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

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp5 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Effect of different weed management practices on organically grown cotton

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.11486
Submitted
26 August 2025
Published
13-07-2026

Abstract

Weeds pose a significant challenge in cotton cultivation by competing with the crop for essential resources such as sunlight, water and nutrients, ultimately leading to reduced yield and fibre quality if not effectively controlled. Although chemical herbicides have been widely used for weed management, rising concerns over herbicide resistance, environmental impacts and the need for sustainable agriculture have encouraged the adoption of organic alternatives. Among these, mulching has been recognised as an effective practice for weed suppression while improving soil health and reducing dependence on synthetic chemicals. A field study was conducted during the kharif seasons from 2020–2024 at the Centre for Organic Agriculture Research and Training, Department of Agronomy, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, to evaluate the effects of different weed management practices in organically grown cotton. The results indicated that crop growth parameters including plant height, leaf area per plant, number of sympodial branches per plantand dry matter accumulation per plant along with yield attributes such as number of picked bolls per plant, boll weight per plant and seed cotton yield per plant were significantly higher under the stale seedbed method combined with twice hand weeding, showing performance comparable to that of straw mulch. This treatment also recorded lower weed density and weed dry weight, along with higher weed control efficiency. Economic analysis revealed that stale seedbed with hand weeding produced higher gross returns, whereas straw mulch was more profitable with better net returns and benefit-cost ratio, indicating its suitability as a sustainable weed management option for organic cotton.

