ISWS, India

All issues

Indian Journal of Weed Science

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

NAAS rating: 5.17

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

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

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.

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.

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

Full length manuscript should not exceed 4500 words including space required for figures, tables and list of references. Research note can be up to 2500 words, with not more than 2 figures or tables. One season/year data should invariably be presented as research notes only.

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

Volume- 1 \| Issue-1&2 (Jan-Jun) \| Year 1969

Volume- 1 | Issue-1&2 (Jan-Jun) | Year 1969

Control of Cynodon dactylon by Mechanical and Chemical Methods B. SHIVARAJ, M. M. HOSAMANI AND S. V. PATIL Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-1 \| Volume: 1 Page No:1-4 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: An lnvestlqatlon was carrled out to study the effect of different chemicals in combination with ploughing for the control of Cvnodon dactylon at the Agricultural College Farm, Dharwar during the year 1966-67. The herbicides tried were Dalapon, TCA and Paraquat in combination with ploughing. There was mortality of shoots and the reduction in weight of fol laq e, as well as rhizome to depth of 0-30 cm The dessication of the rhizomes occurred upto about 15 to 18 cm depth In the Dalapon treated plot. Dalapon 30 kg per ha with split applications before and after ploughing of the land gave a better control of the weed. It may be possible to control the weed more effectively with spraying of Dalapon about 2 to 3 times during the year Email Address Tnstructor in Agronomy, Assistant Professor of Agronomy" Professor of Agronomy, U, A. S., Agricultural College, Dharwar, respectively.
Weed Control in Soybean N.K. JAIN AND S.D. CHOUBEY Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-2 \| Volume: 1 Page No:5-9 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: An experiment was conducted at the J- N. Krishl Vishwa Vidyalaya Farm, Jabalpur (M. P) with four herbicides and cultural practices in the kharif season of 1967 to determine which of the four herb-icides or cultural practices is most effective in controlling weeds in soybean crop. The yield in cultural practices was more as compared to that in herbicidal treatments, the maximum being under hoeing followed by farmer's practices. Among the herbicides, Treflan gave the highest yield followed by TOK E-25 and BV 201. Amiben gave the least yield (19.33 q/ha) out of four herbicides. Weed population per square foot was lowest in TOK E-25 plot and highest in control plot. Email Address Post graduate student and Head of the Department of Agronomy. 1. N. Agrjcultural University, Jabalpur respectively.
Effect of 2,4–Dichlorophenoxyaceticacid on the Linear Growth of Seedlings of Some Weeds S.N. Khosla Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-3 \| Volume: 1 Page No:10-13 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: Seedlings of Achvranthes aspera L., Cassia tara L. and Ruellia tuberosa L. with their radicle and plumule were treated for 72 hours with different concentrations of 2, 4-D (acid). This herbicide inhibited the growth of seedlings of all these weeds effectively. The linear growth of the radicle and the hypocotyl was inhibited and growth of lateral roots was. also checked. Rate of inhibition of radicle and hypocotyl increased at higher concentrations. It caused swellings of the radicle and the hypocotyl of A. aspera and C. tara seedlings. No such swellings were seen in R. tuberosa- The radicle of all the three species were more susceptible to 2,4-D than the hypocotyl. 100 ppm was found lethal for A. aspera and C. tara and 200 ppm for R. tuberosa seedlings. The results were discussed with reference to the strength of the concentrations and their pH values. Email Address Contribution from Regir nal Research Laboratory. Jammu
