Mega business
  • Home
  • About ISWS
    • About Society
    • President's Message
    • Executive Board
    • Constitution
    • Weed Information
    • Other Important Links
    • Downloads
  • Publications
    • Indian Journal of Weed Science
    • IJWS MS online submission
    • Publications login
    • Conference Proceedings
    • Meeting Proceedings
    • ISWS Newsletters
    • Weed News
  • Membership
    • Join ISWS Online
    • Directory ISWS
    • Update ISWS Directory
  • Award
  • Contact Us
    • Contact Us
    • Directory ISWS
  • Member Login
Home IJWS
Submit Your Paper
Guide for Authors
Peer Review Policy
View Editorial Board
Abstracting/ Indexing
Current Issue
All Issue

All issues

Volume - 53(2021)
Issue-1
Volume - 52(2020)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 51(2019)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 50(2018)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 49(2017)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 48(2016)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 47(2015)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 46(2014)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 45(2013)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 44(2012)
Issue-1
Issue-2
Issue-3
Issue-4
Volume - 43(2011)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Volume - 42(2010)
Issue-1&2
Issue-1&2 Supplymentary
Issue-3&4
Volume - 41(2009)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Issue-1&2 Supplymentary
Issue-3&4 Supplymentary
Volume - 40(2008)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Issue-1&2 Supplymentary
Issue-3&4 Supplymentary
Volume - 39(2007)
Issue-1&2
Volume - 38(2006)
Issue-1&2
Volume - 37(2005)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Volume - 36(2004)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4
Volume - 1(1969)
Issue-1&2
Issue-3&4

Indian Journal of Weed Science


Print ISSN: 0253-8050
Online ISSN: 0974-8164

NAAS rating: 5.84

Chief Editor

J.S. Mishra
Dr. J.S. Mishra
Principal Scientist, Division of Crop Research,
ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region,
Bihar Veterinary College, Patna - 800014 (Bihar)
Mobile - +91 9494240904
Email- editorisws@gmail, jsmishra31@gmail.com

Associate editors

Bhagirath S. Chauhan

Dr. Bhagirath Singh Chauhan
Queensland Alliance for Agricultureand Food Innovation
Level 2, Queensland Bioscience Precinct
The University of Queensland
St Lucia QLD 4069, Australia
Email: b.chauhan@uq.edu.au
A.N. Rao
Dr. A.N. Rao
Hydarabad, INDIA
Mobile Number: +91 9440372165
Email: adusumilli.narayanarao@gmail.com

CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPER

Indian Journal of Weed Science is inviting your articles, review article, Research article and Research note on all topics of weed science. IJWS welcomes quality work that focuses on research, development and review. We are looking forward for strict compliance to the modern age standards in all these fields. Authors across the globe are welcome to submit their research papers in the prestigious journal fulfilling the requisite criterion.

Indian Journal of Weed Science (IJWS) is inviting papers for the VOL-53, ISSUE-1 March-(2021)


Article submission guideline

Enter your login details for IJWS below. If you do not already have an account you will need to.. Register here
Author login
  • Author Instruction
  • Style of Invited paper
  • Style of Research Article
  • Style of Research note

Paper Publication Process –

  • Manuscripts are received online in the editorial office with the certificate that MS has not been sent for consideration in any other journals for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are checked by office for its style and pattern and for plagiarism. If plagiarism is more than 20%, it is not considered and sent back to author for revision and re-submission.
  • If MS is found fit at Editorial office in context to plagiarism and style and pattern, it is sent to Chief Editor for further processing.
  • If chief Editor find the MS suitable for consideration, he shall suggest two name of referees as reviewers either from editorial board or from other institutions of concern discipline for reviewing the MS.
  • Editorial Office shall send the MS for double blind review to the reviewers suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Comments of double -blind reviewers will be sent to corresponding author without disclosing the identity of the reviewers to address the comments and re-submission of MS.
  • In case, one reviewer rejects while other accept the MS, it is sent to third reviewer suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Revised MS is again sent to reviewers to see whether their comments are addressed suitably.
  • On agreeing by the reviewers, the MS is again sent to Chief Editors with comments of reviewers and reply of author to take the final decision.
  • The final decision of Chief Editor is communicated to authors.

CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPER

Indian Journal of Weed Science is inviting your articles, review article, Research article and Research note on all topics of weed science. IJWS welcomes quality work that focuses on research, development and review. We are looking forward for strict compliance to the modern age standards in all these fields. Authors across the globe are welcome to submit their research papers in the prestigious journal fulfilling the requisite criterion.

Indian Journal of Weed Science (IJWS) is inviting papers for the VOL-51, ISSUE-4 December-(2019)


Article submission guideline

Enter your login details for IJWS below. If you do not already have an account you will need to.. Register here
Author login
  • Author Instruction
  • Style of Invited paper
  • Style of Research Article
  • Style of Research note

Paper Publication Process –

  • Manuscripts are received online in the editorial office with the certificate that MS has not been sent for consideration in any other journals for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are checked by office for its style and pattern and for plagiarism. If plagiarism is more than 20%, it is not considered and sent back to author for revision and re-submission.
  • If MS is found fit at Editorial office in context to plagiarism and style and pattern, it is sent to Chief Editor for further processing.
  • If chief Editor find the MS suitable for consideration, he shall suggest two name of referees as reviewers either from editorial board or from other institutions of concern discipline for reviewing the MS.
  • Editorial Office shall send the MS for double blind review to the reviewers suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Comments of double -blind reviewers will be sent to corresponding author without disclosing the identity of the reviewers to address the comments and re-submission of MS.
  • In case, one reviewer rejects while other accept the MS, it is sent to third reviewer suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Revised MS is again sent to reviewers to see whether their comments are addressed suitably.
  • On agreeing by the reviewers, the MS is again sent to Chief Editors with comments of reviewers and reply of author to take the final decision.
  • The final decision of Chief Editor is communicated to authors.
Read More

Guidelines for Authors

Indian Journal of Weed Science is a quarterly journal publishing original research article, research notes, opinion articles and review articles (invited or with prior approval of the title reflecting substantial contributions of the author) covering all areas of weed science research. All contributions must be of a sufficient quality to extend our knowledge in weed science.

