Energy budgeting andeconomics of weed management in dry direct-seededrice

Nagarjun, P.; Dhanapal, G. N.; Sanjay, M. T.; Yogananda, S. B.; Muthuraju, R.

doi:10.5958/0974-8164.2019.00001.7

Cited by 10 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The input energy of 6682.75 MJ ha −1 was reported in treatment with the PRE application of IM @ 80 g ha −1 , IM @ 80 g ha −1 (POST), and IM/IMM @ 80 g ha −1 (PRE and POST). Similar findings were reported earlier by [10,11,13,16,42]. Net energy, energy intensiveness, specific energy, energy use efficiency, energy profitability, energy intensity, and specific energy in physical terms and economic terms were calculated for each treatment, as shown in Table 9.…”

Section: Energy Utilization Patternsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…The higher biological yield showed the higher output energy, which raised the energy use efficiency (EUE), energy intensity (EI), and net energy (NE). Whereas, the lower energy indexes in the unweeded check were because of lower outputs [11,13,22,42,45].…”

Section: Energy Utilization Patternmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, 54.85 MJ ha −1 of input energy was required for herbicide application of IM @ 80 g ha −1 (PRE), IM @ 80 g ha −1 (POST), IM/IMM @ 80 g ha −1 (PRE), and IM/IMM @ 80 g ha −1 (POST). The similar energy requirement was mainly due to the similar dose of herbicide applied [10,11,13,16]. The total input energy required in various herbicide treatments is shown in Table 8.…”

Section: Energy Utilization Patternmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The close relationship and interdependence of agriculture, economics, and energy make energy budgeting important [10,11]. Energy optimization at the farm level is of utmost importance, as with the injudicious use of agricultural inputs viz.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Efficacy, Energy Budgeting, and Carbon Footprints of Weed Management in Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Weed management in blackgram is one of the most efficient ways to improve its yield, as uncontrolled weed growth causes a significant decrease in crop yield. A field experiment was performed at Berthin, Himachal Pradesh, India, to investigate the efficacy, energy use efficiency (EUE), and carbon footprints of weed management tactics. Twelve weed control treatments were tested applied alone or in combination at pre and post emergence stages. The most prominent weeds were Cyperus iria, Dactyloctenium aegyptium, and Echinochloa colona, which caused a 68.1% loss in unweeded conditions. The application of weed control treatments reduced the weed count at 60 DAS from around 50% to 90%. The most efficient weed control treatment was pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1, which resulted in a minimum weed infestation (i.e., weed count and weed biomass) and consequently highest yield. Its efficacy in weed control treatment was on par with PRE use of ready mix imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG @ 70 g ha−1. Maximum energy use efficiency was also obtained upon PRE use of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) @ 80 g ha−1 (8.27), trailed by PRE use of imazethapyr + imazamox @ 70 g ha−1 (7.84), mainly because of the higher yield obtained in these treatments which shows their efficiency in energy conversion. The carbon footprints were observed to be the lowest in ready mix combination of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 80 g ha−1 (0.11 kg CE kg−1 yield), followed by imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 70 g ha−1 (0.12 kg CE kg−1 yield), as it resulted in the lowest emission per unit output production.

show abstract

Section: Energy Utilization Patternsupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Energy Utilization Patternmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Energy Utilization Patternmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Efficacy, Energy Budgeting, and Carbon Footprints of Weed Management in Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The higher net returns in treatments with preemergence fb postemergence fb one hand-weeding compared to FP or weed-free treatment during both Aman and Boro despite similar yields were mainly due to a reduction in total weed control cost facilitated by reduced labor use. Nagarjun et al (2019) also reported higher net returns with sequential use of preemergence and postemergence herbicides. The reduction in net returns despite reductions in weed control costs in treatments with postemergence fb hand-weeding as compared to FP was mainly due to lower yields than in the FP.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Integrated weed management in transplanted rice: options for addressing labor constraints and improving farmers’ income in Bangladesh

Ahmed

Kumar²,

Alam³

et al. 2021

Weed Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Bangladesh, weeds in transplanted rice are largely controlled by labor-intensive and costly manual weeding, resulting in inadequate and untimely weed control. Labor scarcity coupled with intensive rice production has triggered increased use of herbicides. These factors warrant a cost-effective and strategic integrated weed management (IWM) approaches. On-farm trials with transplanted rice were conducted during monsoon (‘Aman’) season in 2016 and 2017 and winter (‘Boro’) season in 2016 to 2017 in agroecological zones 11 and 12 with ten treatments - seven herbicide-based IWM options, one mechanical weed control-based option, and two checks – farmers’ current weed control practice and weed-free, to assess effects on weed control, grain yield, labor use, and profitability. Compared to farmers’ practice, herbicide-based IWM options with mefenacet+bensulfuron-methyl as preemergence (PRE) followed by (fb) either bispyribac-sodium or penoxsulam as postemergence (POST) fb one hand-weeding (HW) were most profitable alternatives, with reductions in labor requirement by 11 to 25 persons-day ha−1 and total weed control cost by USD 44 to 94 ha−1, resulting in net returns increases by USD 54 to 77 ha−1 without compromising on grain yield. In contrast, IWM options with bispyrbac-sodium or penoxsulam as POST application fb one HW reduced yields by 12 to 13% and profits by USD 71 to 190 ha−1. Non-chemical option with mechanical weeding fb one HW performed similarly to farmers’ practice on yield and profitability. We suggest additional research to develop feasible herbicide-free approaches to weed management in transplanted rice that can offer competitive advantages to current practices.

show abstract

Advanced technological adaptations can improve the energy-cum-carbon-efficiency of diverse rice production systems

Choudhary,

Meena

2024

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy budgeting andeconomics of weed management in dry direct-seededrice

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Efficacy, Energy Budgeting, and Carbon Footprints of Weed Management in Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)

Efficacy, Energy Budgeting, and Carbon Footprints of Weed Management in Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)

Integrated weed management in transplanted rice: options for addressing labor constraints and improving farmers’ income in Bangladesh

Advanced technological adaptations can improve the energy-cum-carbon-efficiency of diverse rice production systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About