Response of Herbicides on Artemisia vulgaris K.V. Bondale Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-4 \| Volume: 1 Page No:14-20 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: The experiment was laid out on a range patch on the farm of Central Sheep & ·Wool Research Institue, Avikanagar (Rajasthan), with an object to study the response of four herbicidal preparations (Phytar-560, Bladex 'c', spontox and Ansar-529) with three rates (low, medium and high) and two (single or double spraying) frequencies of application, on Artemisia vulgaris. The following conclusions could be drawn:- 1. Growth in height, vigour and seed yield was greatly reduced with the application of 'phytar-560' and 'spontox'. 2. Regeneration of plants was much lowered by harmone herbicides viz. 'spontox' and 'Bladex-c'. 3. 'Ansar-529' was not suitable herbicide to control A. vulgaris, however, the treated plants had seeds of low germination capacity. 4. Medium and high doses responded satisfactorily. 5. Application for the second time (at half rate of the first) was beneficial rather than first single application. Email Address Contribution from Grassland and Forage Agronomy Section, Central Sheep & Wool Research Institute, Avikanagar (Jaipur), Rajasthan.
Weeds Competition in Pearl Millet in Arid Zone as Influenced by Varieties, Doses of Nitrogen and Methods of Weed Control. Vijay Kumar and P. C. Raheja Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-5 \| Volume: 1 Page No:21-30 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: Number and dry weight of weeds was not significantly affected by various varieties. Nitrogen fertilization showed adverse effect on weed population. Harmful effect of nitrogen doses was, however, not marked on-dry ma'ter of weeds. Weed competition, as evident from weeds population and their dry weight was practically nil in WI (hand weeded) plots. Superiority of 2,4-0 was also significant over control (No Weeding). The reduction in weed competition by 2, 4-0 was about the same (34 and 36 per cent) during 1963 and 1964 respectively. Increase in every gram of dry weight in weed per square metre reduce the grain yield by 0.09 gram per plant, Most of the broad leaved weeds were susceptible to the 2, 4-0 sprayings. Email Address Asstt. Prof. of Agronomy, P. A. V., Ludhiana and Project Mana~r, Lake Nasser, Aiwan, U. A. R, respectively
Effect of some Chemical, Mechanical and Cropping Methods of Weed Control on the Food reserves of underground organs in Cyperus rotundus L. Ram Gopal and V. S. Mani Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-6 \| Volume: 1 Page No:31-40 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: Twelve days after the comoletlon of the treatments in the first year the dry weight of nutgrass tubers under P2C~, P4C4 and P~C4 was reduced to 67.2, 87.9 and 844 per cent as compared to PoCo in the 0-15 cm depth. The reduction in 15-:30 cm depth was to the extent of 63.0, 587 and 50.0 per cent as compared to PoCo. At maize harvest in 1964 the reduction was 75.9, 77.3 and 82.6 per cent in the 0-15 cm depth and 83.3,84.4 and 807 per cent respectively for PZC2, P4C.j, and P2Ci as compared to PoCo. Twelve days after repetition of treatments in 1965 the dry weight of nutgrass tubers under P 2C2' P 4CZ and P 4C4 was reduced to 70.4, 71.2 and 71.9 per cent in 0-15 cm depth and 97.4, 97.4 and 100.0 per cent in 15-30 cm depth as compared to PoCo At malz e harve st in 1935 th s raduction in tuber weight wa5 92.2,97.8 and 100.0 per cent in 0-15 cm depth and 94.6, 97.3 and 953 per cent as compared to PoCo. Amount of starch in the nutgrass tubers in the 0-15 cm depth under P2C2• P₄C₄ and P₂C₂ was brought down to 93. 100 and 12.2 per cent and 14 1, 164 and 14.9 p« cent, re spect ive ly 12 days attar the completion of the treatments and at maize harvest in 1964 as compared to PoCo. The amount of starch in the nutgrass tubers in 15-30 cm depth under P2CZ' P4C4 and PeC4 was brought down to 21.4, 393 and 25.9 per cent and 94,0.0 and 20.7 per cent re~pectivelv, 12 days after completion of the treatments and at maize harvest in 1964 as compared to PoCo. Twelve days after the repet itlcn of Email Address Associate Professor of Botany, Himachal Agricultural College, Solan and Agronomist (Weed Control), Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi,
A comparative study of new herbicides on Cyperus rotundus and Trianthema portulacustrum. N. R. Bajpai, B. L. Porwal and D. K. Misra Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-7 \| Volume: 1 Page No:41-47 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: The results obtained frcm the experiment conducted to control Cyperus rotundus L. andT,ianthema i.oriulacusu um chern icall y are summarised here: 1. MSMA (Ansar 529) when applied at the rate of 3'48 to 5.22 (a. e.)/ha CvpelllS roticndus was controlled effectively. The repeated applications of this weedicide will control the weed most effectively. 2. E"!,ective control of Cvperus rctundus was not obtained by the appl teation of Daiapon even at the rate of 4.5 kg (a.e.)/ha. 3. Neither MSMA nor Dalapon was effective in controlling T'rianthema. 4. Effectiveness of M~Ml\ was dscr eased when it was applied in combination with Dal apon, 5. Tuberization in Cvpe rus rotundus was not effectively controlled by any of the two weedicldss used either singly or in combination. Email Address The Head of the Agronomy Department, Jobner; Lectuer in Agronomy, Udaipur and Director of Extension Education, University of Udaipur (Rajasthan)
