Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 31 issue 1 (march 2010) : 11 - 20

INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT IN GROUNDNUT BASED INTERCROPPING SYSTEM- A REVIEW

K
K. Annadurai
N
Naveen Puppala
S
Sangu Angadi
C
C. Chinnusamy
1Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Kumulur, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Tamil Nadu, Kumulur- 621 712, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Annadurai K., Puppala Naveen, Angadi Sangu, Chinnusamy C. (2025). INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT IN GROUNDNUT BASED INTERCROPPING SYSTEM- A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 31(1): 11 - 20. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Minimizing the crop-weed competition particularly at early stage of groundnut usually encounters
with diverse weed flora, the yield could improved upon by about 20-30%. Reduction of pod yield
owing to competition with weed depends on the duration of the crop weed competition in general
and the stages of crop growth in particular. The yield losses are more pronounced in rain fed crop.
When the groundnut fields are kept weed free for a period of at least first 6 weeks there is no
significant reduction in pod yield. On the other hand, when groundnut competes with weeds at 4 -
8 weeks the reduction in pod yield is substantial. Effectiveness of weed control is largely dependent
on the weed species prevalent, its life cycle and method of propagation. Since mechanical / cultural
method alone does not ensure weed free condition, the use of herbicides in combination with
cultural methods should be adopted. In areas where agricultural labourer is scarce and costly, herbicides
may be used as pre and post emergence application to control weeds. Several studies have shown
that the productivity of groundnut is reduced considerably when weed competition occurs during
the early stage of the crop. Several workers have reported different critical periods ranging from 30
to 60 DAS revealed that critical period of weed competition was between 2 to 8 weeks after sowing.
In general, weed competition in groundnut is more severe for the first 6 weeks from sowing. Several methods have been employed to check the growth of weeds and to improve the crop stand and productivity. From the traditional method of hand weeding and hoeing, modernized methods of
weed management is the need of the day through the introduction of herbicides to meet labor
shortage to effect early weed control and reduce the cost of weeding. However, no single method
has been found to be quite effective in reducing the weed intensity and hence an integrated approachis essential. The integrated method of weed control is found to be more suitable for the managementof a broad spectrum of weeds.