The papers submitted should not have been published or communicated elsewhere. Authors will be solely responsible for the factual accuracy of their contribution. Manuscript should not carry any material already published in the same or different forms.

  • Style of Invited paper
  • Style of Research Article
  • Style of Research note

Format

Full length article should be suitably divided into the following sub-sections; ABSTRACT, Key words, INTRODUCTION, MATERIALS AND METHODS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION and REFERENCES. The heading, introduction need not be mentioned in the text.

Title

The title of article should be informative but concise and should not contain abbreviations. It should indicate the content of the article essential for key word indexing and information retrieval. It should be set in small and bold letters. A good title briefly identifies the subject, indicates the purpose of study and introduces key terms and concepts. Title should not be started with the waste words like 'a study of', 'effect of', 'influence of' , 'some observations on', 'a note of' etc. The title should indicate preferably English name or most popular common name of the crops or organisms studied, wherever relevant. Scientific name can be given in abstract and introduction. Authority for such a name should be given at first mention in the text. A short title should be given for running headlines and should cover the main theme of the article.

Author(s) name(s) and affiliations

The name(s) of the author(s) should be given in small letters with sentence case separated by 'comma' or by 'and'. Institute name where the research was carried out should be given in italics. If authors are of different institutes, these can be mentioned by allotting number like 1, 2 or 3 as superscript over the name of author. The affiliation of such author may be given below of the corresponding author email address. Sometimes authors retire and change frequently and wish to give their current address, this should be given as foot note. Email address of main author or corresponding author should be given at the bottom.

Abstract

The abstract should contain at least one sentence on each of the following: objective of investigation (hypothesis, purpose, collection, result and conclusions). Give complete scientific name for plants or other organisms and full name of any symbol or abbreviations used. There is a need to mention place, name and priod of study in abstract. Emphasis should be given to highlight the results and the conclusion of the study. It should not exceed a total length of 200-250 words. Abstract should not have the words like 'will be explained or will be discussed'.

Key words

(5 6) should be given at the end of the abstract and should be arranged alphabetically. Each key word should be started with capital letter and separated by comma ( , ) from other words.

Introduction

Introduction should be brief and to the point, cover the problem and should justify the work or the hypothesis on which it is based. In introduction, a detail review is not necessary. However, to orient readers, important references about previous concepts and research should be given. It should briefly state the currently available information and should identify the research gap that is expected to be abridged through this investigation. Give preference to recent references from standard research publication unless it is of historical importance or a landmark in that field.

Materials and Methods

This part should begin with information relating to period/season/year and place of study, climate or weather conditions, soil type etc. Treatment details along with techniques and experimental design, replications, plot size etc. should be clearly indicated. Use of symbols for treatments may be avoided and an abbreviation should be fully explained at its first mention. Crop variety, methodology for application and common cultivation practices should be mentioned. Known methods may be just indicated giving reference but new techniques developed and followed should be described in detail. Methods can be divided into suitable sub-headings, typed in bold at first level and in italics at second level, if necessary.

Results and Discussion

Results may be reported and discussed together to avoid duplication. Do not mention and recite the data in the text as such given in the table. Instead interpret it suitably by indicating in terms of per cent, absolute change or any other derivations. Relate results to the objectives with suitable interpretation of the references given in the introduction. If results differ from the previous study, suitable interpretation and justification should be given. Repeated use of statements like 'our results are in agreement’ or ‘similar results were reported’ 'should be avoided. At the end of results and discussion, conclusion of the study should be given in 2-3 sentences along with suggestion for further study, if any. All statistical comparisons among treatments may be made at P=0.05 level of probability.

Acknowledgement

The authors may place on record the help and cooperation or any financial help received from any source, person or organization for this study. This should be very brief.

References

Only relevant and recent references of standard work should be quoted. Preference should be given to quote references of journals over proceedings or reports. In general, not more than 15 references should be quoted in full paper and 5 in short communication. However, in review article, emphasis should be given to quote more references with each valid statement/findings in the text. There is no need to give references for standard procedures of soil and plant analysis, and for routine statistical analysis in practice, only the methodology may be indicated. As a thumb rule, all the references quoted in the text must appear at the end of the article and vice-verse. It has been decided to use full name of the journal after the year 2011 onwards. Therefore, references should include names of all authors, year, full title of the article quoted, full name of the journal in italics (no abbreviations), volume number (in Bold), issue number (in brackets) and pages. For books, monographs, theses etc. full title in italics, publisher or university name, volume no., if any, and relevant page range or total no. of pages should be given. The list of references should be arranged alphabetically on author's names and chronologically per author. Author name should be started with surname and initial letter with capital letter. There is no need to separate author's initials by full stop but it should be given in capital letters without gap. Each author name should be separated by comma (,) and last author name by ‘and’. A few examples of correct citation of references for Indian Journal of Weed Science are given below:

Singh Samunder, Punia SS, Yadav A and Hooda VS. 2011. Evaluation of carfentrazone-ethyl + metsulfuron-methyl against broadleaf weeds of wheat. Indian Journal of Weed Science 43(1&2): 12-22.