Chemical control of weeds in linseed O. N. Mehrotra, R. C. Garg and R. N. Tiwari Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-8 \| Volume: 1 Page No:48-52 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: Email Address Conu i+ui ion fr"111 Crop Physiology Section, Agriculture Department, Kanpur (U. P.).
Weed control in maize through triazine herbicides R. P. Singh, M. K. Moolani and N. K. Behl Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-9 \| Volume: 1 Page No:53-62 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: A field experiment on the control of weeds in hybrid maize was conducted at the Research Farm of Punjab Agricultural University, Hissar during 1966-67 and 1967-68. The soil was sandy loam and the total rainfall during tha kJza'if season was less than 50 ern, The residual effect of treatments was studied on the rabi crop of wheat in 1967-68. Pre-emergence application of simazine or atrazine @ 1 kg a. i.!ha was found most effective in controlling broadleat and grassy weeds in the maize crop. These treatments gave maximum yield of maize and consequently proved to be most remunerative. The treatment of hand weeding came next to these treatments. The following crop of wheat did not suffer in its yield from simazine or atrazine application made to maize. Pre-emergence treatments of simazine and atrazine @ 1 kg a. i. I ha also increased the nitrogen uptake of the crop plant. Simazine application @ 2 kg a. L/ha proved toxic to the maize crop and reduced the yield. Email Address Agronomist (Weed Control), J. G. F. R. I. Jhansi, Professor & Head and Research Asstt, (Weed Control) Agronomy Department, Punjab Agricultural University, Hissar,
A survey of flora of field weeds of Chambal commanded area (Kota) Rajasthan Indu Mehta and U.B. Singh Full length articles \| DOI: IJWS-1969-1-1&2-10 \| Volume: 1 Page No:63-75 \| Address & Email \| Article preview \| View PFD \| Download Abstract: A detailed collection of weeds in ten tehsils of Chambal Commanded Area, Have been listed with a statistical synopsis in the present paper. Leguminaceae, Compositeae and Gramineae make more than 1/3 of the flora, these coupled with Euphorbiaceae and Amaranthaceae cover about fifty per cent of the flora. The remaining flora is composed of thirtyeight families. Except Gramineae monocots are poorly developed. Euphorbia, Indigofera, Corchorous have more than four species. Other genera are poorly represented. Digera, Psoralia, Celosia, Alysicarpus, Rungia, Justicia and Euphorbia are very common in kharif season. Obnoxious creeping weeds of this season are Cynotis, Merremia, Trianthema, Convolvulus and Ipomea spp. In Rabi season Chenopodium, Sonchus, T'rigonella, Medicago, and some species of Euphorbia are very common in this area. The only parasites found in the crops in this area are Striga euphr asioides and Cuscuta spp. Certain crop weed associations need special mention because ot their severe competition with crops and further studies are required regarding the relative losses and their extent due to such competition. Wheat crop suffers due to Chenopodium album, C. murale and Convolvulus arvensis, Paddy due to Ammania baccii era, Rottela denscfiora, Cyperus aristatus and Caesulia axillaris, In kharif sorghum, pluses, Til, Groundnut, in general sustain a strong competition with Digera muricata, Ru.ngia ,epens, Celosia argente a, Echinochola colonurn, Psoralea corvlii olia. Merremia emarfinl.1ta, Cyperus rotundus, d usticia quinqueangularis, Vernon; a cony zoides, Vicoa indica etc. These weeds are very common and under favourable conditions of good rainfall even total crop losses in some fields do occur due to these competitions. Selective association of Cuscuta in Lucerne. Striga in Jowar and Ipomea in sunhemp are also worth recording. Email Address Contrtbution of Department of Agriculture, Rajasthan, Jaipur. Work done under the scheme of River Valley Project-at Irrigation Research Centre Chambal Commanded area, Kota.

