Effect of residue and weed management practices on weed flora, yield, energetics, carbon footprint, economics and soil quality of zero tillage wheat

被引:0
作者
R. Puniya
B. R. Bazaya
Anil Kumar
B. C. Sharma
Nesar Ahmed Nesar
R. S. Bochalya
M. C. Dwivedi
Neetu Sharma
Rakesh Kumar
Jyoti Sharma
Ashu Sharma
Swati Mehta
机构
[1] Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology,AICRP Weed Management
[2] College of Agriculture,FSR
[3] Kumher (SKNAU,Division of Agronomy
[4] Jobner),undefined
[5] Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology,undefined
[6] FoA,undefined
[7] Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Science & Technology,undefined
[8] Shoolini University of Biotechnology and Management Science,undefined
[9] KVK,undefined
[10] Kathua,undefined
[11] Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology,undefined
来源
Scientific Reports | / 13卷
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A two-year field study was conducted during Rabi 2018–2019 and 2019–20 to find out the influence of different residue and weed management practices on weed dynamics, growth, yield, energetics, carbon footprint, economics and soil properties in zero-tilled sown wheat at Research Farm, AICRP-Weed management, SKUAST-Jammu. The experiment with four rice residue management practices and four weed management practices was conducted in a Strip-Plot Design and replicated thrice. The results showed that residue retention treatments recorded lower weed density, biomass and higher wheat growth, yield attributes and yields of wheat as compared to no residue treatment. The magnitude of increase in wheat grain yield was 17.55, 16.98 and 7.41% when treated with 125% recommended dose of nitrogen + residue + waste decomposer (RDN + R + WD), 125% RDN + R, and 100% RDN + R, respectively, compared to no residue treatment. Further, all three herbicidal treatments decreased weed density and biomass than weedy treatments. Consequently, a reduction of 29.30, 28.00, and 25.70% in grain yield were observed in control as compared to sulfosulfuron + carfentrazone, clodinafop-propargyl + metasulfuron, and clodinafop-propargyl + metribuzin, respectively. Moreover, 125% RDN + R + WD obtained significantly higher energy output (137860 MJ ha−1) and carbon output (4522 kg CE/ha), but 100% RDN had significantly higher net energy (101802 MJ ha−1), energy use efficiency (7.66), energy productivity (0.23 kg MJ−1), energy profitability (6.66 kg MJ−1), carbon efficiency (7.66), and less carbon footprint (7.66) as compared to other treatments. Despite this, treatments with 125% RDN + R + WD and 125% RDN + R provided 17.58 and 16.96% higher gross returns, and 24.45% and 23.17% net outcomes, respectively, than that of control. However, compared to the control, sulfosulfuron + carfentrazone showed considerably higher energy output (140492 MJ ha−1), net energy (104778 MJ ha−1), energy usage efficiency (4.70), energy productivity (0.14 kg MJ−1), energy profitability (3.70 kg MJ−1), carbon output (4624 kg CE ha−1), carbon efficiency (4.71), and lower carbon footprint (0.27). Furthermore, sulfosulfuron + carfentrazone, clodinafop-propargyl + metasulfuron, and clodinafop-propargyl + metribuzin recorded 29.29% and 38.42%, 27.99%, and 36.91%, 25.69% and 34.32% higher gross returns and net returns over control treatment, respectively. All three herbicides showed higher gross returns, net returns, and benefit cost ratio over control. The soil nutrient status was not significantly affected either by residue or weed management practices. Therefore, based on present study it can be concluded that rice residue retention with 25% additional nitrogen and weed management by clodinafop-propargyl + metasulfuron herbicide found suitable for zero tillage wheat.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Weed management for enhancing yield and economics of wheat (Triticum aestivum) in Eastern India
    Singh, Ravi Prakash
    Verma, Sunil Kumar
    Kumar, Sushil
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2020, 90 (07): : 1352 - 1355
  • [32] Effect of tillage, cover crop and crop rotation on the composition of weed flora in a sandy soil
    Shrestha, A
    Knezevic, SZ
    Roy, RC
    Ball-Coelho, BR
    Swanton, CJ
    WEED RESEARCH, 2002, 42 (01) : 76 - 87
  • [33] Effect of the Year on the Weed Condition of Winter Wheat in Different Soil Tillage Treatments
    Attila Percze
    Csilla Kleinheincz
    Aniko Farkas
    Cereal Research Communications, 2005, 33 : 73 - 76
  • [34] Effect of weed control practices on weed dynamics, yield and economics of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]
    Devi, K. Nandini
    Singh, Kh. Lenin
    Mangang, C. N. J. S. Arangba
    Singh, N. Brajendra
    Athokpam, Herojit Singh
    Singh, A. Dorendro
    LEGUME RESEARCH, 2016, 39 (06) : 995 - 998
  • [35] EFFECT OF THE YEAR ON THE WEED CONDITION OF WINTER WHEAT IN DIFFERENT SOIL TILLAGE TREATMENTS
    Percze, Attila
    Kleinheincz, Csilla
    Farkas, Aniko
    CEREAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS, 2005, 33 (01) : 73 - 76
  • [36] Response of wheat yield and soil fertility to tillage and plant residue management
    Imran, Shahzad
    Arif, Muhammad
    BIOSCIENCE RESEARCH, 2021, 18 (04): : 2671 - 2684
  • [37] Effect of different herbicides on mixed weed flora, yield and economics of wheat (Triticum aestivum) under irrigated conditions of Jammu
    Bharat, Rajeev
    Kachroo, Dileep
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2007, 77 (06): : 383 - 386
  • [38] Impact of soil management practices on yield quality, weed infestation and soil microbiota abundance in organic zucchini production
    Bucki, Piotr
    Regdos, Kinga
    Siwek, Piotr
    Domagala-Swiatkiewicz, Iwona
    Kaszycki, Pawel
    SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE, 2021, 281
  • [39] System productivity, energetics and economics of soybean (Glycine max) - wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system as influenced by weed management practices
    Dubey, R. P.
    Lal, Shyam
    Ghosh, Dibakar
    Singh, P. K.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2022, 92 (08): : 962 - 965
  • [40] Yield and quality of bajra napier hybrid as influenced by weed management practices
    Swathy, A. H.
    Thomas, Usha C.
    RANGE MANAGEMENT AND AGROFORESTRY, 2021, 42 (02) : 294 - 300