BIOTOXIC EFFECT OF DICLOSULAM 84% WDG ON GROWTH, NODULATION AND NITROGEN CONTENT OF GREENGRAM

L. DEEPA¹*, B.K. DESAI², H.S. LATHA³, MAHADEVSWAMY^4
1Department of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, 584101, India
²Department of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, 584101, India
³Department of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, 584101, India
⁴Department of Agricultural microbiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, 584101, India
* Corresponding Author : dkulkarni380@gmail.com

Received : 16-06-2017     Accepted : 24-06-2017     Published : 12-07-2017
Volume : 9     Issue : 32       Pages : 4468 - 4470
Int J Agr Sci 9.32 (2017):4468-4470

Keywords : Diclosulam, Preplant, Herbicides, Nodulation, Crude Protein
Academic Editor : Simerjeet Kaur
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Author thankful to University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, 584101, India and Dow Agro Sciences Private Limited, India
Author Contribution : All authors have contributed equally

The effect of diclosulam WDG on plant growth, nodulation and crude protein content of greengram was studied during the kharif season of 2014 at Raichur (Karnataka). The pre-plant surface application of diclosulam @ 17.5 and 27g a.i. ha-1 adversely affected the parameters because of its phytotoxic effect. Premergent application of pendimethalin 1.5 kg a.i. ha-1 and diclosulam 17.5 g a.i. ha-1 increased the total dry matter production (17.64 and 17 g/plant) among the herbicidal treatments. Pendimethalin 1.5 kg a.i. ha-1 recorded increased the number of effective nodules formed per plant (22.93 and 59.63) and 22.06% of average maximum crude protein content compared to all the herbicide treated plots. In contrast, the pre-plant surface application of diclosulam 27g a.i. ha-1 lower number of effective root nodules (12.47 & 44.80) @ 30 and 60 days respectively, and minimum crude protein content (21.54%). Among the different methods of application, diclosulam pre-plant surface application showed a large degree of phytotoxicity to the crop.

1. Punia S.S., Malik R.S., Yadav A. and Rinwa R.S. (2004) Indian J. Weed Sci., 36(3&4), 280-281.
2. Singh J., Randhawa, Deol J.S., Sardana V. and Singh J. (2002) Indian J. Weed Sci., 34, 299-300.
3. Sheoran P., Sukhvinder S. and Virender S. (2006) Indian J. Pulses Res., 19 (2), 263-264.
4. Jackson M.L. (1973) Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, p. 498.
5. Tai Y.P. and Young G.P. (1974) Crop Sci., 14, 222- 229
6. Vijayalaxmi G.S., Hiremath S.M., Hosmath J.A., Patil P.L. and Doddamani M.B. (2012) Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 25(2), 262–263.
7. Khot D.B., Munde S.D., Khanpara V.D. and Pagar R.D. (2012) Crop Res., 44(3), 326–330.