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

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. sp3 (2025): Advances in Plant Health Improvement for Sustainable Agriculture

Effect of post-emergence herbicides on weed control in Teak (Tectona grandis Linn. f.) nurseries

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.8829
Submitted
12 April 2025
Published
31-07-2025

Abstract

The current investigation aims to assess the influence and suitability of post-emergence herbicides on weed management, germination and seedling development in teak nurseries. The teak drupes underwent soaking and drying processes for six days, followed by field emergence in a 10.5 m2 nursery bed after preconditioning on the seventh day. The experiment, replicated four times, involved the application of post-emergence herbicides two months post-sowing. A total of twenty-one treatments were implemented: T0 (Control), T1 to T4 (Halosulfuron methyl 75 % Water-dispersible Granule (WG) at rates of 45 g, 67 g, 90 g and 110 g/ha), T5 to T8 (Imazethapyr 10 % SL at rates of 156 mL, 234 mL, 312 mL and 390 mL/ha), T9 to T12 (Quizalofop 5 % Emulsifiable Concentrate (EC) at rates of 600 mL, 900 mL, 1200 mL and 1500 mL/ha), T13 to T16 (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid 58 % Soluble Liquid (SL) at rates of 430 mL, 620 mL, 860 mL and 1070 mL/ha) and T17 to T20 (Oxyfluorfen 23.5 % EC at rates of 375 mL, 560 mL, 750 mL and 937 mL/ha). The experimental design utilized a randomized block layout. Weed species (including broad-leaved plants, grasses and sedges) present in the nursery were documented in random 1 m2 plots for each treatment thirty days post-herbicide application. The outcomes indicate that the post-emergence herbicide, imazethapyr 10 % SL at a rate of 234 mL/ha, demonstrates compatibility, effectively controlling monocot and broad-leaved weeds while promoting teak seedling germination and growth with minimal phytotoxic effects.

