Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp1 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Weed dynamics and crop productivity in kharif rice (Oryza sativa L.) under different establishment methods and herbicide treatments

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.10370
Submitted
30 June 2025
Published
04-02-2026

Abstract

The present study was conducted during the kharif season of 2024 at the Post Graduate Research Farm, M S Swaminathan School of Agriculture, Centurion University of Technology and Management, Paralakhemundi, Odisha. The objective was to evaluate the effect of herbicides on weed dynamics and crop productivity under different establishment methods. The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with 2 main plots and 10 subplots, replicated thrice. The main plots consisted of 2 establishment methods: transplanted rice (TPR) and dry-seeded rice (DSR). Subplots included 5 weed management treatments: W1 to W5, comprising combinations of pre- and post-emergence herbicides, W4: hand weeding (HW) and a weedy check (W5), using the test variety RNR-15048. TPR exhibited superior weed suppression (35 % higher WCE), improved growth, yield attributes and recorded 33 % higher yield over DSR. Among weed control treatments, W3 (Pretilachlor 600 g ha-1 PE fb Pyrazosulfuron ethyl 10 % WP 20 g ha-1 at 20 DAT/S) was most effective, with 83–93 % weed control efficiency which was only     5–18 % less than HW. Though HW achieved the highest yield, W3 registered the highest benefit-cost (B:C) ratio of 1.66, outperforming HW due to reduced labour dependency, which resulted in a 41 % lower B:C ratio in HW. Despite higher cultivation costs, TPR showed a 33 % higher B:C ratio than DSR. Thus, W3 in either TPR or DSR is recommended as a labour-saving and cost-effective weed management strategy, especially vital amidst growing labour scarcity in Indian agriculture.

References

  1. 1. Food and Agriculture Organization. FAOSTAT: Crops and livestock products. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2023.
  2. 2. Government of Odisha. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production. Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment, Government of Odisha. 2025.
  3. 3. Kumar P, Singh PD, Singh T, Singh A, Pal RK, Singh G. Yield, nutrient uptake, quality and economics of rice (Oryza sativa L.) as affected by various crop establishment methods and nitrogen levels. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2019;8(5):2009–12.
  4. 4. Ahmed S, Humphreys E, Salim M, Chauhan BS, Kumar V, Zaman AU, et al. Dry direct-seeded and broadcast rice: a profitable and climate-smart alternative to puddled transplanted aus rice in Bangladesh. Field Crops Res. 2025;322:109739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109739
  5. 5. Joshi E, Dinesh K, Lal B, Nepalia V, Gautam P, Vyas AK. Management of direct-seeded rice for enhanced resource use efficiency. Plant Knowl J. 2013;2:119–34.
  6. 6. Rao A, Johnson D, Sivaprasad B, Ladha J, Mortimer A. Weed management in direct-seeded rice. Adv Agron. 2007;93:153–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(06)93004-1
  7. 7. Oerke EC, Dehne HW. Safeguarding production: losses in major crops and the role of crop protection. Crop Prot. 2004;23:275–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2003.10.001
  8. 8. Sekhawat K, Rathore SS, Chauhan BS. Weed management in dry direct-seeded rice: a review on challenges and opportunities for sustainable rice production. Agronomy. 2020;10(9):1264. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10091264
  9. 9. Mirza H, Kamrun N, Karim MR. Effectiveness of different weed control methods on the performance of transplanted rice. Pak J Weed Sci Res. 2007;13:17–25.
  10. 10. Kumar S, Shivani M, Mishra JS, Kumar S, Kumar U, Bharati RC. Efficacy of pre- and post-emergence herbicides on complex weed flora in direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa). Indian J Agric Sci. 2018;88:387–92. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v88i3.78502
  11. 11. Chaudhary A, Venkatramanan V, Kumar MA, Sharma S. Agronomic and environmental determinants of direct seeded rice in South Asia. Circ Econ Sustain. 2023;3(1):253–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00173-x
  12. 12. Kaur T, Kaur S, Singh G, Singh M, Singh J, Kaur P, et al. Weed control in direct-seeded rice with ready mix of penoxsulam + pendimethalin. Indian J Weed Sci. 2025;57(2):155–9. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2025.00026.6
  13. 13. Brar NS, Sandhu PS, Kumar A, Singh P, Kaur S. Economic assessment of herbicide use in rice under different establishment methods in Northwest India. Agrochemicals. 2025;4(2):7. https://doi.org/10.3390/agrochemicals4020007
  14. 14. Bamal D, Duhan A, Pal A, Beniwal RK, Kumawat P, Dhanda S, et al. Herbicide risks to non-target species and the environment: a review. Environ Chem Lett. 2024;22:2977–3032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-024-01773-9
  15. 15. Rao AN, Singh RG, Mahajan G, Wani SP. Weed research issues, challenges and opportunities in India. Crop Prot. 2020;134:104451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2018.02.003
  16. 16. Monteiro A, Santos S. Sustainable approach to weed management: the role of precision weed management. Agronomy. 2022;12:118. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12010118
  17. 17. Mitra B, Patra K, Bhattacharya PM, Ghosh A, Chowdhury AK, Dhar T, et al. Efficacy of pre- and post-emergence herbicide combinations on weed control in no-till mechanically transplanted rice. Cogent Food Agric. 2022;8(1):2139794. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2022.2139794
  18. 18. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1984. 680 p.
  19. 19. Rao VS. Principles of weed science. New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing; 2000. p. 145–62. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482279603
  20. 20. Yadav DB, Yadav A, Punia SS. Evaluation of herbicides for weed control in transplanted rice. Indian J Weed Sci. 2011;43(1–2):61–4.
  21. 21. Chauhan BS, Abugho SB. Growth of four weed species in response to rice cultivar and density. PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e29413.
  22. 22. Mahajan G, Chauhan BS. Integrated weed management in rice: advances and future directions. Adv Agron. 2013;120:315–66.
  23. 23. Suryakala P, Murugan G, Saravanaperumal M, Suseendran K, Stalin P. Effect of weed management practices with new generation herbicides in transplanted rice. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2019;8(3):3913–5.
  24. 24. Dey RK, Sana M, Pal S, Mondal R, Pal S. Effect of post emergence herbicides on weed management in transplanted kharif rice (Oryza sativa L.) and their residuality on soil microorganisms. Curr J Appl Sci Technol. 2020;39(27):88–95. https://doi.org/10.9734/CJAST/2020/v39i2730923
  25. 25. Chauhan BS, Johnson DE. The role of seed ecology in improving weed management strategies in the tropics. Adv Agron. 2010;105:221–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(10)05006-6
  26. 26. Rao VS. Principles of weed science. 2nd ed. New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing; 2015.
  27. 27. Kumar V, Yadav S, Singh S. Effect of weed management practices on growth and yield of rice under system of rice intensification. Indian J Weed Sci. 2014;46(1):50–3.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.