INTRODUCTION:

Maize is the third most imperative grain crop in India after rice and wheat with respect to area and productivity. Maize has been major cereal crop and known as “Queen of Cereals” because of its great productivity potential and adaptability to wide range of environments it occupies significant place in world’s economy. It is grown over an area of 177million hectares with a total production of 967million tones.

Maize is a miracle crop; it is grown in more than 130 countries across the world (Commodity profile on maize, 2014). Major maize growing countries are USA, China, Brazil, Mexico, France, Argentina, Italy and India. Maize is highly productive crop with diversified uses, mainly as food and feed for livestock. It is an important source of carbohydrate, protein, iron, vitamin B, and minerals.

Though, maize is a vigorous and tall growing plant, it is susceptible to competition from weeds. High rainfall, high humidity and high temperature provide very conducive conditions for the lavish growth of the weeds. Weeds compete with crop plants for light, space, water and nutrients, especially during the early stages of growth as they are more adapted to agro-ecosystems than crop plants. Wide spacing in maize allows abundant growth of varied weed species, which trims down the photosynthetic efficiency, dry matter production and partitioning to economic parts and there by reduces sink capacity of crop resulting in poor grain yield (Vaid et al. 2010). Different weed control methods viz., mechanical, cultural and chemical methods of weed control have been devised, tested and perfected. Each of these methods has their advantages and disadvantages. Poor weed management is one amongst the numerous factors that significantly influences the yield of the crop.

Maize crop gets infested with variety of weeds and subjectedto heavy weed competition, which often inflicts huge losses ranging from 28 to 100% (Patelet al., 2006). Weed management strategies attempt to limit the deleterious effects of weeds growing with crop plants. These effects could be quite variable, but the most common is competition for available resources.

The quantities of growth factors used by weeds are thus unavailable to the crop. The extent of nutrient loss varies from 30-40% of the applied nutrients (Mundra et al.2002). The crop requires large amounts of N, P and K in addition to other micronutrients. Weed control can increase fertilizer use efficiency of the crop with checking wasteful removal of nutrients by weeds. Weeds are generally grow vigorous growers and their nutrient requirements are often greater than that of the crop plants. The magnitude of yield reduction due to infestation of grassy weeds, non-grassy weeds and sedges alone has been reported around 84.4, 31.7 and 21.5 per cent, respectively (Pandey.et al.1999). Chemical weed control is a better supplement to conventional methods and forms an integral part of the modern crop production. Most of thepresently available herbicides provide only a narrow spectrum weed control. Many of them have activity only on annual species, while a few are only effective against perennials. Continuous usage of same herbicide or similar herbicides year after year over several years do certainly lead to elimination of sensitive weed species but leave out the tolerant weed species resulting in a gradual build up of their population. Hence, use of two different chemicals with different mode of action may enhance the efficacy of weed control.

Maize is grown during kharif season June-July where manual method of weed control is difficult to adopt due to slushy or hard field conditions as a result of aberrations of monsoon and scarcity of labour and also manual weeding in maize based intercropping systems is difficult due to closely spaced crop rows of component crops. Therefore, pre-emergence and post-emergence herbicides hold a key for early season weed control in such system. Few herbicides like atrazine, oxyfluorfen,2,4-D and pendimethalin are available for weed control in maize but with few limitations for weed control whereas recently introduced herbicide viz., Topramezone and tembotrione are the selective, post-emergence herbicides that have been use in maize crop. These herbicides inhibit hydroxy-phenyl pyruvate dioxygenase (4-HPPD) and the biosynthesis of plastoquinone, with subsequent carotenoid pigment formation, membrane structure and chlorophyll disruption (Porter et al.,2005). HPPD inhibiting herbicides are most effective in newly developing tissues that emerge bleached, as a consequence of failure to properly assemble photo synthetic units and thus they control weeds. (Schonhammer et al., 2006). Tank mix application of these herbicides with lower dose of atrazine was reported to be more effective providing broad spectrum weed control than alone application of individual chemicals so there is urgent need to equivalate alternate post emergence herbicide which can provide broad spectrum weed control in maize crop at Indian condition. Keeping in view the above facts, the experiment entitled “Weed management in Kharif Maize (Zea mays L.) was carried out at Experimental Farm of Agronomy at College of Agriculture, Badnapur during Kharif 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

