Loading...

Field Performance of Different Manually Operated Weeding Equipments for Paddy Crop

Article Id: BKAP3 | Page : 12-15
Citation :- Field Performance of Different ManuallyOperated Weeding Equipments for Paddy Crop .Bhartiya Krishi Anusandhan Patrika.2017.(32):12-15

Bhagwan Singh Narwariya, Vikas Pagare and Rita Patle

Address :

College of Agricultural Engineeing, J.N.K.K.V., Jabalpur- 482004 (M.P.)

Abstract

The efficient and economical method for weeding plays a significant role in reducing cost of operation and enhancing timeliness of operation. In this study, to manage the weeds in transplanted rice, three mechanical weeders were tested and their efficacy was compared with hand weeding. The rice variety namely PS-4 (Pusasungandha-4), was selected for this study. The results reaveled  that among the mechanical weeders, the highest work efficiency was found to be 0.050 ha/h in power weeder and the corresponding lowest value of 0.0094 /ha was obtained with rotary weeder.  Among the mechanical weeders the highest weeding efficiency (85.13%) was obtained with power weeder and weeding operation cost was reduced by 67.8% as compared to hand weeding. No doubt, the results of hand weeding were significantly better but as it is time consuming and laborious hence cannot be recommended at large scale. Among the weeding method, power weeder gave the best field performance; this suggested that engine powered weeder could be useful equipment in modernizing agriculture for small farm holders.

Keywords

Field and Performance

References

  1. Agricultural Statistics (2013).http://agricoop.nic.in/agristatistics.htm.
  2. Alizadeh, M.R. (2011). Field performance evaluation of mechanical weeders in the paddy field in Scientific Research and Essays, Vol. 6(25), pp. 5427-5434.
  3. BIS,(1975). Method of field testing for manually operated paddy weeder. IS 7927: 1975.Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
  4. Gite, L.P. and Yadav, B.G. (1990). Optimum handle height for a push pull type manually operated dry land weeder. Ergonomics, 33(12): 1487-1494. 
  5. Hasanuzzaman M., Ali, M.H., Alam, M. M., Akhtar, M., and Alam, F. K. (2009).Evaluation of pre-emergence herbicide and hand weeding on the weed control efficiency and performance of transplanted rice. American-Eurasian J. Agron., 2(3): 138-143.
  6. Moody, K. (1998).Priorities for weed science research.In R.E. Evenson, R.W. Herdt and M. Hussain (eds.) Rice Research in Asia progress and priorities. CAB International and International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Philippines. pp. 277-290.
  7. Patel, N.M., Shah, P.M. and Patel, P.N., (1998). Comparative effect of different herbicides in upland rice.KufriBadshah. J. Indian Potato Assoc., 22: 74-76. 
  8. Remesan, R., Roopesh, M.S., Remya, N. and Preman, P. S. (2007). Wet Land Paddy Weeding- A Comprehensive Comparative Study from South India. The CIGR E-journal. Manuscript PM 07011, 9: 1-21.
  9. Rice Knowledge Management Portal (RKMP).Visited http://www.rkmp.co.in
  10. Senthil kumar, K. (2003).Productivity of hybrid rice under water saving irrigation and in situ weed in corporation. M.Sc Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
  11. Subudhi, C.R. (2004). Evaluation of weeding devices for upland rice in the eastern Ghat of Orissa, India. Int. Rice Res. Notes (IRRN), 29(1): 79- 80.
     

Global Footprints