, 4-D”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 764–863 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide weed management significantly raised the B:C ratio.

Treatment
weed management through isoproturon + 2, 4-De0
Outcome
B:C ratioe0
Direction
moree0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e0

“Net return and B:C ratio were significantly more under weed management through isoproturon + 2, 4-D”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 764–863 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Energy use efficiency was highest with long handle khurpi.

Treatment
long handle khurpie0
Outcome
energy use efficiencye0
Direction
higheste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e0

“energy use efficiency was highest under long handle khurpi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 874–932 · show in text ↑

isoproturon · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

89 papers: 75 positive, 14 negative or no effect

74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

85 papers more in this group

See all 89 papers →

2,4-D · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

116 papers: 78 positive, 38 negative or no effect

77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

112 papers more in this group

See all 116 papers →

2,4-D · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

66 papers: 64 positive, 2 negative or no effect

63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

62 papers more in this group

See all 66 papers →

isoproturon · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

74 papers: 72 positive, 2 negative or no effect

71 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 papers →

herbicide · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

563 papers: 466 positive, 97 negative or no effect

465 papers in the same direction as this paper · 87 in the opposite direction · 10 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

559 papers more in this group

See all 563 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.