The experiment, “Weed management in Kharif maize (Zeya mays L.)” was carried out during Kharif 2019 at Experimental Farm of Agronomy, College of Agriculture Badnapur, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani Maharashtra (India). Soil of the experimental field clay in texture, moderate in available nitrogen and low in available phosphorus with high in available potassium, soil was moderately alkaline in reaction. The experimental site situated at 19.8682 ⁰N latitude and 75.7256 ⁰E longitude and an altitude of 523 m above mean sea level. The randomized block designs with consist of ten treatments and replicated thrice to get unbiased data. Net plot size and gross plot size of plot was 3.5 x 4.5 and 4.8x 5.1 m respectively. Maize crop variety DKC-9133 was sown with dibbled method at 60 cm row to row and 30cm plant to plant distance during Kharif 2019. The doses of herbicides were calculated as per the treatments simultaneously calibration of knapsack sprayer carried out. The powder or liquid formulation was diluted in the water according to the different doses and 1.2 L of spray solution per plot was applied for each treatment with the help of knapsack sprayer. Treatment consist T₁-Atrazine 50% WP @ 1 Kg a.i /ha (PE) ,T₂- 2,4 –D Dimethyl Amine salt 58% SL @ 1 Kg a.i./ha (PoE), T₃-Topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2 g a.i/ha (PoE at 15 DAS), T₄- Topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i/ha ( PoE at 15 DAS), T₅-Tembotrione 42 % SC @ 105g a.i/ha (PoE 15 DAS), T₆- Topramezone 33.6 % SC @ 25.2g a.i/ha + Atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i/ha (PoE at 15 DAS), T₇-Tembotrione 42% SC @ 105 g a.i/ha + Atrazine 50 % WP @ 250 g a,i/ha (PoE 15 DAS), T₈–One hand weeding at 30 DAS, T₉ : Weedy check, T₁₀-Weed free. Fertilizer dose 175:50:50 NPK kg/ha was applied as common to all treatments. Entire dose of P₂O₅, ¹/₃ of N, ½ of K₂O were applied as basal. Nitrogen was applied in two more splits at knee height stage and at tasseling stage along with ½ of K₂O. Common cultural practices such as irrigation, thinning and gap filling was done.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Growth attributes:

Significantly highest number of functional leaves plant^-1 was recorded due to the weed free treatment (T₁₀) which was at par with (T₆) topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha. And tembotrione 42% SC @ 105g a.i/ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i/ha (T₇) whereas, topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2g a.i/ha as PoE (T₃) was at par with weed free treatment (T₁₀).

Data presented in Table.1 reported that, significantly highest plant height (cm) was recorded with weed free treatment (T₁₀) which was found superior than the other treatments and found at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2g a.i./ha as PoE (T₃), topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₆). However, significantly lowest plant height was recorded due to treatment (T₉) Weedy check at all growth stages.

Treatment of weed free condition recorded higher plant dry matter (g) plant^{- 1}however, it was on par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₆). Significantly lowest plant dry matter was recorded with weedy check (T₉) however it was on par with 2,4-D Dimethylamine salt 58% SL @ 1 Kg a.i./ha (T₂).

Weed free treatment (T₁₀) recorded significantly higher leaf area which was at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₆). Weedy check (T₉) recorded significantly lower leaf area which was at par with 2,4-D Dimethyl Amine salt 58 % SL @ 1Kg a.i./ha as post emergence (T₂) and topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha (T₄) at 60 DAS respectively. At 90 DAS significantly lower leaf area observed due to (T₉) weedy check.

Similar kind of results on all growth attributes on maize due to effect of topramezone + atrazine @ 25.2 + 250g a.i ha^-1 + MSO as PoE and tembotrione +atrazine @ 105 + 250 g a.i ha^-1 + stefes mero as PoE was reported by K. Swetha et al. (2015).