Abstract:

An lnvestlqatlon was carrled out to study the effect of different chemicals in combination with ploughing for the control of Cvnodon dactylon at the Agricultural College Farm, Dharwar during the year 1966-67. The herbicides tried were Dalapon, TCA and Paraquat in combination with ploughing. There was mortality of shoots and the reduction in weight of fol laq e, as well as rhizome to depth of 0-30 cm The dessication of the rhizomes occurred upto about 15 to 18 cm depth In the Dalapon treated plot. Dalapon 30 kg per ha with split applications before and after ploughing of the land gave a better control of the weed. It may be possible to control the weed more effectively with spraying of Dalapon about 2 to 3 times during the year

Email

Address

Tnstructor in Agronomy, Assistant Professor of Agronomy" Professor of Agronomy, U, A. S., Agricultural College, Dharwar, respectively.

Abstract:

An experiment was conducted at the J- N. Krishl Vishwa Vidyalaya Farm, Jabalpur (M. P) with four herbicides and cultural practices in the kharif season of 1967 to determine which of the four herb-icides or cultural practices is most effective in controlling weeds in soybean crop. The yield in cultural practices was more as compared to that in herbicidal treatments, the maximum being under hoeing followed by farmer's practices. Among the herbicides, Treflan gave the highest yield followed by TOK E-25 and BV 201. Amiben gave the least yield (19.33 q/ha) out of four herbicides. Weed population per square foot was lowest in TOK E-25 plot and highest in control plot.

Email

Address

Post graduate student and Head of the Department of Agronomy. 1. N. Agrjcultural University, Jabalpur respectively.

Abstract:

Seedlings of Achvranthes aspera L., Cassia tara L. and Ruellia tuberosa L. with their radicle and plumule were treated for 72 hours with different concentrations of 2, 4-D (acid). This herbicide inhibited the growth of seedlings of all these weeds effectively. The linear growth of the radicle and the hypocotyl was inhibited and growth of lateral roots was. also checked. Rate of inhibition of radicle and hypocotyl increased at higher concentrations. It caused swellings of the radicle and the hypocotyl of A. aspera and C. tara seedlings. No such swellings were seen in R. tuberosa- The radicle of all the three species were more susceptible to 2,4-D than the hypocotyl. 100 ppm was found lethal for A. aspera and C. tara and 200 ppm for R. tuberosa seedlings. The results were discussed with reference to the strength of the concentrations and their pH values.

Email

Address

Contribution from Regir nal Research Laboratory. Jammu

Abstract:

The experiment was laid out on a range patch on the farm of Central Sheep & ·Wool Research Institue, Avikanagar (Rajasthan), with an object to study the response of four herbicidal preparations (Phytar-560, Bladex 'c', spontox and

Ansar-529) with three rates (low, medium and high) and two (single or double spraying) frequencies of application, on Artemisia vulgaris. The following conclusions could be drawn:-

1. Growth in height, vigour and seed yield was greatly reduced with the application of 'phytar-560' and 'spontox'.

2. Regeneration of plants was much lowered by harmone herbicides viz. 'spontox' and 'Bladex-c'.

3. 'Ansar-529' was not suitable herbicide to control A. vulgaris, however, the treated plants had seeds of low germination capacity.

4. Medium and high doses responded satisfactorily. 5. Application for the second time (at half rate of the first) was beneficial rather than first single application.

Email

Address

Contribution from Grassland and Forage Agronomy Section, Central Sheep & Wool Research Institute, Avikanagar (Jaipur), Rajasthan.