Neeser C and Varshney Jay G. 2001. Purple nutsedge; biology and principles for management without herbicides, Indian Journal of Pulses Research 14(1): 10-19.

Naseema A, Praveena R and Salim AM. 2004. Ecofriendly management of water hyacinth with a mycoherbicide and cashew nut shell liquid. Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research 10(1&2): 93-100.

Arya DR, Kapoor RD and Dhirajpant. 2008. Herbicide tolerant crops: a boon to Indian agriculture, pp 23-31. In: Biennial Conference on Weed Management in Modern Agriculture: Emerging Challenges and Opportunities. (Eds. Sharma RS, Sushilkumar, Mishra JS, Barman KK and Sondhia Shobha), 27-28 February 2008, Patna. Indian Society of Weed Science, Jabalpur.

Anonymous. 2006. Long-term herbicide trial in transplanted lowland rice-rice cropping system, pp 62-68. In: Annual Progress Report, AICRP on Weed Control, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.

DWSR. 2010. Annual Report, 2010-11, pp 35-37. Directorate of Weed Science Research, Jabalpur.

Gopal B and Sharma KP. 1981. Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) the most troublesome weeds of the world. Hindasia Publisher, New Delhi, 129 p.

Sushilkumar, Sondhia S and Vishwakarma K. 2003. Role of insects in suppression of problematic alligator weed (Altemanthera philoxeroides) and testing of herbicides for its integrated management. Final Report of ICAR Adhoc Project, 39 p.

For Web references: the full URL should be given and the date when the reference was last accessed. e.g. http://www.faostat.fao.org (accessed 21 May 2019)

Length

Paper TypeMaximum Length (including tables and figures)
Research Article6000 words
Research note4000 words
Review8000 words
Mini-Review5000 words

Units, abbreviations and nomenclature

For physical units, unit names and symbols, the SI system should be employed. Biological names should be given according to the latest international nomenclature. Upon its first use in the title, abstract and text, the common name of a weed should be followed by the scientific name (genus, species and authority) in parentheses. If no common name exists in English, the scientific name should be used only. At the first mention of an herbicide or other chemical substance, give its generic name only. Trade names should not be used. Biological and zoological names, gene designations and gene symbols should be italicized. Yield data should be reported in kg/ha or t/ha. All such letters such as viz., et al., in situ, ex situ, Rabi, Kharif, i.e., etc. should be italicized.

Tables and figures

Tables and figures should be concise and limited to the necessary minimum. We encourage the authors to set tables and figures at the appropriate places in the article but if it is not possible, the same may be given separately. The title should fully describe the contents of the table and explain any symbol or abbreviations used in it. The standard abbreviations of the units of different parameters should be indicated in parentheses. Vertical lines should not be given in the tables and horizontal lines should be used to separate parameters and end of the table.

Figures may be preferred in place of table. In no case the same data should be presented by both tables and figures. While presenting data through line graphs, vertical bars, cylinders, pie charts etc, the same should be preferred with black lines or bars having different clear symbols and shades. The graphs chosen with colours reproduce poorly and should not be given unless it became necessary.

Some useful tips

Avoid numerals and abbreviations at the beginning of a sentence. Don't use superscript for per hectare, ton or meter (kg ha-1 or t ha-1) instead use kg/ha or g/m2, t/ha, mg/g, ml/l etc. Prefer to mention yield data in t/ha only. If it becomes necessary, give yield in kg/ha but not in quintal. Don't use lakh, crores or arabs in text, instead give such figures in million. Only standard abbreviations should be used and invariably be explained at first mention. Avoid use of self-made abbreviations like iso., buta., rizo., etc. Don't use first letter capital for names of plant protection chemicals but it should be used for trade names. Use of treatment symbols like T1 T2 T3 etc. should be avoided. All weights and measurements must be in SI or metric units. Use % after double digit figures, not per cent, for example 10% not 10 per cent. In a series of range of measurement, mention the units only at the end, e.g. 3,4,5 kg/ha instead of 3 kg/ha, 4 kg/ha and 5 kg/ha. Nutrient doses as well as concentration in soil and plant should be given in elemental form only, i.e. P and K should not be given as P2O5 K2O. A variety may be mentioned within single quotes in italic such as 'Pusa Basmai', 'Kufri Sinduri' etc. Statistical data should be given in LSD (P=0.05) instead CD (P=0.05).

Authors are requested to see the recent issue of the journal to prepare the manuscript as per the journal's format.

Manuscript submission

Manuscripts must conform to the journal style (see the latest issue). Correct language is the responsibility of the author. After having received a contribution, there will be a review process, before the Chief Editor makes the definitive decision upon the acceptance for publication. Referee's comments along with editors comments will be communicated to authors as scanned copy/soft copy through email. After revision, author should send back the copy of revised manuscripts to the Chief Editor, ISWS by e-mail only.

Editorial Board reserves the right to suitably modify, accept or reject the MS in view on the reviewer's advice.

We encourage submission of paper only by electronically via E-mail as one complete word document file. When preparing your file, please use only Times New Roman font for text (title 16, all heads 14 and text of 12 point, double spacing with 1.5" margin all the sides) and Symbol font for Greek letters to avoid inadvertent character substitutions.

All manuscripts should be submitted Online (http://www.isws.org.in/login_IJWS.aspx). For authors unable to submit their manuscript online

To see sample copy to prepare the manuscript, please Log on: http://www.isws.org.in/IJWSn/Journal.aspx

Peer Review Policy

All published articles in Indian Journal of Weed Science (IJWS) are subjected to rigorous peer review processes based on initial editor screening and anonymized refereeing by two referees. The ultimate purpose of peer review is to sustain the originality and quality of research work and filtration of poor quality and plagiarized articles. Peer review assures research quality.

