Abstract
A fi eld experiment was conducted at the Research Farm, ITM University, Gwalior; Madhya Pradesh during the kharif seasons of 2017 under the edaphic and climatic conditions of Gwalior (M.P.). The experiment consisted 8 weed management treatments (Imazethapyr @ 70 g a.i./ha (PoE) at 20 DAS + 1 HW at 40 DAS, Quizalofop @ 50 g a.i./ha (PoE) at 20 DAS + 1 HW at 40 DAS, Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl @ 70 g a.i./ha (PoE) at 20 DAS + 1 HW at 40 DAS, Imazethapyr + Imazamox @ 50 g a.i./ha (PoE) at 20 DAS + 1 HW at 40 DAS, Pendimethalin @ 750 g a.i./ha (PE) + 1 HW at 20 DAS, Hand weeding at 20 DAS + Hoeing at 40 DAS, Weed free and Weedy check). It was laid out in randomized block design with 3 replications. Herbicides were applied by knap sack sprayer fi tted with fl at pan nozzle using 500 litre/ha water. In the plots involving hand weeding treatment, weeds were removed manually at 20, 40, 60 DAS and as necessity as per treatment. All other agronomic practices were adopted as per recommended package of practices. The studied for selected attributes by using 3 plants in randomized manner in the seeding depth. Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values of weed parameters viz. total dry weight (g/m2) & weed control effi ciency (%) and crop parameters viz. growth parameters [plant height (cm), number of branches/plant & dry weight/plant (g)], yield attributes [number of pods/plant, number of seeds/pod & test weight (g], computed parameters [seed yield (kg/ha), stover yield (kg/ha) & harvest index (%)], quality parameters [protein content (%), protein yield (kg/ha), gum content (%) & gum yield (kg/ha)] & economics [gross monetary return (₹/ha), net monetary return (₹/ha) & B:C ratio (₹/ha)] over rest of the treatments. The next eff ective was Hand weeding at 20 DAS + Hoeing at 40 DAS; which was at par with Imazethapyr + Imazamox @ 50 g a.i./h
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective values of weed parameters (total weed dry weight and weed control efficiency) over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster Bean
Cyamopsis tetragonolobat0 - Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- weed parameters viz. total dry weight (g/m2) & weed control effi ciency (%)e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“weed parameters viz. total dry weight (g/m2) & weed control effi ciency (%)”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective growth parameters (plant height, branches per plant, dry weight per plant) over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- growth parameters [plant height (cm), number of branches/plant & dry weight/plant (g)]e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“growth parameters [plant height (cm), number of branches/plant & dry weight/plant (g)]”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective yield attributes (pods per plant, seeds per pod, test weight) over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- yield attributes [number of pods/plant, number of seeds/pod & test weight (g]e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“yield attributes [number of pods/plant, number of seeds/pod & test weight (g]”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective seed yield, stover yield and harvest index over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- computed parameters [seed yield (kg/ha), stover yield (kg/ha) & harvest index (%)]e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“computed parameters [seed yield (kg/ha), stover yield (kg/ha) & harvest index (%)]”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective protein content and protein yield over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- protein content (%), protein yield (kg/ha)e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“protein content (%), protein yield (kg/ha)”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective gum content and gum yield over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- gum content (%) & gum yield (kg/ha)e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“gum content (%) & gum yield (kg/ha)”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed free treatment recorded significantly effective economic returns (gross and net monetary return, B:C ratio) over the rest of the treatments.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Treatment
- Weed freee0
- Outcome
- economics [gross monetary return (₹/ha), net monetary return (₹/ha) & B:C ratio (₹/ha)]e1
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed free treatment recorded signifi cantly eff ective values”
e1“economics [gross monetary return (₹/ha), net monetary return (₹/ha) & B:C ratio (₹/ha)]”
e2“over rest of the treatments”
t0“Cluster Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Hand weeding at 20 DAS + hoeing at 40 DAS was the next most effective treatment after weed free, at par with imazethapyr + imazamox.
- Taxon
- Cluster BeanCyamopsis tetragonolobat0
- Outcome
- The next eff ective was Hand weeding at 20 DAS + Hoeing at 40 DASe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The next eff ective was Hand weeding at 20 DAS + Hoeing at 40 DAS”
t0“Cluster Bean”
The same questions in other papers
herbicide · yield · Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (cluster bean)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →herbicide · quality: grain · Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (cluster bean)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
herbicide · quality: protein · Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (cluster bean)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
herbicide · weed · Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (cluster bean)Results agree
20 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 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.