REFERENCES

  1. Abraham, C.T. and Singh. S.P. (1986). Indian Farming, 36 (9): 33-34.
  2. Agasimani, C.A. et.al. (1978). In: ISWS / TNAU. Weed Science Conference, Coimbatore
  3. Anonymous, (1977). Annual report for the year 1976-77. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Agricultural College and
  4. Research Institute, Madurai.
  5. Anonymous, (1983). Annual Report of Coimbatore. All India Co-ordinated Research Programme on weed control
  6. ICAP. Pl. 480.
  7. Anonymous. (1985). Research Highlights-Groundnut, TNAU, Coimbatore.
  8. Anonymous. (1987). All India Coordinated Research Programme on weed control – weed Research and herbicides
  9. Residue studies in cultivate crops, Coimbatore Centre.
  10. Anonymous. (1989). Annual Report of Anna Farm- 1987 / 88. Tamil Nadu. South India.
  11. Appadurai, R. and Selvaraj.K.V. (1974). Madras Agric. J., 61: 803-804.
  12. Asokaraja, N and Ramiah, S. (1987). Madras Agric. J., 74: 252-254.
  13. Athmanaban, U. 1989. MSc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore,
  14. Balakrishnan, K and Rajendran. C. (1987). Madras Agric. J., 74: 403-404.
  15. Balanarasaiah, D. et.al. (1969). Indian Farming. 18(11): 31-33.
  16. Belorkar, V.T. et.al.(1984). In: Annual Conference Indian Society of Weed Science, Banaras Hindu University,
  17. Varanasi. 48-49p.
  18. Bhan, V.M. et.al. (1983). Tropical Pest Management 29(3): 274-276.
  19. Bhola, A.L. et.al. (1985). Haryana J. Agron., 1(1): 21-23.
  20. Brar, L.S. et.al. (1980). Pesticides 14(2): 24-27.
  21. Brar, L.S. et.al. (1973). Indian J. Weed Sci., 1 (2): 86-91.
  22. Carson, A.G. (1979). Ghana J. Agric. Sci., 9: 169-173.
  23. at higher ratio. Pre-emergence fluchloralin at 0.75
  24. kg ha-1 followed by one hand weeding controlled the
  25. weeds satisfactorily and registered higher yields
  26. (Anon, 1983). Similar findings with different doses
  27. of fluchloralin have been reported by Tosh and Jena
  28. (1983), Belorker et.al., (1984), Panwar et.al.,
  29. (1984), Raghavani et.al. (1984), Bhola et.al., (1985),
  30. Suresh (1984) and Pannu Rajkumar (1986).
  31. Malavia and Patel (1989) revealed that there was a
  32. marked decrease in weed population and increase
  33. in pod yield with increases in frequencies of cultural
  34. practices. In case of herbicide application, weed
  35. density increased markedly with advancement of age
  36. of crop. All the herbicides applied as pre-emergence
  37. spray controlled weed population up to 30 DAS. The
  38. effect of fluchloralin on pod yield was more or equal
  39. to one hand weeding on 30 DAS. Hence it has
  40. been suggested that pre-emergence herbicide spray
  41. followed by one hand weeding is ideal for effective
  42. control of weeds.
  43. 2.2.3.2 Cultural + Pendimethalin
  44. It was observed that pre-emergence
  45. application of pendimethalin followed by one hand
  46. hoeing and weeding checked the weed growth
  47. (Anon., 1983). Pendimethalin at 0.75 to 1.5 kg ha-
  48. 1 with one hand weeding gave the most effective
  49. weed control and produced yield similar to those
  50. under weed free condition (Bhola et.al., 1985).
  51. CONCLUSIONS
  52. In recent years, short duration legumes are
  53. intercropped with long and short duration legumes
  54. and it is observed that there is no marked reduction
  55. in the yield of the base crop. Intercropping systems
  56. have been reported to give higher return than the
  57. pure stand of crops. The results from different studies
  58. revealed that significantly higher dry pod yield and
  59. monetary returns were obtained from integrated
  60. weed management and mechanical method of
  61. weed control. However, application of herbicides
  62. alone did not control the weeds effectively. The
  63. pre-emergence application of herbicides like
  64. pendimethalin @0.75 kg a.i./ha + one hand
  65. weeding (15 DAS) + one hoeing (30 UAS) gave
  66. better results. The first hand weeding or harrowing
  67. in groundnut is usually done at 25 days after
  68. sowing and is repeated once or twice depending
  69. upon the weed situation. Beyond 45 days of
