Abstract
AbstractThe sustainability of happy seeder (HS) sown wheat with preceding rice residue retention needs optimization of row spacing and integrated weed management. In this context, a study was conducted during Rabi seasons of 2020-21 and 2021- 22 at Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India. The objective was to evaluate and identify the best option to realize higher wheat productivity and better weed management in wheat sown with happy seeder (HS) using varying row spacings in combination with retained preceding rice residues and integrated weed management treatments. The tested treatments include: wheat sown with happy seeder at row spacings (HS row spacing) of 18.25, 20.0 and 22.5 cm and weed control treatments including: unsprayed check, pre-plant application (PPA) of pyroxasulfone 127.5 g/ha, pendimethalin 1125 g/ha PPA, pendimethalin + metribuzin 962.5 g/ha PPA and post-emergence application (PoE) of metribuzin + clodinafop 270 g/ ha. HS row spacing of 18.25 cm recorded P. minor density reduction of 16.7, 17.8% and 26.1, 27.1% and broad-leaved weeds density reduction of 22.1, 15.9% and 31.1, 27.8% at harvest, over HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cm, in 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively. An increase in wheat grain yield of 24.9, 28.6% and 10.7, 16.3% was recorded with HS row spacing of 18.25 than HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cm during 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively. Lower weed density (74.4%) and higher grain yield (82.9%) were recorded with metribuzin + clodinafop 270 g/ha compared to unsprayed check. Pendimethalin plus metribuzin 962.5 g/ha PPA by mixing with urea has provided greater control of diverse weed flora in wheat.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Narrow happy seeder spacing reduced P. minor density relative to wider spacing.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- HS row spacing of 18.25 cme0
- Interactor
- P. minore0weed
- Outcome
- P. minor densitye0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 16.7, 17.8% and 26.1, 27.1%e0
- Comparator
- HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“HS row spacing of 18.25 cm recorded P. minor density reduction of 16.7, 17.8% and 26.1, 27.1% and broad-leaved weeds density reduction of 22.1, 15.9% and 31.1, 27.8% at harvest, over HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cm, in 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Narrow happy seeder spacing reduced broad-leaved weed density relative to wider spacing.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- HS row spacing of 18.25 cme0
- Interactor
- broad-leaved weedse0weed
- Outcome
- broad-leaved weeds densitye0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 22.1, 15.9% and 31.1, 27.8%e0
- Comparator
- HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“HS row spacing of 18.25 cm recorded P. minor density reduction of 16.7, 17.8% and 26.1, 27.1% and broad-leaved weeds density reduction of 22.1, 15.9% and 31.1, 27.8% at harvest, over HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cm, in 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Narrow happy seeder spacing increased wheat grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- HS row spacing of 18.25e0
- Outcome
- wheat grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 24.9, 28.6% and 10.7, 16.3%e0
- Comparator
- HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“An increase in wheat grain yield of 24.9, 28.6% and 10.7, 16.3% was recorded with HS row spacing of 18.25 than HS row spacing of 20.0 and 22.5 cm during 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Metribuzin plus clodinafop reduced weed density versus unsprayed check.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- metribuzin + clodinafop 270 g/hae0
- Outcome
- weed densitye0
- Direction
- Lowere0
- Value
- 74.4%e0
- Comparator
- unsprayed checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lower weed density (74.4%) and higher grain yield (82.9%) were recorded with metribuzin + clodinafop 270 g/ha compared to unsprayed check.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Metribuzin plus clodinafop increased grain yield versus unsprayed check.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- metribuzin + clodinafop 270 g/hae0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 82.9%e0
- Comparator
- unsprayed checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lower weed density (74.4%) and higher grain yield (82.9%) were recorded with metribuzin + clodinafop 270 g/ha compared to unsprayed check.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Pendimethalin plus metribuzin mixed with urea gave greater weed control.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Pendimethalin plus metribuzin 962.5 g/ha PPA by mixing with ureae0
- Interactor
- diverse weed florae0weed
- Outcome
- control of diverse weed florae0
- Direction
- greatere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pendimethalin plus metribuzin 962.5 g/ha PPA by mixing with urea has provided greater control of diverse weed flora in wheat.”
The same questions in other papers
metribuzin · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
44 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
71 papers more in this group
See all 75 papers →pendimethalin · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →clodinafop · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
56 papers more in this group
See all 60 papers →clodinafop · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
57 papers more in this group
See all 61 papers →metribuzin · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
59 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →nitrogen · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
37 papers more in this group
See all 41 papers →density · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 papers →density · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
375 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
494 papers more in this group
See all 498 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.