References

  1. 1. Kjaer ED, Foster GS. The economics of tree improvement of teak (Tectona grandis L.) Technical Note 43. Danida Forest Seed Centre. Danida Forest Seed Centre, Humlebaek, Denmark. 1996;43:1-27.
  2. 2. Arunkumar AN, Warrier K, Warrier RR. The timeless legacy of teak: Unveiling its history, importance and enduring relevance. In: Economically important trees: Origin, evolution, genetic diversity and ecology. Springer, Singapore. 2024;37:173-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-5940-8_5
  3. 3. Muzik TJ. Weed biology and control. 1970;1-273.
  4. 4. Masilamani P, Paramathma M, Chinnusamy C, Sudhagar RJ, Annadurai K. Effect of pre-emergence herbicides on weed control in Pungam (Pongamia pinnata L.) nursery. Indian Forester. 2013;139(9):811-3.
  5. 5. Bargali SS. Cultural practices in nursery. In: Singh V, Lavania SC, editors. Forest trees and nursery management: Current trends. (). Dehradun: Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh Publications; 2003. p. 211-28.
  6. 6. Harker KN, O'Donovan JT. Recent weed control, weed management and integrated weed management. Weed Technology. 2013;27(1):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1614/WT-D-12-00109.1
  7. 7. Agostinetto D, Tarouco CP, Markus C, de Oliveira E, da Silva JM, Tironi SP. Seletividade de genótipos de eucalipto a doses de herbicidas. Semina: Ciências Agrárias. 2010;31(3):585-98. https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2010v31n3p585
  8. 8. Paz L, Ferreira CH, Endres L, Nascimento HH, Souza RD. Phytotoxic effects of African mahogany seedlings to herbicides. Floresta e Ambiente. 2018;25(4):1-7 https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-8087.018617.
  9. 9. Norsworthy JK, Ward SM, Shaw DR, Llewellyn RS, Nichols RL, Webster TM, et al. Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Science. 2012 ;60(SP1):31-62. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-11-00155.1
  10. 10. Braz GB, Oliveira RS, Constantin J, Takano HK, Godinho FB. Selectivity of herbicides applied in post-emergence of showy crotalaria. Revista Caatinga. 2016;29(4):918-26. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252016v29n417rc
  11. 11. Masilamani P, Chinnusamy C, Annadurai K. Promotion of germination in teak (Tectona grandis Linn. f.) using pre-emergence herbicides. Indian Journal of Forestry. 2018;41(1):43-7. https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2018-3VMGD4
  12. 12. Mani VS, Malla ML, Gautam KC, Bhagwandas B. Weed-killing chemicals in potato cultivation. Indian Farming. 1973:23(8):17-8
  13. 13. Raju RA. Field manual for weed ecology and herbicidal research. Agrotech Publishing Academy, Udaipur; 1997.
  14. 14. Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. Statistical methods for agricultural workers. Indian Council of Agricultural Research Publications, New Delhi, India. 1995.1-330.
  15. 15. Grossmann K. Mediation of herbicide effects by hormone interactions. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2003;22:109-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-003-0020-0
  16. 16. Oruc EO, Sevgiler Y, Uner N. Tissue-specific oxidative stress responses in fish exposed to 2, 4-D and azinphosmethyl. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2004;137(1):43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2003.11.006
  17. 17. Benli AÇ, Sarıkaya R, Sepici-Dincel A, Selvi M, Şahin D, Erkoç F. Investigation of acute toxicity of (2, 4-dichlorophenoxy) acetic acid (2, 4-D) herbicide on crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Esch. 1823). Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology. 2007;88(3):296-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2007.01.004
  18. 18. Nelson KA, Renner KA, Penner D. Weed control in soybean (Glycine max) with imazamox and imazethapyr. Weed Science. 1998;46(5):587-94. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043174500091141
  19. 19. Kay G, McMillan MG. Pre-and post-emergent herbicides in chickpeas. I. Crop tolerance. In: Proceedings of the 9th Australian Weeds Conference. 1990;40-3.
  20. 20. Kantar F, Elkoca E, Zengin H. Chemical and agronomical weed control in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L. cv. Aziziye-94). Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry. 1999;23(6):631-6.
  21. 21. Munro IC, Carlo GL, Orr JC, Sund KG, Wilson RM, Kennepohl E, et al. A comprehensive, integrated review and evaluation of the scientific evidence relating to the safety of the herbicide 2, 4-D. Journal of the American College of Toxicology. 1992;11(5):559-664. https://doi.org/10.3109/10915819209141893.
  22. 22. Tan S, Evans RR, Dahmer ML, Singh BK, Shaner DL. Imidazolinone‐tolerant crops: History, current status and future. Pest Management Science. 2005;61(3):246-57. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.993.
  23. 23. Ram H, Singh G, Aggarwal N, Buttar GS, Singh O. Standardization of rate and time of application of imazethapyr weedicide in soybean. Indian Journal of Plant Protection. 2013;41(1):33-7.
  24. 24. Nandan B, Sharma BC, Kumar A, Sharma V. Efficacy of pre and post emergence herbicides on weed flora of urd bean under rainfed subtropical Shiwalik foothills of Jammu and Kashmir. Indian Journal of Weed Science. 2011;43:172-4.
  25. 25. Vyas MD, Jain AK. Effect of pre-and post-emergence herbicides on weed control and productivity of soybean (Glycine max). Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2003;48(4):309-11.
  26. 26. Papiernik SK, Grieve CM, Yates SR, Lesch SM. Phytotoxic effects of salinity, imazethapyr and chlorimuron on selected weed species. Weed science. 2003;51(4):610-7. https://doi.org/10.1614/0043-1745(2003)051[0610:PEOSIA]2.0.CO;2
  27. 27. Vikas Gupta VG, Singh BN, Jai Kumar JK, Mahender Singh MS, Jamwal BS. Effect of imazathypr on weed control and yield in chickpea under Kandi belt of low altitude sub-tropical zone of Jammu. Madras Agricultural Journal. 2012;99(1-3):81-6. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.100020
  28. 28. Ramesh T, Rathika S. Management of emerged weeds in irrigated blackgram (Vigna mungo. L.) through post emergence herbicides. Legume Research. 2016;39(2):289-92. https://doi.org/10.18805/lr.v0iof.6771
  29. 29. Kuhns LJ. How to control weeds-the basics and the herbicides. American Nurseryman. 1982;155(5):29-49.
  30. 30. Cooper PD. Herbicide for use in broadleaved seedbeds with particular reference to amenity species. Aspects of Applied Biology. 1984;5:391-6.
  31. 31. Meakin AR, Orpin C. Oxyfluorfen. Further studies in nursery weed control and species safety. Aspects of Applied Biology. 1984;5:397-407.
  32. 32. South DB. Herbicides for southern pine seedbeds. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 1986;10:152-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/sjaf/10.3.152
  33. 33. Mason WL, Williamson DR. Recent research into weed control on seedbeds in forest nurseries. Aspects of Applied Biology. 1988;16:231-8.
  34. 34. Turner DJ, Loader MP. Effect of ammonium sulphate and other additives upon the phytotoxicity of glyphosate to Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. Weed Research. 1980;20(3):139-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.1980.tb00059.x
  35. 35. Masilamani P, Chinnusamy C, Albert VA, Govindaraj M. Compatibility and efficiency of pre-emergence herbicides on weed control and seedling growth of Teak (Tectona grandis L. f.) nursery. Indian Journal of Forestry. 2017;40(1):9-13. https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2017-NO2D32
  36. 36. Owston PW, Abrahamson LP. Weed management in forest nurseries. In: Duryea ML, Landis TD, Perry CR, editors. Forestry Nursery Manual: Production of Bareroot Seedlings. Netherlands: Springer; 1984. p. 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6110-4_18

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.