  70. sowing no weeding is done to avoid damage to
  71. the growing peg and developing pods. For
  72. controlling fresh flush of weeds appearing
  73. relatively at later stages, use of herbicides plus
  74. hand weeding is found effective.
  75. Vol. 31, No. 1, 2010 19
  76. Chandrasingh, D. et.al. (1977). In: Proceedings ISWS / APAU Weed Science Conference, Hyderabad. 202p
  77. Chandrasekaran, V.P.(1978). MSc.(Ag.) Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore,
  78. Chinnappan, K. (1978). MSc.(Ag.).Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore,
  79. Crookston, R.K. et.al. (1975). Crop Sci 15: 412-416.
  80. De, R. et.al. (1978). Indian J. Agric. Sci.. , 4: 132 -137.
  81. Drennan, D.S.H. and Jennings. E.A.(1977). Weed Res., 17: 3-9.
  82. Dwivedi, R.N. (1981). Fertil. News. 26(10): 28-34.
  83. Elangovan, R, and Gopalswamy. N. (1978). Pesticides 12(2): 41-42.
  84. Gangule, B.A. and Khuspe, V.S.(1962). Indian J. Agron., 6:270-277.
  85. Gaudham, K.C. (1984). In: Annual Conference Indian Society of Weed Science, Banaras Hindu University,
  86. Varanasi.. 47 p.
  87. Gajendra Giri. (I990). Indian J. Agron 35 (4): 446-449.
  88. Gill, H.S. and Brar. L.S (1973). Proc.3rd All India Weed control Semin, Hissar. pp. 46-47.
  89. Gopalasundaram, F. 1976. M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ., Coimbatore. India.
  90. Girijesh, G.K. and Patil. V.C (1989). Oil seeds Res. 6: 334-340.
  91. Gowda, K.T.K., et.al. (1977) In: Proc. Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Andhra Pradesh- Agric. Univ.,
  92. Hyderabad. 203p.
  93. Hammerton, J.L. (1976). Weed Res.,16 (l) : 27-35.
  94. Hedge, M.R. and Reddy. E.N.(1987). Indian J. Agron. , 32: 18-20.
  95. Hill, L.V. and Santleman. P.W. (1969). Weed Sci., 17(1): 1-2.
  96. Iwata, I. and Takayanagi. S. (1980). Weed Res., 25(3): 200-206.
  97. Jain, S.C., et.al. (1984). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc., Weed Sci. Banaras Hindu Univ., Varanasi. 52p.
  98. Jadhav, R.P., and Narkhede. R.N. (1982). Madras Agric. J., 6(11): 756-759.
  99. Janny, A., et.al. (1965). Neth. J. Agric. Sci., 13:280-283.
  100. Jeyakumar, R. , et. al. (1987). Pesticides 21(1): 37-39.
  101. Kalaiselvan, P., et.al. (1987). Andhra Agric. J., 34(2): 197-198.
  102. Karthikeyan, R..(1984). MSc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
  103. Kavalappa, B.N., et.al. (1988). Current Research (Univ.of Agrl. Sci., Bangalore.) 17(4): 43-46.
  104. Kavani, H.D., et. al. (1988). Indian J. Weed Sci., 3: 96-97 .
  105. Kondap, S.M., et.al. (1980). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Orissa Univ. Agric. Tech., Bhuvaneshwar. 25p.
  106. Kondap, S.M., et.al. (1985). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Punjab Agric. Univ., Ludhiana. 47p.
  107. Krishnamurthy, K., et.al. (1981). In: Proc. 8th Asian-Pao. Weed Sci. Soc. Conf., Bangalore. 123-127p.
  108. Kulandaivelu, R. et. al. (1978). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. Coimbatore.
  109. Kulandaivelu, R. and Sankaran. S. (1985). Indian J. Weed Sci., 17 (1); 26-30.
  110. Laura, S. et. al (1987). Crop Science, 27: 763-758.
  111. Mahapatra, L.C. et.al.(1985). Indian J. Agron. 30: 28-31.
  112. Mahrotra, O.N. and Ali. A. (1970). Indian J. Agron., 15: 277-280.
  113. Malavia, D.D. and Patel. J.C. (1989). Indian J. Agron., 3 (4): 338-342.
  114. Malik, R.K. and V.M. Bhan. 1983. Pesticides Annu. pp. 95-96
  115. Mehra S.P., P.S. Sidhu and H.S. Gill. 1987. J. Res. Pun Agric. Univ., 24(1): 8-14.
  116. Mohandass, S., et. al. (1987) .Indian express (Newspaper), April-29th, 1987.
  117. Morachan, Y.B., et. al. (1977). Madras Agric. J., 64: 607-608.
  118. Muthukumaran, A.(1985). MSc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. Coimbatore. India.
  119. Muthuvel. P., et. al. (1984). Madras Agric. J., 71: 623-624.
  120. Naidu, L.G.K., et.al. (1982). Indian J. Weed Sci., 14 ( 2 ): 137-140.
  121. Naik, L.B., et. al. (1977). Indian J. Weed Sci., 9 ( l ): 31-32.
  122. Narayana Rao, K., and Mahadeva Gupta. K. (1981). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci.,Univ., Agri. Sci.,
  123. Bangalore. 25p.