References

  1. 1. FiBL. Organic world 2024. 2023. https://www.fibl.org/en/shop-en/1747-organic-world-2024
  2. 2. IMARC Group. India organic cotton market report. 2024. https://www.imarcgroup.com/india-organic-cotton-market
  3. 3. Srinivasulu G, Rao AS. Effect of sequential application of herbicides on weed management in cotton. In: Proc Symp Challenges Agronomic Crop Management Early 21st Century. Hyderabad: Society of Agronomists; 2000. p. 24–5.
  4. 4. Mohler CL. Mechanical management of weeds. In: Liebman M, Mohler CL, Staver CP, eds. Ecological management of agricultural weeds. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge Univ Press; 2001. p. 139–209. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511541810.005
  5. 5. Naidu VS. Handbook on weed identification. Jabalpur (India): Directorate of Weed Science Research; 2012. 354 p.
  6. 6. Abdullah MR, Zakaria N, Ahmad-Hamdani MS, Juraimi AS. Evaluation of herbicide efficacy on weed control and grain yield in rice field under flooded condition. Plant Arch. 2020;20(2):8163–9.
  7. 7. OPSTAT statistical software. http://opstat.somee.com/
  8. 8. Chacko SR, Raj SK, Pillai PS, Jacob D, Lakshmi PR, Radhakrishnan NV, et al. Nutrient availability and nutrient uptake by crop and weed as influenced by stale seedbed, mulching and mechanical weeding in okra. Agric Sci Dig. 2022;42(5):568–73. https://doi.org/10.18805/ag.D-5529
  9. 9. Gopinath KA, Kumar N, Mina BL, Srivastva AK, Gupta HS. Evaluation of mulching, stale seedbed, hand weeding and hoeing for weed control in organic garden pea (Pisum sativum subsp. hortense L.). Arch Agron Soil Sci. 2009;55(1):115–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340802287026
  10. 10. Krishna RG, Ganesan E, Bharani K, Bharani A. Effect of weed management practices on weed dynamics, yield, quality parameters and economics of organic bhendi. Madras Agric J. 2017;104(10–12):340–4. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.201786
  11. 11. Kumari P, Saini JP, Kumar R, Chopra P, Sharma RP. Impact of seed bed manipulations and weed management practices on growth, yield and economics of wheat under organic conditions. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2019;8(8):2889–97. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.808.333
  12. 12. Patil B, Reddy VC, Prasad TV, Shankaralingappa BC, Devendra R, Kalyanamurthy KN. Weed management in irrigated organic finger millet. Agric Sci Dig. 2013;45(2):143–5.
  13. 13. Ravichandran RP, Prabhakaran NK. Behaviour of weeds under non-chemical methods of weed management in maize. Chem Sci Rev Lett. 2017;6(23):1604–8.
  14. 14. Gupta JP, Rao AV. Effect of mulching on nodulation, nitrogenase activity, growth and yield of greengram (Vigna radiata) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata subsp. cylindrica). Indian J Agric Sci. 1989;59(3):181–2.
  15. 15. Kumar P, Paslawar AN, Kumar S, Bhattacharjee S. Response of Bt cotton to different moisture conservation practices under dryland condition. Pharma Innov J. 2022;11(2):268–72.
  16. 16. Vandana DV, Sheeja KR, Jacob D, Shalini PP, Aparna B, Pratheesh PG. Enhancing finger millet yield and grain quality through stale seedbed and live mulch strategies. Plant Sci Today. 2025;12(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7997
  17. 17. Satyareddi SA, Devasenapathy P, Chinnusamy C, Kaleeshwari RK, Mynavathi V. Influence of non-chemical weed management practices on nutrient uptake in sunflower and weeds. Trends Biosci. 2015;8(13):3503–7.
  18. 18. Shankar KA, Channabasavanna AS. Effect of non-chemical weed management approaches on yield and nutrient uptake in high density planting of cotton in Vertisol of northern Karnataka. Int J Plant Soil Sci. 2022;34(23):396–404. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2022/v34i2331603
  19. 19. Hussain K, Ilyas A, Ali S, Bibi I, Shakil Q, Farid MU, et al. Impacts of nitrogen fertiliser application and mulching on morpho-physiological and yield-related traits in cotton. Agriculture. 2022;13(1):12. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13010012
  20. 20. Wankhade ST, Turkhede AB, Katkar RN, Solanke VM, Sakhare BA. Effect of bio-mulching and fertiliser on growth and yield of cotton. Crop Res. 2001;21:34–7.
  21. 21. Adak T, Singha A, Kumar K, Shukla SK, Singh A, Singh VK. Soil organic carbon, dehydrogenase activity, nutrient availability and leaf nutrient content as affected by organic and inorganic sources of nutrients in mango orchard soil. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2014;14(2):394–406. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-95162014005000031
  22. 22. Ansari AA, Ismail SA. Reclamation of sodic soils through vermitechnology. Pak J Agric Sci. 2008;21:1–4.
  23. 23. Rajashekarappa KS, Basavarajappa BE, Puttaiah ET. Effect of different organic mulches and in situ green manuring on soil properties, yield and economics of maize in south-eastern dry zone of Karnataka. Glob J Biol Agric Health Sci. 2013;2(3):236–40.
  24. 24. Sawale SA, Saoji BV, Patil MJ. Effect of sunhemp on nutrient content and uptake by rainfed cotton. Ann Plant Physiol. 2004;18(2):149–51.
  25. 25. Awasarmal BC. Organic residue management under soybean–sorghum cropping system in Vertisol [doctoral dissertation]. Parbhani (India): Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2002.
  26. 26. Pandian K, Subramaniayan P, Gnasekaran P, Chitraputhirapillai S. Effects of crop residue mulch and seedbed preparation methods on soil properties and rainfed groundnut production in Alfisols of semi-arid India. Soil Use Manag. 2021;37(3):479–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12622
  27. 27. Kumar R, Turkhede AB, Meena S, Nagar RK. Performance of American cotton–legume based intercropping system on nutrient uptake and soil nutrient status. Agric Sci Dig. 2016;36(3):234–6. https://doi.org/10.18805/asd.v36i3.11450
  28. 28. Mohan SC, Chandaragiri KK. Nutrient uptake and post-harvest available soil nutrients under organic farming system in cotton + blackgram intercropping system. Int J Plant Sci. 2007;2(1):120–3.
  29. 29. Blaise D, Velmourougane K, Santosh S, Manikandan A. Intercrop mulch affects soil biology and microbial diversity in rainfed transgenic Bt cotton hybrids. Sci Total Environ. 2021;794:148787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148787
  30. 30. Tu C, Ristaino JB, Hu S. Soil microbial biomass and activity in organic tomato farming systems: Effects of organic inputs and straw mulching. Soil Biol Biochem. 2006;38(2):247–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.05.002
  31. 31. Bilalis D, Sidiras N, Vavoulidou E, Konstantas A. Earthworm populations as affected by crop practices on clay loam soil in a Mediterranean climate. Soil Plant Sci. 2009;59(5):440–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710802342327

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.