EFFECT OF DIFFERENT HERBICIDES AND HAND WEEDING ON GROWTH ATTRIBUTES AND YIELD IN TRANSPLANTED RICE

ARUN ARASU¹*, ARIVUKKARASU KAMARAJ², SATHIYA SAMRAJ^3
1Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, 625 104, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641 003, India
²Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, 608 002, India
³Department Of Agronomy, Adhiparasakthi Agricultural College, Kalavai, 632 506, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641 003, India, India
* Corresponding Author : arunevin29@gmail.com

Received : 31-08-2019     Accepted : 13-09-2019     Published : 15-09-2019
Volume : 11     Issue : 17       Pages : 8951 - 8953
Int J Agr Sci 11.17 (2019):8951-8953

Keywords : Rice, Pretilachlor, Pyrazosulfuron ethyl, Dry matter production and growth attributes
Academic Editor : All authors equally contributed
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar, 608 002, Tamil Nadu, India

The field investigation was carried out at Annamalai University, Faculty Agriculture, experimental farm, Annamalai Nagar to study the effect of different weed management practices in transplanted rice during rabi 2014. The experiment was laid out in a randomized block design with seven treatments and three replications using rice variety BPT 5204 as test crop. Weed management practices had significantly influenced the growth attributes in transplanted rice. The plant height, dry matter production, leaf area index, crop growth rate and relative growth rate were significantly higher under hand weeding twice at 20 and 40 DAT. However, it was comparable with application of Pretilachlor + Pyrazosulfuron ethyl @ 0.615 kg ha-1 as pre emergence (T7).

1. Economic Survey (2015-16) Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, Vol-II, 100, (accessed 17.12.2017).
2. Veeraputhiran R. and Balasubramanian R. (2013) In proc. National Conference on Challenges in Weed Management in ecosystems present status and future strategies, Coimbatore, India, 30, Nov.–Dec., 175.
3. Jacques Dioxf (2003) International Rice Commission Newsletter, 52, 2-7.
4. Pal S., Ghosh R.K., Banerjee R.K., Kundu R. and Alipatra A.(2012) Indian J. Weed Sci., 44(4), 210-213.
5. Khaliq A., Riaz M.Y. & Matloob A. (2011) Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science, 3(12), 302-310.
6. Yoshida S., Forno D.A. Cock J.H. and Gomez K.A. (1976) Laboratory manual for physiological studies of rice. IRRI, Manila, Philippines.
7. Watson D.J. (1958) Leaf growth in relation to crop yield-the growth of leaves. Mithorpe (ed.) Butter worths, London.
8. Enyi B.A.C. (1962) Ann. Bot., 26, 467–487.
9. Sunil C.M., Shekara B.G., Kalyanamurthy K.N. and Shankaralingappa B.C. (2010) Indian J. Weed Sci., 42, 180-83.
10. Angirs N. and Kumar Suresh N. (2005) Indian J. Weed Sci., 37(3&4), 202-204.
11. Chopra N.K. and Nisha Chopra (2003) Indian J. Weed Sci., 35, 27-29.
12. Thiyagarajan T.M., Senthil Kumar K., Bindraban P.S., Hengsdijk S., Ramasamy V., Velu D., Durgadevi K., Govindarajan R., Priyadarshini R., Sudhalakshmi C., Nisha P.T. and Gayathry G. (2002) Journal of Agriculture Research and Management, 1(4), 169-181.