  124. Ono Y. and Ozaki. K. (1971). Field Crop Abstr., 25: 36-38.
  125. Palaniappan, S.P. (1985). Cropping systems in the tropics: Principles and Management, Willey Eastern Limited, New
  126. Delhi, 1-188.
  127. Parameswaran, P., et.al (1988). Indian Farming. 33 (7): 12-13.
  128. Pannu Rajkumar, (1986). J. Haryana Agric. Univ. 23(4): 290-291.
  129. Panwar, R.S., et.al. (1984). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc.Weed Sci., Banaras Hindu Univ. Varanasi. 46p.
  130. 20 AGRICUTURAL REVIEWS
  131. Patel, R.B. and Raghavani. (1980). In: Annual Conf. Indian. Soc. Weed Sci.. 0rissa Univ. Agric. Tech.,
  132. Bhubaneshwar. 46p.
  133. Patel, K.G., et. al. (1985). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Punjab Agric. Univ. Ludhi.ana. 36p.
  134. Patro, G.K., et.al. (1981). In: Annual Conf. Indian. Soc. Weed Sci., Univ. Agric. Sci., Bangalore. 25p.
  135. Prabhakara Setty, T.K. and Hosmani, M.M.(1975). Mysore J. Agric. Sci. 9(3): 439-448.
  136. Raghavani, B.R., et.al. (1984). Indian J. Weed Sci. , 16(4): 234-237.
  137. Rajah, C. et.al. (1978). Agriculture and Agro. Industries Journal October, 1978: 1-3.
  138. Rajan, M.S.S., et.al. (1982). Res. Bull. Marathuwada. Agric. Univ., Parbhani. 6(1/12): 15-17.
  139. Rangiah, F.K., et.al. (1976). Madras Agric. J., 63(8/10): 458-460
  140. Saraf, C.S., et.al. (1975). Indian J. A,gron., 20: 127-130.
  141. Saxena, M.C. (1973). Bulletin -Indian Society of Agronomy. New Delhi, 32-35p.
  142. Saxena, M.C., et.al. (1977). Legume Research, 1 : 27-32.
  143. Selvaraj, S.(1978). M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India.
  144. Seshadri, C.R., et.al. (1956). Madras Agric. J., 43 : 496-504.
  145. Seshaiah, T. (1978). M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis. Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.
  146. Seshaiah, T., et.al. (1979). In; Abstracts of papers, ISWS/MAU Weed Science Conference, Parbhani.
  147. Shah, C.B. and Meisheri.H.M. (1980). In: Annual Conf. Indian. Soc. Weed Sci., Orissa Univ., Agric. Tech.,
  148. Bhubaneshwar. 61p.
  149. Sinde, S.H., et.al. (1989). Indian J. Agron., 34 (4): 485-486.
  150. Singh, G.B. and Moolani. M.K.(1967). Indian J. Agron. 12: 267 -273.
  151. Singh, K.K., et.al. (1986). Indian J.. Agron. , 20: 187- 188.
  152. Singh, B.P., et.al. (I980). Haryana Agric. Univ. J. Res. , 10 (2) :207-2l2.
  153. Singh, A., et. al. (1988). Indian J.. Weed Sci., 17 ( 4 ): :9-14.
  154. Soundararajan, M.S., et.al. (1976). Madras Agric. J., 63(8/10): 496-497.
  155. Soundararajan, M.S., et.al. (1981). Pesticides, 15(3): 17-18.
  156. Soundararajan, M.S. et.al. (1984a). Madras Agric. J., 71: 408-410.
  157. Soundararajan, M.S., et.al. (1984b). Madras Agric. J., 71: 411-414.
  158. Sripathi, H.P. (1987). International Pigeon pea Newsletter, 6:36-37.
  159. Suresh, K.K. (1984). M.Sc.(Ag.).Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
  160. Tandon, H.L.S. and Sekhan, G.S. (1988). Fertilizer Development and consultation organization, New Delhi. 143p.
  161. Thimmegowda, S and Krishnagowda, K.P. (1977). In: Weed Science Conference Workshop. Andhra Pradesh Agric
  162. Univ., Hyderabad. India, 203-204p.
  163. Tiwari, A.N., et.al. (1989). Indian J. Agron. 34 ( 2 ): 137-171.
  164. Tiwari, A.N., et.al. (1990). Indian J. Agron. 35(4): 341-345.
  165. Tosh, G.C. and Jena, B.C. (1983). Indian J. Weed Sci., 15(1): 62-64.
  166. Verma, O.P.S. and Jaiprakash. (1977). In: Proc. ISWS/APAU Weed Sci. Conf. Hyderabad, 202p.
  167. Veerasamy, R., et.al. (1974). Madras Agric. J., 61: 801-802.
  168. Walker, M.E., et.al. (1982). Peanut Sci. 9: 53-57.
  169. Yadav , T.P. (1977). The Oil and Oil Seed J., 29:24.
  170. Yadav, S.K., et.al. (1986). In: Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science, Haryana Agrl. University.
  171. Yaduraju, N.T. et.al. (1980). Indian J. Agron. 25 ( 3 ) ; 447-452.
  172. Yaduraju, N.T., et.al. (1981). In: Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science. IARI, New Delhi
Published In
Agricultural Reviews
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    volume 31 issue 1 (march 2010) : 11 - 20

    INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT IN GROUNDNUT BASED INTERCROPPING SYSTEM- A REVIEW

    K
    K. Annadurai
    N
    Naveen Puppala
    S
    Sangu Angadi
    C
    C. Chinnusamy
    1Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Kumulur, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Tamil Nadu, Kumulur- 621 712, India

    • Submitted|

    • First Online |

    • doi

    Cite article:- Annadurai K., Puppala Naveen, Angadi Sangu, Chinnusamy C. (2025). INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT IN GROUNDNUT BASED INTERCROPPING SYSTEM- A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 31(1): 11 - 20. doi: .

    ABSTRACT

    Minimizing the crop-weed competition particularly at early stage of groundnut usually encounters
    with diverse weed flora, the yield could improved upon by about 20-30%. Reduction of pod yield
    owing to competition with weed depends on the duration of the crop weed competition in general
    and the stages of crop growth in particular. The yield losses are more pronounced in rain fed crop.
    When the groundnut fields are kept weed free for a period of at least first 6 weeks there is no
    significant reduction in pod yield. On the other hand, when groundnut competes with weeds at 4 -
    8 weeks the reduction in pod yield is substantial. Effectiveness of weed control is largely dependent
    on the weed species prevalent, its life cycle and method of propagation. Since mechanical / cultural
    method alone does not ensure weed free condition, the use of herbicides in combination with
    cultural methods should be adopted. In areas where agricultural labourer is scarce and costly, herbicides
    may be used as pre and post emergence application to control weeds. Several studies have shown
    that the productivity of groundnut is reduced considerably when weed competition occurs during
    the early stage of the crop. Several workers have reported different critical periods ranging from 30
    to 60 DAS revealed that critical period of weed competition was between 2 to 8 weeks after sowing.
    In general, weed competition in groundnut is more severe for the first 6 weeks from sowing. Several methods have been employed to check the growth of weeds and to improve the crop stand and productivity. From the traditional method of hand weeding and hoeing, modernized methods of
    weed management is the need of the day through the introduction of herbicides to meet labor
    shortage to effect early weed control and reduce the cost of weeding. However, no single method
    has been found to be quite effective in reducing the weed intensity and hence an integrated approachis essential. The integrated method of weed control is found to be more suitable for the managementof a broad spectrum of weeds.

