Abstract
A field experiment was carried out during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2013 and 2014 at Ludhiana, Punjab, to study the efficacy of different weed-management techniques on weed dynamics, fodder yield, quality and disease reaction in multi cut sorghum [Sorghum bicolour (L.) Moench]. The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively. Hand- weeding (at 20 and 30 days after sowing) and application of atrazine @ 0.375 kg a.i./ha + pendimethalin @ 0.750 kg a.i./ha as pre-emergence spray significantly reduced total weed population and dry weight of weeds in compari- son to the other weed-control treatments. These treatments showed higher weed-control efficiency (WCE) than that of the other weed-control treatments. Application of propaquizalofop as post-emergence spray was also effec- tive in reducing weed population and dry matter but had phytotoxic effect on the crop and recorded significantly lower fodder yield. Hand-weeding resulted in significantly higher green-and dry-fodder yield of sorghum over all the treatments, but was statistically at par with the application of atrazine @ 0.375 kg a.i./ha + pendimethalin @ 0.750 kg a.i./ha as pre-emergence spray. These 2 treatments enhanced the green-fodder yield by 39.0 and 36.7% and dry-fodder yield by 48.5 and 45.1% respectively, over weedy check. Hand-weeding and application of atra- zine + pendimethalin (0.375 + 0.750 kg a.i./ha) resulted in 58.7 and 53.9% more crude protein yield than weedy check respectively. The maximum net returns ( 37,790/ha and 36,320) and benefit: cost ratio (1.46 and 1.28) were realized with atrazine @ 0.375 kg a.i./ha + pendimethalin @ 0.750 kg a.i./ha (PE) and hand-weeding at 20 and 30 days after sowing respectively. The leaf-spot disease was the minimum (8.54 %) in hand weeded plots and plots sprayed with atrazine @ 0.375 kg a.i./ha + pendimethalin @ 0.750 kg a.i./ha as pre-emergence spray showed moderate leaf spot severity of 15.7% as the weed population was less in these plots.
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
Weeds reduced green-fodder yield of sorghum by 28.1%.
- Treatment
- infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedgese0
- Interactor
- grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedgese0weed
- Outcome
- green-foddere0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 28.1e0
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Weeds reduced dry-fodder yield of sorghum by 32.7%.
- Treatment
- infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedgese0
- Interactor
- grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedgese0weed
- Outcome
- dry-fodder yieldse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 32.7e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Hand-weeding increased green-fodder yield of sorghum by 39.0% over the weedy check.
- Treatment
- Hand-weedinge1
- Outcome
- green-fodder yielde3
- Direction
- enhancede3
- Value
- 39.0e3
- Comparator
- weedy checke3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
e1“Hand- weeding (at 20 and 30 days after sowing)”
e3“These 2 treatments enhanced the green-fodder yield by 39.0 and 36.7% and dry-fodder yield by 48.5 and 45.1% respectively, over weedy check”
Claim · model-written summary
Hand-weeding increased dry-fodder yield of sorghum by 48.5% over the weedy check.
- Treatment
- Hand-weedinge1
- Outcome
- dry-fodder yielde3
- Direction
- enhancede3
- Value
- 48.5e3
- Comparator
- weedy checke3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
e1“Hand- weeding (at 20 and 30 days after sowing)”
e3“These 2 treatments enhanced the green-fodder yield by 39.0 and 36.7% and dry-fodder yield by 48.5 and 45.1% respectively, over weedy check”
Claim · model-written summary
Hand-weeding increased crude protein yield of sorghum by 58.7% over the weedy check.
- Treatment
- Hand-weedinge1
- Outcome
- crude protein yielde5
- Direction
- moree5
- Value
- 58.7e5
- Comparator
- weedy checke5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
e1“Hand- weeding (at 20 and 30 days after sowing)”
e5“resulted in 58.7 and 53.9% more crude protein yield than weedy check respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Hand-weeding at 20 and 30 days after sowing gave a benefit:cost ratio of 1.28.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
e6“benefit: cost ratio (1.46 and 1.28) were realized with atrazine @ 0.375 kg a.i./ha + pendimethalin @ 0.750 kg a.i./ha (PE) and hand-weeding at 20 and 30 days after sowing respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf-spot disease was at its minimum, 8.54%, in hand-weeded plots.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
e7“The leaf-spot disease was the minimum (8.54 %) in hand weeded plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Post-emergence propaquizalofop recorded significantly lower fodder yield of sorghum, with phytotoxic effect on the crop.
- Treatment
- Application of propaquizalofop as post-emergence spraye4
- Outcome
- fodder yielde5
- Direction
- lowere5
- Qualifier
- phytotoxic effect on the crope5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The sorghum crop was infested with grassy, broad- leaf weeds and sedges, which reduced 28.1 and 32.7% of green-fodder and dry-fodder yields respectively”
e4“Application of propaquizalofop as post-emergence spray”
e5“had phytotoxic effect on the crop and recorded significantly lower fodder yield”
The same questions in other papers
herbicide · yield · SorghumResults differ
51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
62 papers more in this group
See all 66 papers →infection · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →application · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
84 papers more in this group
See all 88 papers →herbicide · quality: protein · SorghumResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.