Weed density and weed bio mass at harvest of greengram
Grasses (G)
Lowest density and dry weight of grasses was recorded with two hand weedings at 15 and 30 DAS (T
9), which was however, at par with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2), whereas significantly highest density and biomass of grasses was registered with weedy check (T
10), during both the years of experimentation (Table 1 and 2).
Sedges (S)
Atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb halosulfuron methyl 67.5 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
4) registered lower sedge count and biomass, which was at par with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb halosulfuron methyl 34 g + 2,4-D amine salt 290 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
8) and both of them were statistically lower compared to atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2), two hand weedings at 15 and 30 DAS (T
9) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1), which in turn were comparable among themselves during both the years of study. The results indicated that recommended dose or half of the recommended dose of halosulfuron methyl was effective in controlling the sedges in maize followed by greengram sequence.
Broadleaved weeds (BLW)
Similar trend in broadleaved weed count and biomass was observed during the two years of study. Weedy check (T
10) recorded significantly highest broadleaved weed count and biomass, where as it was lowest with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3), which was however, comparable with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2), hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS (T
9) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1).
Total weed density
The total weed population and biomass in greengram due to residual effect of weed management practices imposed in preceding maize, was lowest with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3) (Table 1 and 2) during the first year of investigation and with hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS (T
9) during second year of investigation and both in turn were comparable with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2). Lower density and dry weight of total weeds might be due to higher weed control efficiency with these treatments in the preceding maize, that may lead to poor weed seed dispersal which in turn ensued lower weed count in succeeding greengram. The results were in conformity with the findings of
Nazreen et al., (2018) and
Verma et al., (2009).The density and dry weight of total weeds was significantly highest with weedy check (T
10), during both the years of study (Table 1 and 2). This might be due to higher density and dry weight of weeds in weedy check in maize that in turn favoured higher weed count and bio mass in succeeding greengram.
Germination percentage
Germination percentage of succeeding greengram crop was not significantly varied due to different weed management practices imposed in maize during both the years of study (Table 3). The results corroborate with the findings of
Chand et al., (2014).
Growth, yield attributes and yield of succeeding greengram
Taller plants with higher stature and dry matter production of greengram were noticed with T
9 (hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS), which was closely followed by atrazine 1.0 kg ha-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb halosulfuron methyl 67.5 g ha
-1 as PoE (T4), in the order of descent, without any significant disparity among the treatments (Table 3). Higher plant height and dry matter production in succeeding greengram might be due to effective control of weeds in the above treatments imposed in maize that in turn might lead to lowest weed frequency and biomass of weeds in the succeeding greengram which may favoured greengram to utilize nutrients, moisture and light effectively to produce higher vegetative potential.
Higher number of pods plant
-1, number of seeds pod
-1, test weight,seed and haulm yield of succeeding greengram was reported with hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS (T
9), which was however, at par with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb halosulfuron methyl 67.5 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
4), in the order of descent, without any significant disparity among them due to weed management practices imposed in preceding maize. This might be attributed to minimum crop weed competition in greengram, which enhanced more synthesis and translocation of assimilates to developing pods and seeds in greengram (Table 3 and 4).
Weedy check (T
10), recorded the lowest growth parameters, yield attributes and yield of greengram compared to all other treatments. It might be ascribed due to higher density of weeds in the preceding maize, due to which more number of weeds were germinated per unit area in the succeeding greengram and offered severe competition for growth resources that might have lead to poor performance of greengram as noticed in the form of poor stature of the crop with lowest dry matter production, that in turn decreased number of pods plant
-1, number of seeds pod
-1, test weight and yield of greengram.
Enzyme activity and microbial population in soil of succeeding greengram
Enzyme activity
viz., acid phosphatase, alkaline phosphatase, urease and dehydrogenase activity and microbial count
i.e., total bacteria, fungi and actinomycetes population in the soil was recorded at the time of harvest of greeengram. Enzyme activity and microbial count was not statistically distinct at harvest of greengram, which indicated that weed control practices imposed in maize did not alter the enzyme activity and microbial count in the subsequent greengram, during both the instances of study as indicated in Table 5.
Economics of greengram
Gross returns (GR), net returns (NR) and benefit cost ratio (BCR) of greengram followed similar trend during both the years of study. Higher gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio of succeeding greengram was noticed with hand weeding twice at 15 and 30 DAS (T
9) and it was at par with atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb one HW at 30 DAS (T
1), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 30 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
3), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 120 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
2) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb halosulfuron methyl 67.5 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
4) (Table 4).This may be attributed to higher seed yield due to reduced crop weed competition.
The next best treatments with higher gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio were atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb topramezone 15 g + 2,4-D amine salt 290 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
7), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb tembotrione 60 g + 2,4-D amine salt 290 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
6), atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb 2,4-D amine salt 580 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
5) and atrazine 1.0 kg ha
-1 as PE
fb halosulfuron methyl 34 g + 2,4-D amine salt 290 g ha
-1 as PoE (T
8), in the order of descent without significant disparity among them. Lowest gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio of greengram was noticed with weedy check (T
10), during the two years of study and it might be attributed to low yields due to severe crop weed competition.