Paper Publication Process –

  • Manuscripts are received online in the editorial office with the certificate that MS has not been sent for consideration in any other journals for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are checked by office for its style and pattern and for plagiarism. If plagiarism is more than 20%, it is not considered and sent back to author for revision and re-submission.
  • If MS is found fit at Editorial office in context to plagiarism and style and pattern, it is sent to Chief Editor for further processing.
  • If chief Editor find the MS suitable for consideration, he shall suggest two name of referees as reviewers either from editorial board or from other institutions of concern discipline for reviewing the MS.
  • Editorial Office shall send the MS for double blind review to the reviewers suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Comments of double -blind reviewers will be sent to corresponding author without disclosing the identity of the reviewers to address the comments and re-submission of MS.
  • In case, one reviewer rejects while other accept the MS, it is sent to third reviewer suggested by Chief Editor.
  • Revised MS is again sent to reviewers to see whether their comments are addressed suitably.
  • On agreeing by the reviewers, the MS is again sent to Chief Editors with comments of reviewers and reply of author to take the final decision.
  • The final decision of Chief Editor is communicated to authors.

Peer Review Policy

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our reviewers therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the (Indian Journal of Weed Science) Journal of Management and Research and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The Editors first evaluate all manuscripts. In some circumstances it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.

Type of Peer Review

The (Indian Journal of Weed Science) employs double blind review, where the reviewer remains anonymous to the authors throughout the process.

How the reviewer is selected

Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our reviewer database contains reviewer contact details together with their subject areas of interest, and this is constantly being updated.

Reviewer reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
  • Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work

Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process. Reviewers are requested to refrain from giving their personal opinion in the "Reviewer blind comments to Author" section of their review on whether or not the paper should be published. Personal opinions can be expressed in the "Reviewer confidential comments to Editor" section.

How long does the peer review process take?

Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 2-8 weeks. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the Editors within 3 weeks and the Editors may request further advice from the reviewers at this time. The Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript.

Final report

A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers, and may include verbatim comments by the reviewers.
Chief Editor's Decision is final
Reviewers advise the Editors, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Special Issues / Conference Proceedings

Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.

Becoming a Reviewer for the (Indian Journal of Weed Science)

If you are not currently a reviewer for the (Indian Journal of Weed Science) but would like to be considered as a reviewer for this Journal, please contact the editorial office by e-mail at (editorisws@gmail.com), and provide your contact details. If your request is approved and you are added to the online reviewer database you will receive a confirmatory email, asking you to add details on your field of expertise, in the format of subject classifications.

Editorial Board

Editorial office:

Office Manager, Indian Society of Weed Science, ICAR-Directorate of Weed Research, Maharajpur, Jabalpur, India 482 004

Publisher Address:

Secretary, Indian Society of Weed Science, ICAR-Directorate of Weed Research, Maharajpur, Jabalpur, India 482 004

Principal Scientist
Division of Crop Research
ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region
Bihar Veterinary College, Patna - 800014 (Bihar)

Chief Editor J.S. Mishra 9494240904 jsmishra31@gmail.com

The University of Queensland
St Lucia QLD 4069, Australia

Associate Editor Bhagirath Singh Chauhan b.chauhan@uq.edu.au

Consultant,
ICRISAT,
International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics
Patancheru, Hyderabad

Associate Editor A.N. Rao 9440372165 adusumilli.narayanarao@gmail.com

Editors

Professor,
Department of Agronomy, CCSHAU,
Hisar-125 004 (Haryana)

Ashok Kumar Yadav 9416995523 aky444@gmail.com

Professor & Head,
Division of Agronomy
FoA, Main Campus,
Chatha, SKUAST-Jammu (J&K)

B.C. Sharma 9419152428 drbhagwati@gmail.com

Principal
Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture
Affiliated to TNAU)
Manakkadavu, Pollachi-642103 (Tamil Nadu)

C. Chinnusamy 9443721575 chinnusamyc@gmail.com

Scientist,
ICAR - Directorate of Weed Research,
Jabalpur (Madhya Padesh)

Dibakar Ghosh 8989190213 dghoshagro@gmail.com

Principal Scientist
Department of Agronomy,
Assam Agricultural University
Jorhat - 785013 (Assam)

I.C. Barua 9435094326 iswar_barua@yahoo.co.in

Principal Scientist
PJTSAU, Hyderabad-30 (Telangana)

M. Madhavi 9491021999 molluru_m@yahoo.com

Assistant Agronomist
Directorate of Agriculture (Govt. of WB)
Kolkata 700001, West Bengal

Malay Kumar Bhowmick 9434239688 bhowmick_malay@rediffmail.com

Associate Professor
(Soil Science & Agrl. Chemistry)
Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College & Research Institute (TNAU),
Trichy (Tamil Nadu)

P. Janaki 9443936160 janakibalamurugan@rediffmail.com

Assistant Chemist (Residue),
Department of Agronomy,
Punjab Agricultural University
Ludhina-141 004 (Punjab)

Pervinder Kaur 9646105418 pervi_7@yahoo.co.in

Sr. Agronomist, Directorate of Extension Education
Punjab Agricultural University
Ludhiana – 141004 (Punjab)

Simerjeet Kaur 9814081108 simer@pau.edu

College of Horticulture,
Vellanikkara. Thrissur – 680 656, (Kerala)