Yield attributes:

Weed free treatment (T₁₀) recorded higher number of rows per cob (14 rows) which was at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2 g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₆) (13.93 rows) which was at par with tembotrione 42 % SC @ 105 g a.i./ha + atrazine 50 % WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₇) (13.66 rows) and Topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2 a.i./ha (T₃) (13.40 rows). Significantly lowest number of rows per cob recorded in (T₉) weedy check (11.17 rows).

Table 1. Growth and yield attributes on maize (Zea mays L.) influenced by different weed management treatments.

Treatments	Mean number of leaves plant^-1	Plant height (cm) plant^-1	Dry matter accumulation (g) plant^-1	Mean leaf area (cm)² plant	Number of rows cob^-1	Length of cob (cm)	Girth of cob (cm)	Weight of cob(g)	Test weight (g)
T₁: Atrazine 50 %WP@1 Kg a.i/ha(PE)	12.2	144.7	174.53	81.35	13.13	16.86	14.40	196.30	34.96
T₂: 2,4 –D Dimethyl Amine salt 58 %SL @1 Kga.i./ha(PoE).	11.46	141.56	167.86	75.9	13	16.04	14.02	180.54	34.16
T₃:Topramezone33.6 %SC @ 67.2g a.i/ha(PoEat 15DAS)	13.20	147.80	178.08	78.22	13.40	16.94	14.43	201.32	38.23
T₄: Topramezone33.6 %SC @25.2 g a.i/ha(PoEat 15DAS)	11.00	142.03	170.41	76.54	12.93	16.07	14.31	192.03	36.37
T₅: Tembotrione42 %SC @ 105 ga.i/ha (PoE15 DAS)	10.94	142.03	171.24	79.50	13.00	15.58	13.70	190.92	35.93
T₆:Topramezone33.6 %SC@ 25.2g a.i/ha + Atrazine 50 % WP @ 250 (g) a.i. /ha (PoE at 15 DAS)	13.56	148	180.94	89.80	13.93	17.58	14.50	208.33	39.5
T₇: Tembotrione 42% SC @ 105 g a.i/ha + Atrazine 50 % WP @ 250 (g) a.i./ha ( PoE15 DAS)	13.33	144.86	175.21	82.60	13.66	17.51	14.45	202.0	37.5
T₈:One hand weeding at 30 DAS	11.60	140.53	166.98	77.97	12.97	16.99	14.23	171.43	34.33
T₉: Weedy check	8.83	135.13	163.37	69	11.17	14.61	13.63	153.50	33.10
T₁₀:Weed free	13.73	148.56	182.95	92.26	14	17.70	14.54	214.52	40.5
SE(m)+	0.28	0.75	1.18	1.08	0.18	0.41	0.25	3.66	0.52
CDat5%	1.06	2.89	4.54	2.49	0.60	1.57	0.59	14.04	2.01
General mean	11.99	143.52	173.76	80.40	13.12	16.59	14.22	191.09	36.47

Table2. Grain yield (q ha^-1),Stover yield (q ha^-1), Biological yield (q ha^-1), Harvest index of maize( Zea mays L.) influenced by different weed management treatments .

Treatments	Grain yield (q ha^-1)	Stover yield (q ha^-1)	Biological Yield(q ha^-1)	Harvest Index
T₁: Atrazine 50 %WP@1 Kga.i/ha(PE)	53.60	71.07	124.67	42.99
T₂:2,4 –D Dimethyl Amine salt 58 %SL @1Kga.i./ha(PoE).	51.37	70.62	121.99	42.11
T₃:Topramezone33.6 %SC @ 67.2ga.i/ha(PoEat 15DAS)	54.43	72.34	126.77	42.93
T₄: Topramezone33.6 %SC @25.2 ga.i/ha(PoEat 15DAS)	48.28	71.17	119.45	40.41
T₅: Tembotrione42 %SC @ 105 ga.i/ha(PoE15 DAS)	45.96	70.34	116.30	39.51
T₆:Topramezone33.6 %SC@ 25.2g a.i/ha+ Atrazine 50 % WP @ 250 (g) a.i. /ha(PoE at 15 DAS)	56.69	73.00	129.69	43.71
T₇: Tembotrione42% SC @105g a.i/ha+ Atrazine 50 % WP @ 250 (g) a.i./ha (PoE15 DAS)	54.50	72.62	127.12	42.87
T₈:Onehandweedingat30 DAS	47.00	67.10	114.10	41.19
T₉: Weedycheck	27.34	57.89	85.23	32.07
T₁₀:Weed free	58.90	74.67	133.57	44.09
SE(m)+	1.40	1.17	3.11	-
CDat5%	4.40	3.54	10.09	-
General mean	49.81	70.08	119.99	-

