STUDIES ON DIFFERENT METHODS OF WEED MANAGEMENT IN TOMATO (Solanum lycopersicum L.) cv. ABHILASHA

R. KUSHUM¹, R.P. MAURYA²*, SULOCHANA³, DEEPIKA⁴, PINKE⁵, D.C. MEENA⁶, M.K. BUNDELA⁷, M.K. JAT⁸, R.S. CHAUDHARY^9
1Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
²Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
³Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
⁴Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
⁵Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
⁶Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
⁷Department of Horticulture, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
⁸Department of Plant Pathology, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
⁹Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
* Corresponding Author : mauryarose@gmail.com

Received : 03-05-2023     Accepted : 30-05-2023     Published : 30-05-2023
Volume : 15     Issue : 5       Pages : 12382 - 12384
Int J Agr Sci 15.5 (2023):12382-12384

Keywords : Tomato, Mulching, Weed, Pendimethalin, Oxyflorfen
Academic Editor : Kannan C. S. Warrier
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Horticulture; Department of Plant Pathology; Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, School of Agriculture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur, 302017, Rajasthan, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

The present research was carried out at experimental field, Department of Horticulture, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jagatpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan to study the effect of different weed management practices on plant growth, yield, and quality attributes on tomato under semi-arid condition during kharif season of the year 2022-23. The experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design with three replications which comprises of eleven treatment combinations (T0 = Control, T1 = Hand weeding (one hand weeding at 30 DAT), T2 = Hand weeding (two hand weeding at 30 and 45 DAT), T3 = Black plastic mulch, T4 = Wheat straw mulch, T5 = Pendamethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha, T6 = Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha + one hand weeding at 30 DAT, T7 = Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha + two hand weeding at 30 and 45 DAT, T8 = Oxyfluorfen @ 0.25 kg/ha, T9 = Oxyfluorfen @ 0.25 kg/ha + one hand weeding at 30 DAT and T10 = Oxyfluorfen @ 0.25 kg/ha + two hand weeding at 30 and 45 DAT). The highest plant height (66.33 cm) at 45 DAT, (44.00) leaves per plant, (79.47) fruits per plant, (4.68 cm) fruit diameter, (79.53 g) heaviest fruit weight, lowest (6.47%) weed density, (5.24 g) fresh and (0.81 g) dry weight of weeds, highest (4.94 kg/plant) and (63.99 t/ha) yield, (79.29 %) weed control efficiency, (0%) weed index and maximum (Rs. 5, 43,943.00) net return and the highest (3.25) benefit: cost ratio were recorded in black plastic mulch (T3) followed by (75.27) fruits per plant, (9.73%) weed density (1.21 g) dry weight of weeds, and (2.79) benefit: cost ratio in Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha + two hand weeding at 30 and 45 DAT (T7). The maximum (46.93 days) was taken for weed emergence in Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha + two hand weeding at 30 and 45 DAT (T7). It is, therefore, concluded from the present study, black plastic mulch (T3) was found to be best followed by Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha + two hand weeding at 30 and 45 DAT (T7) and showed a significant effect on vegetative growth, yield and quality of tomato cv. ‘Abhilasha’

1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2008) FAO Production Year Book. Rome, Italy.
2. National Horticulture Board (2021) Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, New Delhi, 21.
3. Kimani S.K., Nandwa, S.M. and Mugendi, D.N. (2003) in, M.P. Gichuru, A. Bationo, M.A. Bekunda, et al. (Eds.), Soil Fertility Management in Africa, a Regional Perspective, Academy Science Publishers,
4. Adigun J.A. (2005) Agric. Tropica Subtropica, 38, 73-80.
5. Sanok W.J., Shelleck G.W. and Greighton J.F. (1979) Weed Sci. Soc., Dept. of Rort. Uni. of Maryland, College Park 20742, USA, 33, 332-335.
6. Abbasi N. A., Zafar L., Khan H.A., and Qureshi A.A. (2013) Pakistan J. of Botany, 45, 1581-1587.
7. Mashingaidze A.B. and Chivinge O.A. (2005) Trans. Zimbabwe Sci. Assoc., 69, 12-19.
8. Adigun J.A. and Lagoke S.T.O. (2003) J. Weed Sci., 16, 23-29.
9. Osipitan O.A. and Dille J.A. (2017) Front. Plant Sci., 8, 1090.
10. Buhler D.D. (1999) J. Crop Prod., 2, 1-7.
11. Osipitan O.A. (2007) J. Agric. Sci., 9, 11-20.
12. Sheoran O.P., Tonk D.S., Kaushik L.S., Hasija R.C. and Pannu R.S. (1998) Recent Advances in information theory, Statistics & Computer Applications by D.S. Hooda & R.C. Hasija, Department of Mathematics Statistics, CCS HAU, Hisar. p. 139-143.
13. Shil S., Nath D., Dey D. and Chakraborty A. (2016) J. of Eco-friendly Agric., 11(2), 191-193.
14. Yadav M. K. and Singh R. S. (2009) Indian J. Agric. Sci., 79 (4), 268-272.
15. Rao V.S. (1995) In. Proceeding National seminar on changing pest situation in the current agricultural scenario of India. (June 16, 1988) pp. 641- 645, ICAR, New Delhi.
16. Mamolos A.P. and Kalburtji K.L. (2001) Journal of Crop Production, 4(2), 197-218.
17. Dhonde M.B., Kate S.R., Pandure B.S. and Tambe A.D. (2009) Indian J. of Weed Science, 41(1&2), 102-105.
18. Gupta V., Singh M., Kumar A., Sharma B.C., & Kher D. (2013) Indian J. of Agronomy, 58(2), 220-225.
19. Meena D. S., Baldev R., Chaman J. & Tetrawal J.P. (2011) Indian J. of weed Science, 43(3&4), 169-171.
20. Teiteh R., Norman J.C. and Amoatey C.A. (2011) Ghana Journal of Horticulture, 9, 65 - 78.
21. Patel T.U., Patel C.L., Patel D.D., Thanki J.D., Patel P.S., and Jat R.A. (2011) Indian J. of Agronomy, 56(3), 267-272.
22. Yadav R.B., Vivek R.V. and Yadav K.G. (2013) Indian J. of Weed Science, 45(2), 113-115.
23. Kavitha M.P., Maheswari M.U., Krishna K., Balaji G., Yuavaraj R., Sachin R. and Kumar S.K. (2021) Indian Journal of Weed Science, 53(1), 114-116.