T. Girija 9447004940 girijavijai@gmail.com

Principal Scientist,
Directorate of Maize Research,
Pusa Campus, New Delhi-110012

C.M. Parihar 9013172214 pariharcm@gmail.com

Indexing Indexing & Abstracting Services


1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Volume- 44 | Issue-3 (Jul-Sep) | Year 2012

Integrated weed management in mustard
Suresh Kumar, Ashwani Kumar, S.S. Rana, Navell Chander and N.N. Angiras
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-1 | Volume: 44 Page No:139-143 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted with fourteen treatments (oxadiarzyl 0.180 kg/ha, pendimethalin 1.50 kg/ha, trifluralin 1.50 kg/ha and isoproturon 1.25 kg/ha alone and at half rate with hand weeding (HW), oxadiarzyl, pendimethalin and  trifluralin each at half rate followed by (fb) isoproturon 0.75 kg/ha (post), pendimethalin fb clodinafop each at half rate, hand weeding  twice and weedy check) at Palampur during Rabi 2006-2007 and 2007-08. Phalaris minor (28.2%), Avena ludoviciana (25.2%) and Lolium temulentum (19.2%) were the predominant grassy weeds. The broad-leaved weeds (Vicia sativa, Coronopus didymus and Anagallis arvensis) as a whole constituted 26.7% of the total weed flora. Hand weeding twice and pendimethalin fb isoproturon were more effective in reducing the population of P. minor. Pendimethalin + hand weeding and hand weeding twice were effective against A. ludoviciana. Similarly integration of one hand weeding with isoproturon and trifluralin and hand weeding twice effectively taken care of L. temulentum. Pendimethalin + isoproturon and hand weeding twice reduced N and S removal by weeds. Pendimethalin fb isoproturon and trifluralin fb isoproturon resulted in significantly higher yield attributes (silique/plant, seeds/silique, 1000-seed weight), seed yield and seed N per cent of mustard. Trifluralin + HW and pendimethalin fb isoproturon gave higher gross and net returns due to weed control over other treatments. Isoproturon resulted in highest net return per rupee invested on weed control (18.5).

Email

skg_63@yahoo.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management COA, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh 176 062
Effect of integrated weed management practices on sugarcane ratoon and associated weeds
Rohitashav Singh, Jitendra Kumar, Pravendra Kumar, Tej Pratap, V.K. Singh, Ram Pal and Suman Panwar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-32 | Volume: 44 Page No:144-146 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during 2008-09 and 2009-10 at G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar (Uttarakhand). The soil of the experimental field was clay loam texture, medium in organic carbon (0.66%), available phosphorus (27.5 kg P/ha) and potassium (243.5 kg K/ha) with pH 7.2. Experiment consisted of six treatments were laid out in randomized block design with four replications. In the experimental field Cyperus rotundus, Ehinochloa colona, Brachiaria reptans,Commelina benghalensis, Ipomoea spp. and Parthenium hysterophorus were major weeds in both the years. Beside these, Digitaria sanguinalis was also observed as major weed during 2009-10. Other weeds were Cleome viscosa, Corchorus acutangulus, Dactyloctenium aegyptium and phylanthus niruri. Lowest density as well as dry weight of total weeds were recorded under the treatment of three hoeing at 30, 60 and 90 days after harvesting (DAH) of main crop which was at par with per-emergence application of metribuzin 0.88 kg/ha followed by (fb) hoeing at 45 DAH fb 2,4-D 1.0 kg/ha at 90 DAH. The highest cane yield was recorded with the execution of three hoeings at 30, 60 and 90 DAH treatment which was closely fb metribuzin at 0.88 kg/ha at 3 DAH fb hoeing at 45 DAH fb 2,4-D 1.0 kg/ha at 90 DAH of main crop.

Email

rohitash_1961@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, G.B.P.U.A. & T., Pantnagar, Uttarakhand 263 154
Effect of monsoon and weed management on growth and yield of direct-seeded rice
V. Pratap Singh, S.P. Singh, Abnish Kumar, Akshita Banga and Neeta Tripathi
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-3 | Volume: 44 Page No:147-150 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field study was conducted during 2008 and 2009 at G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar to evaluate the effect of two seeding time (before and after onset of monsoon) and six methods of weed control in direct dry seeded rice. Among the weed control treatments, butachlor applied 1.5 kg/ha in year 2008 and broadcasting of Sesbania knocked down by the application of  2, 4-D (brown manuring) at 30 days after sowing in 2009 recorded lowest weed dry weight. Pre-emergence application of butachlor 1.5 kg/ha yielded highest followed by the application of pretilachlor 0.5 kg/ha and broadcasting of Sesbania knock down with 2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha at 30 DAS which were at par with each other during both the year of experimentation.

Email

vpratapsingh@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand 263 145
Performance of onion under weed and fertilizer management
T.U. Patel, C.L. Patel, D.D. Patel, J.D. Thanki, M.K. Arvadia and H.B. Vaidya
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-4 | Volume: 44 Page No:151-158 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