Higher length of cob (17.70cm) was recorded in weed free treatment (T₁₀) which was at par with rest of treatments except topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha (T₄), 2,4–D dimethyl Amine salt 58% SL @ 1Kg a.i./ha (T₂) (16.04cm), Tembotrione 42% SC @ 105g a.i./ha (T₅) (15.58cm) respectively. Significantly lowest length of cob was recorded in weedy check (T₉) (14.61 cm).

Weed free treatment (T₁₀) recorded higher girth of cob (14.54cm) which was at par with rest of the treatments, however it was significantly superior over weedy check (T₉) (13.63cm), 2,4-D dimethyl amine salt 58% SL @ 1 Kg a.i./ha (T₂) (14.02cm), tembotrione 42% SC @ 105g a.i./ha (T₅) (13.70cm) respectively.

Weed free treatment (T₁₀) recorded higher weight of cob (214.52g) which was at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₆) (208.33g) and it was at par with tembotrione 42 % SC @ 105g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₇) (202g) and topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2g a.i./ha (201.32 g) (T₃) respectively. Significantly lowest weight of cob was recorded in (T₉) weedy check (153.50g).

Data presented in Table 1. Weed free treatment (T₁₀) recorded higher number of grains per cob (468) which was at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i/ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₆) (465.05) respectively. Significantly lowest number of grains per cob were recorded in weedy check (T₉) (410.57).

Glimpses of data presented in Table 1 revealed that, application of herbicide with combination of pre-emergence and post emergence herbicides resulted in better growth of the crop ultimately proved beneficial for better values of yield attributes viz., number of rows cob^-1, length of cob, girth of cob,weight of cob, number of grains cob^-1, weight of grains cob^-1 and test weight, which can be attributed to better control of weeds by the combination of herbicides similar finding was observed by K. Swetha et al. (2015). Whereas minimum values of yield attributes were observed in weedy check. These findings were in conformity with Puscal Sharma et al. (2014).

Yield:

Data presented in Table 2 reported that, efficient utilization of soil and climatic resources by maize plant in the presence of relatively low weed density and dry weight led to maximum grain yield (58.90 q/ha ) in weed free treatment (T₁₀) which was at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @25.2g a.i/ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i/ha (T₆) (56.69 q/ha) and tembotrione 42 % SC @ 105 g a.i./ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i./ha (T₇) (54.50 kg/ha) respectively. These findings were substantiating with the results of Madhavi et al. (2014) who reported that efficiency of maize crop to partition the dry matter into its economic yield was highest in tank mix application of HPPD (4- hydroxyl-phenyl pyruvate dioxygenase) Inhibiting herbicides with atrazine while Significantly lowest grain yield recorded in weedy check(T₉) (27.34 q/ha).

Data presented in Table 2 regarding stovar yield was significantly influenced by different weed management treatments. Highest stover yield (74.67 q/ha) was recorded in weed free treatment (T₁₀) Highest stover yield was recorded in weed free treatment (74.67q/ha) which was significantly superior to all other treatments; this might be due to the continuous removal of weeds. Similar findings were reported by Malviya et al. (2012). While treatment (T₁₀) was found at par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i/ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i/ha (T₆) (73.00 q/ha) as post emergence it was at par with tembotrione 42 % SC @ 105 g a.i/ ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a, i/ha (T₇) (72.62 q/ha ) and topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2g a.i /ha (T₃) (72.34 q/ha) respectively. Higher stover yield in weed control treatments could be due to better growth and development of maize, which produced more biomass. Significantly lower stover yield was recorded in weedy check. This is due to higher crop weed competition in weedy check treatment. These results are in close agreement with previous findings of Dixit and Gautam (1994). Significantly lower stover yield was found in unweeded control plot.