    REFERENCES

    1. Abraham, C.T. and Singh. S.P. (1986). Indian Farming, 36 (9): 33-34.
    2. Agasimani, C.A. et.al. (1978). In: ISWS / TNAU. Weed Science Conference, Coimbatore
    3. Anonymous, (1977). Annual report for the year 1976-77. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Agricultural College and
    4. Research Institute, Madurai.
    5. Anonymous, (1983). Annual Report of Coimbatore. All India Co-ordinated Research Programme on weed control
    6. ICAP. Pl. 480.
    7. Anonymous. (1985). Research Highlights-Groundnut, TNAU, Coimbatore.
    8. Anonymous. (1987). All India Coordinated Research Programme on weed control – weed Research and herbicides
    9. Residue studies in cultivate crops, Coimbatore Centre.
    10. Anonymous. (1989). Annual Report of Anna Farm- 1987 / 88. Tamil Nadu. South India.
    11. Appadurai, R. and Selvaraj.K.V. (1974). Madras Agric. J., 61: 803-804.
    12. Asokaraja, N and Ramiah, S. (1987). Madras Agric. J., 74: 252-254.
    13. Athmanaban, U. 1989. MSc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore,
    14. Balakrishnan, K and Rajendran. C. (1987). Madras Agric. J., 74: 403-404.
    15. Balanarasaiah, D. et.al. (1969). Indian Farming. 18(11): 31-33.
    16. Belorkar, V.T. et.al.(1984). In: Annual Conference Indian Society of Weed Science, Banaras Hindu University,
    17. Varanasi. 48-49p.
    18. Bhan, V.M. et.al. (1983). Tropical Pest Management 29(3): 274-276.
    19. Bhola, A.L. et.al. (1985). Haryana J. Agron., 1(1): 21-23.
    20. Brar, L.S. et.al. (1980). Pesticides 14(2): 24-27.
    21. Brar, L.S. et.al. (1973). Indian J. Weed Sci., 1 (2): 86-91.
    22. Carson, A.G. (1979). Ghana J. Agric. Sci., 9: 169-173.
    23. at higher ratio. Pre-emergence fluchloralin at 0.75
    24. kg ha-1 followed by one hand weeding controlled the
    25. weeds satisfactorily and registered higher yields
    26. (Anon, 1983). Similar findings with different doses
    27. of fluchloralin have been reported by Tosh and Jena
    28. (1983), Belorker et.al., (1984), Panwar et.al.,
    29. (1984), Raghavani et.al. (1984), Bhola et.al., (1985),
    30. Suresh (1984) and Pannu Rajkumar (1986).
    31. Malavia and Patel (1989) revealed that there was a
    32. marked decrease in weed population and increase
    33. in pod yield with increases in frequencies of cultural
    34. practices. In case of herbicide application, weed
    35. density increased markedly with advancement of age
    36. of crop. All the herbicides applied as pre-emergence
    37. spray controlled weed population up to 30 DAS. The
    38. effect of fluchloralin on pod yield was more or equal
    39. to one hand weeding on 30 DAS. Hence it has
    40. been suggested that pre-emergence herbicide spray
    41. followed by one hand weeding is ideal for effective
    42. control of weeds.
    43. 2.2.3.2 Cultural + Pendimethalin
    44. It was observed that pre-emergence
    45. application of pendimethalin followed by one hand
    46. hoeing and weeding checked the weed growth
    47. (Anon., 1983). Pendimethalin at 0.75 to 1.5 kg ha-
    48. 1 with one hand weeding gave the most effective
    49. weed control and produced yield similar to those
    50. under weed free condition (Bhola et.al., 1985).
    51. CONCLUSIONS
    52. In recent years, short duration legumes are
    53. intercropped with long and short duration legumes
    54. and it is observed that there is no marked reduction
    55. in the yield of the base crop. Intercropping systems
    56. have been reported to give higher return than the
    57. pure stand of crops. The results from different studies
    58. revealed that significantly higher dry pod yield and
    59. monetary returns were obtained from integrated
    60. weed management and mechanical method of
    61. weed control. However, application of herbicides
    62. alone did not control the weeds effectively. The
    63. pre-emergence application of herbicides like
    64. pendimethalin @0.75 kg a.i./ha + one hand
    65. weeding (15 DAS) + one hoeing (30 UAS) gave
    66. better results. The first hand weeding or harrowing
    67. in groundnut is usually done at 25 days after
    68. sowing and is repeated once or twice depending
