Study Effects of Planting Methods and Tank Mixed Herbiciedes on Weeds Controlling and Wheat Yield

Zoheir. Ashrafi, Hamid. Mashhadi, Sedigheh Sadeghi and Robert E. Blackshaw

Journal of Agricultural Science, 2009, vol. 1, issue 1, 101

Abstract: The aim of integrated weed management (IWM) is to use of a combination of different practices to maintain weeddensities at manageable levels. A field experiment was conducted at Agricultural College, Tehran of University, inKaraj city 2005-2006 by planting wheat, to investigate the response of planting methods and tank mixed herbicides. Theexperiment was laid out using a split plot arrangement, in randomized complete block design with three replications.Methods of planting were assigned to the main plots; while tank mixed herbicdes were kept in the sub-plots. The subplotsize measured 4.5 × 4.5 m2. Row to row distance was kept at 30 cm. Data were recorded on weed density m-2, plantheight (cm), spike length (cm), Number of spikes m-2, Number of grains spike-1, 1000 grain weight (g), biological yield(kg ha-1), and grain yield (kg ha-1). The data for individual traits were subjected to the ANOVA technique andsignificant means were separated by the LSD test. The analysis of the data showed that methods of sowing werestatistically significant for plant height, No. of grains spike-1, 1000-grain weight and biological yield. The herbicideswere statistically significant for all the parameters investigated except No. of grains spike-1, while the interaction ofmethods of planting with herbicides could not reach the level of significance in any of the traits examined. Among themethods of planting, line sowing was the best followed by line + broadcast sowing. The herbicide mixtures controlledmixed stands of broadleaf and grassy weeds to the tune of 65 to 74% with a consequent increase in grain yield from 58-107%. Buctril-M + Topik 15 WP, 2,4-D + Puma Super 75 EW and Topik 15 WP were segregated as the top scoringapplications by increasing yield to the extent of 107, 104 and 101 %, respectively over the weedy check.

Date: 2009
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/2341/2195 (application/pdf)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/view/2341 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:101

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Agricultural Science from Canadian Center of Science and Education Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Canadian Center of Science and Education ().