Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 37 issue 4 (december 2003) : 303 - 306

STUDIES ON PHYSIOLOGICAL VARV\TIONS IN,FRENCHBEAN '(PHASEOLUS VULGARIS L.) AS INFLUENCED BY INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT AND NITROGEN LEVELS UNDER NORTH GUJARAT CONDmONS

M.P. Prajapati, L.R.Patel, B.M. Patel, B.S. Patel
1Department of Agronomy. C.P. College 'Of Agriculture GUjarat Agricultural University, Sardar Krushinagar· 385 506. India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Prajapati M.P., L.R.Patel, Patel B.M., Patel B.S. (2024). STUDIES ON PHYSIOLOGICAL VARV\TIONS IN,FRENCHBEAN '(PHASEOLUS VULGARIS L.) AS INFLUENCED BY INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT AND NITROGEN LEVELS UNDER NORTH GUJARAT CONDmONS. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 37(4): 303 - 306. doi: .
Reid studies carried out during 1998–99 and 1999–2000 revealed that the LAI of frenchbean increased upto 60 DAS and thereafter, it decreased under all the weed control treatments and different levels of nitrogen. Maximum values of fresh as well as dry weight per plant, LAI, NAR, CGR, RGR, harvest Index and seed yield were recorded under weed free condition, followed by application of pendimethalin @ 0.75 kg/ha+one HW at 45 DAS, Ukewise, physiological parameters viz., fresh as well as dry matter production per plant LAI, NAR, RGR, CGR and harvest index were significantly higher under the highest level of nitrogen Le. 120 kg N/ha. The lowest values of all the growth parameters were registered under the weedy check treatment receiving no nitrogen
    1. Ali, M. and Kushwaha, R.B. (1987). Indian Frog., 5: 2o-23~
    2. Habbish, I.G. and Ishaq, MK (1974). Expt. Agril, 10: 45·50.
    3. Pandey, R.K etal (1979)./ndianJ. Agric. Sci., 48: 466-473.
    4. Ramachandra, R.A.etal (1998). Crop Res., 15: 21-25.
    5. Rana, N.S. and Singh,H. (1998)./ndianJ. Agron., 43: 367-370.
    6. SaXena, KK and Verma, V.S. (1994). HaryanaJ. Agron., 10: 211-214.
    7. Sreelatha, OK et al (1997). Ann. Agric. Res., 18: 111-114.
    8. Wallace, D.H. and Munger, H.M. (1965). Crop. Sci., 6: 503-507.
    9. Watson, D.L. (1952). Adv. Agron., 4: 101-145.
    10. Williams, R.E (1946). Ami. Bot., 10: 41-72.

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)