Professional Documents
Culture Documents
TABLE 1: Effect of crop weed-competition on density (No. m-2) and dry matter (g m-2) of weeds in field pea1.
Treatments Weed density Weed dry weight
20 DAS 60 DAS At harvest 20 DAS 60 DAS At harvest
2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2008-09 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10
Weedy check 5.8 (32.3) 7.9 (62.1) 8.5 (71.8) 1.7 (2.0) 7.3 (51.9) 10.5 (109.8) 1.7 (2.0) 1.8 (2.1) 10.8 (116.1) 11.2 (124.4) 19.6 (382.8) 20.3 (411.9)
throughout
Weed free 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 2.0 (2.9) 2.7 (6.1) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.45 (1.1) 1.6 (1.5)
throughout
Weed free up 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 5.1 (25.0) 1.0 (0.0) 5.0 (23.8) 6.6 (42.2) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 18.8 (353.6) 19.4 (375.4)
to 20 DAS
Weed free up 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 3.6 (12.0) 1.0 (0.0) 4.4 (18.0) 5.7 (31.4) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 9.3 (86.0) 9.7 (92.6)
to 40 DAS
Weed free up 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 4.0 (15.1) 5.4 (27.7) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 5.5 (29.0) 5.6 (30.3)
to 60 DAS
Weed free up 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 2.9 (7.4) 4.3 (17.2) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.7 (1.8) 1.8 (2.3)
to 80 DAS
Weed free up 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.9 (2.4) 2.5 (5.4) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.8 (2.4) 1.9 (2.6)
to 100 DAS
Weedy up to 5.7 (31.0) 7.9 (61.3) 1.0 (0.0) 1.7 (2.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.7 (2.0) 1.8 (2.1) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0)
20 DAS
Weedy up to 5.6 (30.4) 7.9 (62.2) 1.0 (0.0) 1.7 (1.9) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.7 (1.9) 1.8 (2.2) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0)
40 DAS
Weedy up to 5.8 (33.1) 8.0 (62.9) 8.4 (70.2) 1.72 (2.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.72 (2.0) 1.8 (2.1) 10.8 (114.8) 11.2 (124.4) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0)
60 DAS
Weedy up to 5.8 (33.2) 8.0 (62.6) 8.4 (69.8) 1.7 (1.9) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.70 (1.9) 1.8 (2.2) 10.7 (113.3) 11.1 (122.7) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0)
LEGUME RESEARCH - An International Journal
80 DAS
Weedy up to 5.8 (32.9) 8.1 (64.6) 8.5 (71.1) 1.7 (1.9) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 1.7 (1.9) 1.8 (2.1) 10.8 (116.3) 11.1 (121.1) 1.0 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0)
100 DAS
SEm (±) 0.16 0.22 0.20 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.03 0.03 0.16 0.17 0.16 0.25
CD at 5% 0.46 0.65 0.59 0.03 0.36 0.51 0.09 0.08 0.46 0.51 0.47 0.73
1
Data are x+1 transformed and data in parentheses are original
Volume 39 Issue 1 (2016) 89
1
TABLE 2: Parameter estimates for the Gompertz and logistic equations .
Year Gompertz parameters Logistic parameters
a b xo R2 a b xo R2
2008-09 111.85 37.23 -4.70 0.74 101.68 1.64 107.06 0.81
2009-10 108.74 37.87 -6.13 0.73 100.72 1.68 107.04 0.82
1
a : yield asymptote (% of season long weed-free field pea); b and xo constants; R2 coefficient of determination (%).
TABLE 3: Effect of crop-weed competition on plant height, yield attributes, grain and straw yield of field pea
Treatments Plant height (cm) No of branches plant-1 No of pods plant-1 No of grains pod-1 Grain yield kg ha-1
2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10
Weedy check 82.67 72.67 1.52 1.44 10.56 10.09 3.11 2.93 1118 1008
Weed free 60.80 55.32 3.04 2.87 19.26 18.89 4.67 4.40 2224 2015
Weed free up to 77.33 70.69 1.67 1.58 11.90 11.42 3.18 2.99 1245 1118
20 DAS
Weed free up to 63.67 57.09 2.67 2.46 17.11 16.45 3.85 3.63 1938 1730
40 DAS
Weed free up to 62.00 56.47 2.84 2.70 18.98 17.63 4.25 4.12 2159 1888
60 DAS
Weed free up to 61. 70 55.99 2.78 2.84 19.28 18.76 4.20 4.39 2235 1954
80 DAS
Weed free up to 61.67 55.83 2.98 2.81 19.34 18.51 4.62 4.36 2246 1995
100 DAS
Weedy up to 61.33 56.21 2.80 2.74 19.22 18.27 4.53 4.27 2215 1946
20 DAS
Weedy up to 63.00 60.31 2.22 2.18 15.65 15.15 4.02 3.78 1783 1656
40 DAS
Weedy up to 69.33 63.39 2.09 2.07 14.47 13.98 3.36 3.17 1624 1456
60 DAS
Weedy up to 72.61 67.00 1.82 1.72 13.47 12.98 3.22 3.04 1423 1277
80 DAS
Weedy up to 76.61 68.67 1.64 1.55 12.50 11.97 3.13 2.95 1179 1058
100 DAS
SEm± 3.79 3.04 0.14 0.17 0.89 1.09 0.31 0.22 107 95
CD at 5% 11.20 8.97 0.42 0.51 2.83 3.21 0.90 0.66 314 280
140
●Weedy ●Weedy
Relative yield (% of season long weed free)
Relative yield (% of season long weed free)
100
5 % yield loss
10 % yield loss
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 1 00 120
REFERENCES
Akhter, N., Rahman, M.M., Hasanuzzaman, M. and Nahar, K. (2009). Plant characters and seed yield of garden pea under
different light intensity. Am.-Eur. J. Agron.2: 152–155.
Harker, K.N., Blackshaw, R.E. and Clayton, G.W. (2001). Timing weeds removal in field pea (Pisum sativum). Weed
Technology. 15: 277-283.
Knezevic, S.Z., Evans, S.P., Blankenship, E.E.,Van Acker, R.C. and Lindquist, J.L. (2002). Critical period for weed control:
the concept and data analysis. Weed Science50: 773-786.
Kumar, A., Sharma, B.C., Nandan, B. and Sharma, K.P. (2009).Crop-weed competition in field pea under rainfed subtropical
conditions of Kandi belt of Jammu. Indian J. of Weed Sci. 41(1&2) : 23-26.
Mohler, C.L. (2001). Enhancing the competitive ability of crops. In M. Liebman, C. Mohler, and C. Stave reds. Ecological
Management of Agricultural weeds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 269-321.
Tepe, I., Erman, M., Yarcin, R. and Bukun, B. (2011).Critical period of weed control in chickpea under non-irrigated
condition.Turk. J. Agric. For. 35 : 525-534.
Tripathi, S.S., Singh, R., Singh, S. and Singh, R.K. (2001). Study on crop-weed competition in tendril pea (Pisum sativum
L.) under Tarai of Uttaranchal. Indian J. of Weed Sci.33 (1&2) : 46-48.
Vasilakoglou, Loannis and Kico Dhima (2012). Leafy and semi-leafless field pea competition with wild oat as affected by
weed density. Field Crop Research. 126: 130-136.
Copyright of Legume Research: An International Journal is the property of Agricultural
Research Communication Centre and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.