Agricultural Reviews, volume 30 issue 1 (march 2009) : 32 - 39

APPROACHES ON HERBICIDE - HERBICDE INTERACTION - A REVIEW

K. Kalaichelvi, A. Arul Swaminathan, K.Ramamoorthy

Affiliations

¹Department of Agronomy Tamil Nadu Agricultural University - Coimbatore - 641 003, India

Submitted|
First Online |
doi

Cite article:- Kalaichelvi K., Swaminathan Arul A., K.Ramamoorthy (2025). APPROACHES ON HERBICIDE - HERBICDE INTERACTION - A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 30(1): 32 - 39. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Herbicide mixtures are commonly used in agriculture to broaden the spectrum of weed
control. The interactions or the combinations may be desirable or undesirable. Acetachlor at
150g/ha applied and ready mix application of anilofos and ethoxysulfuron at 780 g /ha provide
effective control of weeds with higher grain yield. Tank mix application of metribuzin with
isoproturon at 1.0 kg/ha, clodinofop (60g/ha) and fenoxyprop (120g/ha) applied at 3 leaf
stage marginally increase the mortality against the resistant biotypes and susceptible biotypes
of Phalaris minor with the corresponding increase in the dose of metribuzin. Tank mixing of
MON 12000, CGA 152005 with atrazine or bentazon reduces the weed control of these post
- emergence herbicides, in controlling velvetleaf. Chlorimuron is compatible with glyphosate,
but aciflurofen antogonise glyphosate activity. Thus the interaction effect of herbicide molecule
differed.

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Angiras, N.N. and Attri, S.P. (2002). Indian J. Weed Sci., 34: 42-45.
Brommer, L.C., et al. (2000). Weed Sci, 48: 181-187.
Ellis, M.J. and Griffin, L.J. (2003). Weed Technol, 17: 21-27.
Ferreira, L.K., et al. (1995). Weed Sci., 43: 184-191.
Vol. 30, No. 1, 2009 39
Gaul, O.S., et al. (1995). Weed Sci., 43: 358-364.
Hart, E.S. (1997). Weed Sci., 45: 434-438.
Hicks, V.T., et al. (1998). Weed Sci., 46: 284-288.
Hoagland, E.R., et al. (2004). Weed Sci., 52: 475-486.
Kathirvelan, P and Vaiyapuri, V. (2003). Indian J. Weed Sci., 35(3&4): 257-258.
Kleifeld, G., et al. (1994). Weed Res., 34: 461-469.
Moorthy, S.T.B., (2002). Indian J. Weed Sci., 34(344): 285-286
Narwal, S., et al. (2002). Indian J. Weed Sci., 34(1&2): 28-31.
Panwar, R.S., et al. (1995). Indian J. Weed Sci., 27 (1&2): 67-70.
Raskar, B.S. and Bhoi., P.G. (2002). Indian J. Weed Sci., 34(1&2): 50-52.
Singh, G and Singh, M. (2002). Indian. J. Weed Sci., 3(1&2): 9-12.
Singh, G., et al. (2004). Indian. J. Weed Sci., 36(1&2): 64-67.
Singh, S., et al. (2003). Indian. J. Weed Sci., 35(3&4): 190-193.
Stake, J.R. and Oliver, R.L. (1998). Weed Sci., 46: 652-660.
Thelen, D.K., et al. (1995). Weed Sci., 43: 337-341.
Yadav, A., et al. (2004). Indian J. Weed Sci., 36(1&2): 1-4.

Disclaimer :

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Copyright :

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

APPROACHES ON HERBICIDE - HERBICDE INTERACTION - A REVIEW

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Reviewed By

In this Article

APC

Publish With US

Become a Reviewer/Member

Open Access

Products and Services

Support and Policies

Editorial Board