In the new alluvial soil of Navsari (Gujarat), a field experiment was conducted in Rabi season to study the yield, quality and post harvest life of onion (Allium cepa L.) cv. ‘Gujarat Onion White-1’ as affected by weed management and fertilizer levels during two conjunctive years of 2008-09 and 2009-10. Weed population were decreased significantly with application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha or oxyfluorfen 0.24 kg/ha supplement with one hand weeding at 40 DAT during both the season of investigation. Echinochloa spp., Trianthema portulacastrum, Digera arvensis. Physalis minima. and Cynodon dactylon. were found as major weeds in experiment field. Further, pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha followed by one hand weeding  produced higher onion bulb yield of 39.3, 36.6 and 38.0 t/ha during both years as well as in pooled, respectively and found at par with oxyflourfen 0.24 kg/ha + one hand weeding at 40 DAT and weed free treatments. In pooled, increasing fertilizer rate from 75% to 125% of RDF was found effective and the higher level of fertilizer (125% RDF) gave the highest bulb yield, which was 10.52 and 19.43% more than of the F2 and F1 levels, respectively. Regarding post harvest life of bulbs, weight losses (%), black mould development (%) and sprouting (%) were remained unaffected by weed management and fertilizer levels except significantly higher weight losses (%) was observed under weed management treatment. On the basis of interaction, it is inferred that the treatment combination of (pendimethalin 1 kg/ha fb one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting supplement with 100% RDF) found most appropriate (39.86 t/ha) and profitable not only to secure the net return of   2,69,422/ha with  7.85 BCR per unit cost of onion production but also save 25% of fertilizer.

Email

tushagri.ank@nau.in

Address

Department of Agronomy, N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat 396 450
Movement of pendimethalin in saturated and unsaturated conditions in clay loam and sandy loam soils
A. Sireesha, P.C. Rao, P.V. Rao, G. Swapna and Ch. S. Ramalaxmi
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-5 | Volume: 44 Page No:159-162 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Movement studies were carried out using packed soil columns to know the distribution pattern of pendimethalin in clay loam and sandy loam under saturated and unsaturated conditions. Pendimethalin was applied at 20 mg/kg of soil and the soil columns were kept for movement studies at time intervals of 1, 3, 5, 7, 15, 22 and 37 days. The soils used in the study were clay loam and sandy loam. Pendimethalin remained primarily in the top soil layers. Under saturated conditions movement of pendimethalin was more in sandy loam as compared to clay loam. Under unsaturated conditions, pendimethalin showed more mobility in clay loam.  The increase in herbicide movement was observed with increase in days. The factors that influence movement are the herbicide solubility, soil structure and texture and the amount of water passing through the soil profile influenced movement of herbicide. Pendimethalin moved up to 20-25 and 5-20 cm under unsaturated and saturated conditions at 37 days after application, respectively.  In clay loam soil, under saturated and unsaturated conditions, pendimethalin moved up to 15-20 cm  at 37 days after application.

Email

sireesha_291@yahoo.co.in

Address

AICRP on Weed Control, ANGRAU, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh 500 030
Effect of chemical and mechanical weed management on yield of French bean–sorghum cropping system
Narinder Panotra, O.P. Singh and Ashwani Kumar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-6 | Volume: 44 Page No:163-166 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during  2003-04 and 2004-05 to develop an effective weed management practice to study the effect of weed management practice in French bean cropping system under subtropical agro-ecosystems of western Uttar Pradesh. Pre-planting and pre-emergence application of fluchloralin 1.0 kg/ha and pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha reduced the population of Anagallis arvensis, Melilotus alba, Melilotus indica and Phalaris minor significantly than weedy check and other herbicide treatments and resulted significant increase in growth and yield attributes, viz. plant height, no. of branches, dry matter accumulation, no. of pods/plant and seeds/pod, seed and straw yield of french bean. Maximum yield was recorded in fluchloralin 1.00 kg/ha and pendimethalin 1.00 kg/ha treatments with a corresponding value of 1.11 and 1.11 t/ha of French bean and 37.1 and 36.2 t/ha of fodder sorghum  during both the years of experimentation. Application of fluchloralin 1.0 kg/ha and pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha increased the net return of French bean significantly over weedy check, besides at B: C. ratio of 1.18 and 1.12 during two cropping seasons.

Email

dr.narinderpanotra@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Janta Vedic College, Baraut, Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh 250 811
Effect of plant population and weed management practices on productivity of sweet corn
L.K. Arvadiya, V.C. Raj, T.U. Patel, M.K. Arvadia and A.M. Patel
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-7 | Volume: 44 Page No:167-171 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Experiment was carried out under heavy black clay soil (vertisol) at the Experimental Farm,  N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari during two successive seasons of 2007-08  and 2008-09 to study the effect of varying plant population and weed management practices on weed flora and productivity of sweet corn (Zea mays L. Saccharata). Weed density and biomass was significantly lower with crop population of 1,11,111 plants/ha. Significantly higher green cob (9.5 t/ha) and green fodder (14.9 t/ha) yield with net return ( 75,779/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (5.36) was produced with plant population of 1,11,111 plants/ha and was at par with crop population of 83,333 plant/ha.  Significantly lowest weed biomass was recorded in weed free check which recorded highest yield of green cob (10.7 t/ha) and fodder (17.1 t/ha). Application of atrazine 1 kg/ha + hand weeding at 40 days after sowing was remunerative  with higher net return ( 88,873/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (6.72).

