Paper · 2025 · Indian Journal of Weed Science

Comparative efficacy of herbicide-mixtures for efficient weed management and productivity enhancement of pre-Kharif greengram

Srijani Maji; Preetam Biswas; Aksita Paul; et al.

12
claims
19
verbatim quotes
1
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Early slow growing behaviour of short-duration greengram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) makes it a poor competitor against weeds and failure to take up timely weed control measures may lead to severe yield losses. Hence, the present study was taken up during the pre-Kharif seasons of 2022 and 2023 at Kalyani, West Bengal with an objective to assess different herbicide-mixes for their weed managing efficiency in greengram and improving productivity and profitability. Propaquizafop (2.5%) + imazethapyr (3.75%) w/w ME (propaquizafop + imazethapyr) 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl (5% EC) + imazethapyr (10% SL) (quizalofop-ethyl + imazethapyr) 50+75g/ha at 15 days after sowing (DAS) were most effective against grasses. Clodinafop-propargyl (8%) + sodium-acifluorfen (16.5%) EC (clodinafop-propargyl + sodium-acifluorfen), irrespective of doses, significantly reduced growth of broad-leaved weeds. Imazamox (35%) + imazethapyr (35%) WG (imazamox + imazethapyr) 60 g/ha was most effective in controlling sedges. Clodinafop-propargyl + acifluorfen-sodium 245 g/ha, propaquizafop +imazethapyr 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl+ imazethapyr (50+75 g/ha) showed similar efficacy in reducing overall weed growth recording higher weed control efficiency. Weed management with these treatments significantly increased greengram growth traits, greengram productivity and benefit cost ratio. The principal component analysis confirmed the superiority of those treatments. The identified effective herbicide-mixtures usage would help in successful inclusion of greengram in rice-wheat systems.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Propaquizafop (2.5%) + imazethapyr (3.75%) w/w ME (propaquizafop + imazethapyr) 125 g/ha controlled grasses.

Treatment
Propaquizafop (2.5%) + imazethapyr (3.75%) w/w ME (propaquizafop + imazethapyr) 125 g/hae0
Interactor
grassese0weed
Outcome
grassese0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Propaquizafop (2.5%) + imazethapyr (3.75%) w/w ME (propaquizafop + imazethapyr) 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl (5% EC) + imazethapyr (10% SL) (quizalofop-ethyl + imazethapyr) 50+75g/ha at 15 days after sowing (DAS) were most effective against grasses.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 467–717 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

quizalofop-ethyl (5% EC) + imazethapyr (10% SL) (quizalofop-ethyl + imazethapyr) 50+75g/ha controlled grasses.

Treatment
quizalofop-ethyl (5% EC) + imazethapyr (10% SL) (quizalofop-ethyl + imazethapyr) 50+75g/hae0
Interactor
grassese0weed
Outcome
grassese0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Propaquizafop (2.5%) + imazethapyr (3.75%) w/w ME (propaquizafop + imazethapyr) 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl (5% EC) + imazethapyr (10% SL) (quizalofop-ethyl + imazethapyr) 50+75g/ha at 15 days after sowing (DAS) were most effective against grasses.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 467–717 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Clodinafop-propargyl (8%) + sodium-acifluorfen (16.5%) EC controlled growth of broad-leaved weeds.

Treatment
Clodinafop-propargyl (8%) + sodium-acifluorfen (16.5%) ECe0
Interactor
broad-leaved weedse0weed
Outcome
growth of broad-leaved weedse0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Clodinafop-propargyl (8%) + sodium-acifluorfen (16.5%) EC (clodinafop-propargyl + sodium-acifluorfen), irrespective of doses, significantly reduced growth of broad-leaved weeds.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–895 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Imazamox (35%) + imazethapyr (35%) WG (imazamox + imazethapyr) 60 g/ha controlled sedges.

Treatment
Imazamox (35%) + imazethapyr (35%) WG (imazamox + imazethapyr) 60 g/hae0
Interactor
sedgesCarexe0weed
Outcome
sedgese0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Carex
Carex · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Christian Fischer · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Imazamox (35%) + imazethapyr (35%) WG (imazamox + imazethapyr) 60 g/ha was most effective in controlling sedges.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 896–1008 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clodinafop-propargyl + acifluorfen-sodium 245 g/ha reduced overall weed growth with higher weed control efficiency.

Treatment
Clodinafop-propargyl + acifluorfen-sodium 245 g/hae0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
overall weed growthe0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Clodinafop-propargyl + acifluorfen-sodium 245 g/ha, propaquizafop +imazethapyr 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl+ imazethapyr (50+75 g/ha) showed similar efficacy in reducing overall weed growth recording higher weed control efficiency.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1009–1241 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

propaquizafop +imazethapyr 125 g/ha reduced overall weed growth with higher weed control efficiency.

Treatment
propaquizafop +imazethapyr 125 g/hae0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
overall weed growthe0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Clodinafop-propargyl + acifluorfen-sodium 245 g/ha, propaquizafop +imazethapyr 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl+ imazethapyr (50+75 g/ha) showed similar efficacy in reducing overall weed growth recording higher weed control efficiency.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1009–1241 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

quizalofop-ethyl+ imazethapyr (50+75 g/ha) reduced overall weed growth with higher weed control efficiency.

Treatment
quizalofop-ethyl+ imazethapyr (50+75 g/ha)e0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
overall weed growthe0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–125 · show in text ↑
e0

“Clodinafop-propargyl + acifluorfen-sodium 245 g/ha, propaquizafop +imazethapyr 125 g/ha and quizalofop-ethyl+ imazethapyr (50+75 g/ha) showed similar efficacy in reducing overall weed growth recording higher weed control efficiency.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1009–1241 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

These weed management treatments increased greengram growth traits.

Treatment
Weed management with these treatmentse0
Outcome
greengram growth traitse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Weed management with these treatments significantly increased greengram growth traits, greengram productivity and benefit cost ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1242–1375 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

These weed management treatments increased greengram productivity.

Treatment
Weed management with these treatmentse0
Outcome
greengram productivitye0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Weed management with these treatments significantly increased greengram growth traits, greengram productivity and benefit cost ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1242–1375 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

These weed management treatments increased benefit cost ratio.

Treatment
Weed management with these treatmentse0
Outcome
benefit cost ratioe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Weed management with these treatments significantly increased greengram growth traits, greengram productivity and benefit cost ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1242–1375 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Principal component analysis confirmed superiority of the treatments.

Outcome
superiority of those treatmentse0
Comparator
those treatmentse0

Verbatim

e0

“The principal component analysis confirmed the superiority of those treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1376–1455 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors propose using these herbicide mixtures to include greengram in rice-wheat systems.

Outcome
successful inclusion of greengram in rice-wheat systemse0

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The identified effective herbicide-mixtures usage would help in successful inclusion of greengram in rice-wheat systems.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1456–1576 · show in text ↑

Imazethapyr · weed · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results differ

50 papers: 49 positive, 1 negative or no effect

48 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

46 papers more in this group

See all 50 papers →

propaquizafop · weed · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

clodinafop-propargyl · weed · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

herbicide · growth · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

28 papers: 19 positive, 9 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

24 papers more in this group

See all 28 papers →

herbicide · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

109 papers: 103 positive, 6 negative or no effect

102 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

105 papers more in this group

See all 109 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.