Highest biological yield (133.57q/ha) was recorded in weed free treatment which was on par with topramezone 33.6% SC @ 25.2g a.i. ha^-1 + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i. ha^-1 as post emergence it was at par with tembotrione 42% SC @ 105g a.i. ha^-1+ atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i. ha^-1, topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2g a.i. ha^-1and atrazine 50% WP @ 1Kg a.i. ha^-1respectively. Significantly lowest biological yield was recorded in weedy check.

Data on harvest index revealed significant increase in harvest index in weed control treatments. Highest harvest index (44.09%) was recorded in weed free treatment (T₁₀) which was at par with topramezone 33.6 % SC @ 25.2g a.i/ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i /ha (T₇) (43.71%), atrazine 50% WP @ 1 Kg a.i/ha (T₁) (42.99%), topramezone 33.6% SC @ 67.2g a.i/ha (T₃) (42.93%) and tembotrione 42% SC @ 105g a.i/ha + atrazine 50% WP @ 250g a,i/ha (T₇) (42.87%) respectively. While the lowest harvest index (32.07%) was recorded in (T₉) weedy check. This might be due to higher harvest index that the genotype had a higher capacity to translocate photosynthates towards economic sinks in presence of low weed competition. A similar report of increase in the harvest index with reduced weed competition was reported earlier by Sanodiya et al. (2013).

REFERENCES:

1. Commodity profile - Maize, 2014. Krishijagran.com

2. Dixit, A and Gautam, K.C. 1994. Effect of atrazine on photosynthesis and nitrogen metabolism in rabi maize. Indian Journal of Weed Science. 26 (3 and 4):77-81. DMR.2013.Annual reporton Directorate of Maize Research.

3. K. Swetha, 2015.Weed management with new generation herbicides in kharif maize. M.Sc.(Ag.)Thesis. Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University, Hyderabad, India.

4. Malviya A., Malviya N., Singh and Band Singh, A.K.2012. Integrated weed management in maize (Zea mays L.) under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Dry land Agriculture Research & Development. 27 (1): 70-73

5. Mundra S.L., Vyas A. K and Maliwal P.L.2002. Effect of weed and nutrient management on nutrient uptake by maize (Zea mays L.) and weed. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 47 (3):378-383.

6. Patel V. J., Upadhyay P.N., Patel J.B and Meisuriya, M.I. 2006. Effect of herbicide mixture on weeds in kharif maize (Zea mays L.) under middle Gujarat conditions. Indian Journal of Weed science. 38 (1&2):54-57.

7. Pandey A.K., Prakash V., Singh R.D and Mani V.P.1999.Integrated weed management in maize (Zea mays L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy. 46(2):260-265.

8. Sanodiya P., Jha A.K and Shrivastava A.2013. Effect of integrated weed management on seed yield of fodder maize. Indian Journal of Weed Science.45 (3): 214–216.

9. Swetha K, Madhavi M, Pratibha G and Ramprakash T. 2015. Weed management with new generation herbicides in maize. Indian Journal of Weed Science 47(4):432–433.

10. Vaid, S., Daizy, R. B.,Singh, H. P. and Kohli, R. K. 2010. Phytotoxic effect of Eugenol towards two weedy species. The Bio scan. 5(3): 339-341.

11. Puscal Sharma,BuddhadebDuary and Raghavendra Singh.2014.Tank mix application of tembotrione and atrazine to reduce weed growth and increase productivity of maize. Indian Journal of Weed Science 50(3): 305–308, 2018.

12. Porter, R.M., Vaculin, P.D., Orr, J.E., Immaraju, J.A., O‟ Neal, W.B. 2005.Topramezone a new active for post-emergence weed control in corn. North Central Weed Science Society Proceedings.60: 93.

13. Schonhammer, A., Freitag, J., Koch, H., 2006.Topramazone a new highly selective herbicide compound for control of warm season grasses and dicotyledonous weeds in maize]. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection. (20): 1023-1031.

Received on 30.07.2022 Modified on 20.08.2022

Res. J. Pharmacognosy and Phytochem. 2022; 14(4):272-276.

DOI: 10.52711/0975-4385.2022.00047