Email

tushagri.ank@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat 396 450
Productivity and profitability of rice–wheat sequence under conservation tillage
Sushma Saroj Surin*, M.K. Singh, R.R. Upasani, R. Thakur and S.K. Pal
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-8 | Volume: 44 Page No:172-175 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Field experiment was conducted during 2009-10 and 2010-11 at Agronomical Research Farm of Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi with four tillage management (zero till rice and zero till wheat; zero till rice and conventional till wheat;  conventional till rice and zero till wheat and conventional till rice and conventional till wheat) in main plot and three methods of weed control practices viz.,weedy check, recommended herbicides butachlor 1.5 kg/ha pre-emergence + 2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha post-emergence for rice and isoproturon 0.75 kg/ha + 2,4-D  0.5 kg/ha post-emergence for wheat and two hand weeding (20 and 40 DAS for rice and 25 and 50 DAS for wheat) in sub plot to assess the productivity and profitability of rice -wheat (cropping system under conservation tillage. Direct seeded rice–wheat sequence with conventional tillage produced maximum rice equivalent yield 7.44 t/ha (for 3.1 t/ha rice and 3.6 t/ha wheat) and net return (Rs. 58,206/ha). Among weed control, rice-wheat either with butachlor 1.5 kg/ha pre-emergence + 2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha post-emergence in rice and isoproturon 0.75 kg/ha + 2,4-D 0.5 kg/ha post-emergence in wheat or, with two hand weeding in both crops produced maximum rice equivalent yield (7.4 t/ha and 7.8 t/ha) and net return (Rs. 62,258/ha and  Rs. 60,498/ha)

Email

sushmasarojsurin5@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi, Jharkhand 834 006
Effect of stale seedbed method and weed management on growth and yield of irrigated direct-seeded rice
M.K. Singh* and Ashish Singh
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-9 | Volume: 44 Page No:176-180 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted at Agricultural Research Farm of  Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi to study the effect of methods of rice establishment and weed management practices in irrigated direct seeded rice. Treatment comprised of three crop establishment methods, viz. dry seeding after land preparation using stale seed bed method by shallow ploughing or by glyphosate 1 kg/ha, puddled wet seeded in main plot and five weed control measures in subplot, viz. weedy, hand weeding at 15 and 30 DAS, pendimethalin 1 kg/ha pre emergence followed by 2,4-D EE 500 g/ha at 30 DAS, butachlor 1 kg/ha pre-emergence followed by 2,4-D 500 g/ha, fenoxaprop-p-ethyl with safener 56 g/ha 15 DAS followed by ethoxy sulfuron 18 g/ha at 20 DAS in a split plot design replicated thrice. Crop establishment methods did not influence rice growth and yield components, and yield. Irrespective of method of establishment, hand weeding twice was found to be superior in managing weeds in DSR than all sequentially applied herbicide treatments.

Email

mksingh194.m@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221 005
Integrated weed management in gladiolus
Anil Kumar, B.C. Sharma and Jai Kumar
Full length articles | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-10 | Volume: 44 Page No:181-182 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was carried out during Rabi season from 2007-2010 at Chatha, Jammu to find out relative efficiency of weed management practices in gladiolus (Tagets erecta L.). Result revealed significant enhancement in spike yield with 2 hand weedings at 20 and 40 days after transplanting (6.05 t/ha) and pendimethalin 2 kg/ha + 1 hand weeding (5.79 t/ha), both of which were superior to weedy check (3.25 t/ha). The highest weed control efficiency (78.2%) was also achieved with 2 hand weedings, followed by pendimethalin + hand weding 76.9%). Application of pendimethalin along with hand weeding proved to be economical.

Email

anillau@gmail.com

Address

Division of Agronomy, SKUAST-J, Chatha, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir 180 009
Efficacy of bispyribac-sodium on weed flora and yield of drilled rice
Anay Rawat, C.S. Chaudhary, V.B. Upadhyaya and Vikas Jain
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-11 | Volume: 44 Page No:183-185 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during Kharif seasons of 2010 at JNKVV, Jabalpur to study the efficacy of bispyribac-sodium and other herbicides against weeds in drilled rice.  The field was infested with grassy weeds viz., Echinochloa colona, Dinebra retroflexa, Cyperus iria, Eclipta alba and Phyllanthus niruri. The efficacy of bispyribac-sodium as post- emergence was significantly superior when applied at 80 g/ha over other herbicides. However, the application of bispyribac-sodium 20 g/ha was more remunerative. Among the herbicidal treatments bispyribac-Na 80 g/ha recorded maximum grain yield (4.59 t/ha) which was at par with other doses of bispyribac-Na except 10 g/ha and significantly higher as compared to cyhalofop-butyl and butachlor.

Email

rawatanay@rediffmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, JNKVV, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh 482 004
Weed dynamics, yield and economics of pigeonpea influenced by growth promoters and mulching
S. Jawahar Chinnathurai, A. Veeramani and P. Prema
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-12 | Volume: 44 Page No:186-190 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

The experiment was laid out in split plot design and replicated thrice at Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai during Rabi 2009-2010. The main plot treatment consisted of mulching with crop residue and no mulch as control. Foliar spray of micronutrient mixture, NAA at 40 ppm, salicylic acid at 100 ppm, brassinolide at 0.1 ppm, triacontanol at 500 ppm and no spray were assigned to sub plot. Among the main plot treatments, mulching with crop residue effectively controlled the weed density of grasses, sedges and broad leaved weeds which increased the yield attributes. The eonomic parameters, viz. gross return, net return, and benefit cost ratio were higher in mulching. The subplot treatment foliar spray of NAA at 40 ppm reduced the weed density significantly, which also enhanced the yield and yield attributes despite recording more economic returns. When  both the main and subplot treatments combined together, they gave better control of sedges  at 40 and 60 DAS and grasses at 60 DAS due to shade effect of robust stature of plants. This treatment combination resulted in substantial increase in yield and yield attributes and also more economic returns.

Email

veeramanitnau@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625 104
H2O2 induced seed viability assessment of Asian spider flower
K. Sivasubramaniam and V. Vijayalakshmi
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-13 | Volume: 44 Page No:191-192 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Experiment carried out to assess the viability of Asian spider flower seeds revealed that presoaking embryos of Cleome viscosa in 1% H2O2  for 30 M followed by 0.2% tetrazolium (Tz) staining for 4 h showed pronounced improvement in staining compared to embryos not subjected to H2O2 that remained unstained.