    69. upon the weed situation. Beyond 45 days of
    70. sowing no weeding is done to avoid damage to
    71. the growing peg and developing pods. For
    72. controlling fresh flush of weeds appearing
    73. relatively at later stages, use of herbicides plus
    74. hand weeding is found effective.
    75. Vol. 31, No. 1, 2010 19
    76. Chandrasingh, D. et.al. (1977). In: Proceedings ISWS / APAU Weed Science Conference, Hyderabad. 202p
    77. Chandrasekaran, V.P.(1978). MSc.(Ag.) Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore,
    78. Chinnappan, K. (1978). MSc.(Ag.).Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore,
    79. Crookston, R.K. et.al. (1975). Crop Sci 15: 412-416.
    80. De, R. et.al. (1978). Indian J. Agric. Sci.. , 4: 132 -137.
    81. Drennan, D.S.H. and Jennings. E.A.(1977). Weed Res., 17: 3-9.
    82. Dwivedi, R.N. (1981). Fertil. News. 26(10): 28-34.
    83. Elangovan, R, and Gopalswamy. N. (1978). Pesticides 12(2): 41-42.
    84. Gangule, B.A. and Khuspe, V.S.(1962). Indian J. Agron., 6:270-277.
    85. Gaudham, K.C. (1984). In: Annual Conference Indian Society of Weed Science, Banaras Hindu University,
    86. Varanasi.. 47 p.
    87. Gajendra Giri. (I990). Indian J. Agron 35 (4): 446-449.
    88. Gill, H.S. and Brar. L.S (1973). Proc.3rd All India Weed control Semin, Hissar. pp. 46-47.
    89. Gopalasundaram, F. 1976. M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ., Coimbatore. India.
    90. Girijesh, G.K. and Patil. V.C (1989). Oil seeds Res. 6: 334-340.
    91. Gowda, K.T.K., et.al. (1977) In: Proc. Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Andhra Pradesh- Agric. Univ.,
    92. Hyderabad. 203p.
    93. Hammerton, J.L. (1976). Weed Res.,16 (l) : 27-35.
    94. Hedge, M.R. and Reddy. E.N.(1987). Indian J. Agron. , 32: 18-20.
    95. Hill, L.V. and Santleman. P.W. (1969). Weed Sci., 17(1): 1-2.
    96. Iwata, I. and Takayanagi. S. (1980). Weed Res., 25(3): 200-206.
    97. Jain, S.C., et.al. (1984). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc., Weed Sci. Banaras Hindu Univ., Varanasi. 52p.
    98. Jadhav, R.P., and Narkhede. R.N. (1982). Madras Agric. J., 6(11): 756-759.
    99. Janny, A., et.al. (1965). Neth. J. Agric. Sci., 13:280-283.
    100. Jeyakumar, R. , et. al. (1987). Pesticides 21(1): 37-39.
    101. Kalaiselvan, P., et.al. (1987). Andhra Agric. J., 34(2): 197-198.
    102. Karthikeyan, R..(1984). MSc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
    103. Kavalappa, B.N., et.al. (1988). Current Research (Univ.of Agrl. Sci., Bangalore.) 17(4): 43-46.
    104. Kavani, H.D., et. al. (1988). Indian J. Weed Sci., 3: 96-97 .
    105. Kondap, S.M., et.al. (1980). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Orissa Univ. Agric. Tech., Bhuvaneshwar. 25p.
    106. Kondap, S.M., et.al. (1985). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Punjab Agric. Univ., Ludhiana. 47p.
    107. Krishnamurthy, K., et.al. (1981). In: Proc. 8th Asian-Pao. Weed Sci. Soc. Conf., Bangalore. 123-127p.
    108. Kulandaivelu, R. et. al. (1978). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. Coimbatore.
    109. Kulandaivelu, R. and Sankaran. S. (1985). Indian J. Weed Sci., 17 (1); 26-30.
    110. Laura, S. et. al (1987). Crop Science, 27: 763-758.
    111. Mahapatra, L.C. et.al.(1985). Indian J. Agron. 30: 28-31.
    112. Mahrotra, O.N. and Ali. A. (1970). Indian J. Agron., 15: 277-280.
    113. Malavia, D.D. and Patel. J.C. (1989). Indian J. Agron., 3 (4): 338-342.
    114. Malik, R.K. and V.M. Bhan. 1983. Pesticides Annu. pp. 95-96
    115. Mehra S.P., P.S. Sidhu and H.S. Gill. 1987. J. Res. Pun Agric. Univ., 24(1): 8-14.
    116. Mohandass, S., et. al. (1987) .Indian express (Newspaper), April-29th, 1987.
    117. Morachan, Y.B., et. al. (1977). Madras Agric. J., 64: 607-608.
    118. Muthukumaran, A.(1985). MSc.(Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. Coimbatore. India.
    119. Muthuvel. P., et. al. (1984). Madras Agric. J., 71: 623-624.
    120. Naidu, L.G.K., et.al. (1982). Indian J. Weed Sci., 14 ( 2 ): 137-140.
    121. Naik, L.B., et. al. (1977). Indian J. Weed Sci., 9 ( l ): 31-32.
    122. Narayana Rao, K., and Mahadeva Gupta. K. (1981). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci.,Univ., Agri. Sci.,