Email

viji.seedscience@gmail.com

Address

Department of Seed Science and Technology, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625 104
Dry-seeded rice productivity in relation to sowing time, variety and weed control
Harjeet Singh Brar and M.S. Bhullar
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-14 | Volume: 44 Page No:193-195 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

Transplanted crop recorded the lowest total weed population and dry matter and similar to dry seeding on 0 days after nursery sowing. Total weed population and dry matter was lower under early sowing on 0, 7 and 14 DANS as compared to delayed sowings. Sequential application of herbicides effectively controlled Echinochloa sp. and D. sanguinalis while control of Eragrostis sp. and L. chinensis was very poor. Transplanted crop recorded the highest rice grain yield, at par with dry seeding on 0 DANS but significantly higher than dry seeding on later dates. Three hand hoeings gave significantly higher grain yield than herbicides. Rice seeding directly on 0, 7 and 14 DANS produced similar grain yield under herbicides and three hand hoeings. Further delay in seeding significantly reduced grain yield under herbicides as compared to hand hoeings.

Email

bhullarms@pau.edu

Address

Department of Agronomy, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab 141 004
Chemical management of broad-leaved weeds in grapes
S.D. Ramteke, A.B. Rajurkar, M.A. Bhange and R.J. Kor
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-15 | Volume: 44 Page No:196-199 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

field experiment was conducted to study the effect of different herbicides alone or in combination, viz. BCSAA 10717-2% + glyphosate (42% SC), BCSAA10717-500 (SC), It is glyphosate (42% SC), glyphosate (41% SC) and paraquat(24 SL) for management of annual and perennial broad-leaved weeds in grapes after October pruning of the year 2010-2011. Herbicide treatments in grape vineyard significantly reduced the total number of weed. Among the tested herbicides, the most effective weed control was recorded with BCSAA 10717 (2%) + glyphosate 42% SC (85.0 + 1700 g/ha) which showed lowest weed density of 22 (4.80) plants/m2 and lowest dry weight (0.212 g) of weed after 30 days. While paraquat (24 SL) found effective in increasing the yield with decreasing competition between grape vine and weed,  The highest yield (32.12 t/ha) was found in area where paraquat 24 SL was used for weed control. No phytotoxic signs or symptoms, viz. leaf tip/surface injury, wilting, vein clearing, necrosis, epinasty and /or hyponasty were observed by weed management treatments.

Email

sdramteke@yahoo.com

Address

Department of Plant Physiology, National Research Centre for Grapes, Pune, Maharashtra 412 307
Weed management in pearlmillet based intercropping system
Ashish Kiroriwal, R.S Yadav and Amit Kumawat
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-16 | Volume: 44 Page No:200-203 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during Kharif season of 2007 to study the weed management in pearlmillet inter-cropping systems. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design and replicated three times. Pre-emergence application of pendimethalin at 0.75kg/ha and oxyfluorfen at 0.2 kg/ha decreased the crop growth and yield attributes, viz. plant stand, plant height, dry matter production, root weight and root length compared to two hand weeding due to some phytotoxic effect but superior to one hand weeding and weedy check. Significantly higher seed, stover, biological and pearlmillet equivalent yield were recorded in two hand weeding treatment over all other treatments except weed free. The N and P uptake of pearlmillet and net returns increased significantly under all the weed control treatments as compared to weedy check.

Email

amit.skn@rediffmail.com

Address

College of Agriculture, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner, Rajasthan 334 002
Effect of brown manuring on weed growth, yield and economics of irrigated maize
A. Ramachandran, A. Veeramani and P. Prema
Short communications | DOI: IJWS-2012-44-3-17 | Volume: 44 Page No:204-206 |
Address & Email | Article preview | View PFD | Download

Abstract:

A field experiment was conducted during Rabi season of 2011-12 at Madurai to study the effect of brown manuring on weed dynamics, yield and yield attributes and economics of irrigated maize. The weed management practice of PE alachlor 1.0 kg/ha + brown manuring proved to be effective in registering the lowest weed density of grasses, sedges, broad-leaved weeds and total weeds at 20, 40 and 60 days after sowing (DAS) and was at par with PE alachclor 1.0 kg/ha + daincha as intercrop with in-situ incorporation on 35 DAS except at 20 and 40 DAS. The above said prominent treatment has also registered higher weed control efficiency (84.41, 92.15 and 89.65% at 20, 40 and 60 DAS, respectively). As a result, the above promising treatment   has  increased  the  yield attributes such as cob length (17.09 cm), no. of rows/cob (14.76), no. of grains/row (38.56) and 100-grain weight (23.57 g), which in turn reflected   in    registering  higher grain yield of  7,227 kg/ha and stover yield of 11,563 kg/ha. The net returns ( 45,993/ha) and benefit cost ratio (3.61) were also more in PE alachlor 1.0 kg/ha + Brown manuring. The weed management practice of PE alachlor 1.0 kg/ha + daincha as intercrop with in-situ incorporation on 35 DAS was found to be the next best treatment in recording the higher grain and stover yield and economic returns.

Email

veeramanitnau@gmail.com

Address

Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625 104

CONTACT Us

Dr. Shobha Sondhia, Secretary, ISWS
ICAR-Directorate of Wed Research
Jabalpur -482 004
  • iswsjbp@gmail.com
  • (+91) 8269253534
website counter

Designed, Developed & Maintained by

by Gyanendra Pratap Singh



©Copyright 2020 Indian Society of Weed Science (ISWS). All Rights Reserved.