    123. Bangalore. 25p.
    124. Ono Y. and Ozaki. K. (1971). Field Crop Abstr., 25: 36-38.
    125. Palaniappan, S.P. (1985). Cropping systems in the tropics: Principles and Management, Willey Eastern Limited, New
    126. Delhi, 1-188.
    127. Parameswaran, P., et.al (1988). Indian Farming. 33 (7): 12-13.
    128. Pannu Rajkumar, (1986). J. Haryana Agric. Univ. 23(4): 290-291.
    129. Panwar, R.S., et.al. (1984). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc.Weed Sci., Banaras Hindu Univ. Varanasi. 46p.
    130. 20 AGRICUTURAL REVIEWS
    131. Patel, R.B. and Raghavani. (1980). In: Annual Conf. Indian. Soc. Weed Sci.. 0rissa Univ. Agric. Tech.,
    132. Bhubaneshwar. 46p.
    133. Patel, K.G., et. al. (1985). In: Annual Conf. Indian Soc. Weed Sci., Punjab Agric. Univ. Ludhi.ana. 36p.
    134. Patro, G.K., et.al. (1981). In: Annual Conf. Indian. Soc. Weed Sci., Univ. Agric. Sci., Bangalore. 25p.
    135. Prabhakara Setty, T.K. and Hosmani, M.M.(1975). Mysore J. Agric. Sci. 9(3): 439-448.
    136. Raghavani, B.R., et.al. (1984). Indian J. Weed Sci. , 16(4): 234-237.
    137. Rajah, C. et.al. (1978). Agriculture and Agro. Industries Journal October, 1978: 1-3.
    138. Rajan, M.S.S., et.al. (1982). Res. Bull. Marathuwada. Agric. Univ., Parbhani. 6(1/12): 15-17.
    139. Rangiah, F.K., et.al. (1976). Madras Agric. J., 63(8/10): 458-460
    140. Saraf, C.S., et.al. (1975). Indian J. A,gron., 20: 127-130.
    141. Saxena, M.C. (1973). Bulletin -Indian Society of Agronomy. New Delhi, 32-35p.
    142. Saxena, M.C., et.al. (1977). Legume Research, 1 : 27-32.
    143. Selvaraj, S.(1978). M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India.
    144. Seshadri, C.R., et.al. (1956). Madras Agric. J., 43 : 496-504.
    145. Seshaiah, T. (1978). M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis. Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.
    146. Seshaiah, T., et.al. (1979). In; Abstracts of papers, ISWS/MAU Weed Science Conference, Parbhani.
    147. Shah, C.B. and Meisheri.H.M. (1980). In: Annual Conf. Indian. Soc. Weed Sci., Orissa Univ., Agric. Tech.,
    148. Bhubaneshwar. 61p.
    149. Sinde, S.H., et.al. (1989). Indian J. Agron., 34 (4): 485-486.
    150. Singh, G.B. and Moolani. M.K.(1967). Indian J. Agron. 12: 267 -273.
    151. Singh, K.K., et.al. (1986). Indian J.. Agron. , 20: 187- 188.
    152. Singh, B.P., et.al. (I980). Haryana Agric. Univ. J. Res. , 10 (2) :207-2l2.
    153. Singh, A., et. al. (1988). Indian J.. Weed Sci., 17 ( 4 ): :9-14.
    154. Soundararajan, M.S., et.al. (1976). Madras Agric. J., 63(8/10): 496-497.
    155. Soundararajan, M.S., et.al. (1981). Pesticides, 15(3): 17-18.
    156. Soundararajan, M.S. et.al. (1984a). Madras Agric. J., 71: 408-410.
    157. Soundararajan, M.S., et.al. (1984b). Madras Agric. J., 71: 411-414.
    158. Sripathi, H.P. (1987). International Pigeon pea Newsletter, 6:36-37.
    159. Suresh, K.K. (1984). M.Sc.(Ag.).Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
    160. Tandon, H.L.S. and Sekhan, G.S. (1988). Fertilizer Development and consultation organization, New Delhi. 143p.
    161. Thimmegowda, S and Krishnagowda, K.P. (1977). In: Weed Science Conference Workshop. Andhra Pradesh Agric
    162. Univ., Hyderabad. India, 203-204p.
    163. Tiwari, A.N., et.al. (1989). Indian J. Agron. 34 ( 2 ): 137-171.
    164. Tiwari, A.N., et.al. (1990). Indian J. Agron. 35(4): 341-345.
    165. Tosh, G.C. and Jena, B.C. (1983). Indian J. Weed Sci., 15(1): 62-64.
    166. Verma, O.P.S. and Jaiprakash. (1977). In: Proc. ISWS/APAU Weed Sci. Conf. Hyderabad, 202p.
    167. Veerasamy, R., et.al. (1974). Madras Agric. J., 61: 801-802.
    168. Walker, M.E., et.al. (1982). Peanut Sci. 9: 53-57.
    169. Yadav , T.P. (1977). The Oil and Oil Seed J., 29:24.
    170. Yadav, S.K., et.al. (1986). In: Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science, Haryana Agrl. University.
    171. Yaduraju, N.T. et.al. (1980). Indian J. Agron. 25 ( 3 ) ; 447-452.
    172. Yaduraju, N.T., et.al. (1981). In: Annual Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science. IARI, New Delhi
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Agricultural Reviews

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)