Abstract:

Number and dry weight of weeds was not significantly affected by various varieties. Nitrogen fertilization showed adverse effect on weed population. Harmful effect of nitrogen doses was, however, not marked on-dry ma'ter of weeds. Weed competition, as evident from weeds population and their dry weight was practically nil in WI (hand weeded) plots. Superiority of 2,4-0 was also significant over control (No Weeding). The reduction in weed competition by 2, 4-0 was about the same (34 and 36 per cent) during 1963 and 1964 respectively. Increase in every gram of dry weight in weed per square metre reduce the grain yield by 0.09 gram per plant, Most of the broad leaved weeds were susceptible to the 2, 4-0 sprayings.

Email

Address

Asstt. Prof. of Agronomy, P. A. V., Ludhiana and Project Mana~r, Lake Nasser, Aiwan, U. A. R, respectively

Abstract:

Twelve days after the comoletlon of the treatments in the first year the dry weight of nutgrass tubers under P2C~, P4C4 and P~C4 was reduced to 67.2, 87.9 and 844 per cent as compared to PoCo in the 0-15 cm depth. The reduction in 15-:30 cm depth was to the extent of 63.0, 587 and 50.0 per cent as compared to PoCo. At maize harvest in 1964 the reduction was 75.9, 77.3 and 82.6 per cent in the 0-15 cm depth and 83.3,84.4 and 807 per cent respectively for PZC2, P4C.j, and P2Ci as compared to PoCo. Twelve days after repetition of treatments in 1965 the dry weight of nutgrass tubers under P 2C2' P 4CZ and P 4C4 was reduced to 70.4, 71.2 and 71.9 per cent in 0-15 cm depth and 97.4, 97.4 and 100.0 per cent in 15-30 cm depth as compared to PoCo At malz e harve st in 1935 th s raduction in tuber weight wa5 92.2,97.8 and 100.0 per cent in 0-15 cm depth and 94.6, 97.3 and 953 per cent as compared to PoCo. Amount of starch in the nutgrass tubers in the 0-15 cm depth under P2C2• P₄C₄ and P₂C₂ was brought down to 93. 100 and 12.2 per cent and 14 1, 164 and 14.9 p« cent, re spect ive ly 12 days attar the completion of the treatments and at maize harvest in 1964 as compared to PoCo. The amount of starch in the nutgrass tubers in 15-30 cm depth under P2CZ' P4C4 and PeC4 was brought down to 21.4, 393 and 25.9 per cent and 94,0.0 and 20.7 per cent re~pectivelv, 12 days after completion of the treatments and at maize harvest in 1964 as compared to PoCo. Twelve days after the repet itlcn of

Email

Address

Associate Professor of Botany, Himachal Agricultural College, Solan and Agronomist (Weed Control), Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi,

Abstract:

The results obtained frcm the experiment conducted to control Cyperus rotundus L. andT,ianthema i.oriulacusu um chern icall y are summarised here: 1. MSMA (Ansar 529) when applied at the rate of 3'48 to 5.22 (a. e.)/ha CvpelllS roticndus was controlled effectively. The repeated applications of this weedicide will control the weed most effectively.

2. E"!,ective control of Cvperus rctundus was not obtained by the appl teation of Daiapon even at the rate of 4.5 kg (a.e.)/ha.

3. Neither MSMA nor Dalapon was effective in controlling T'rianthema.

4. Effectiveness of M~Ml\ was dscr eased when it was applied in combination with Dal apon,

5. Tuberization in Cvpe rus rotundus was not effectively controlled by any of the two weedicldss used either singly or in combination.

Email

Address

The Head of the Agronomy Department, Jobner; Lectuer in Agronomy, Udaipur and Director of Extension Education, University of Udaipur (Rajasthan)

Abstract:

Email

Address

Conu i+ui ion fr"111 Crop Physiology Section, Agriculture Department, Kanpur (U. P.).

Abstract:

A field experiment on the control of weeds in hybrid maize was conducted at the Research Farm of Punjab Agricultural University, Hissar during 1966-67 and 1967-68. The soil was sandy loam and the total rainfall during tha kJza'if season was less than 50 ern, The residual effect of treatments was studied on the rabi crop of wheat in 1967-68. Pre-emergence application of simazine or atrazine @ 1 kg a. i.!ha was found most effective in controlling broadleat and grassy weeds in the maize crop. These treatments gave maximum yield of maize and consequently proved to be most remunerative. The treatment of hand weeding came next to these treatments. The following crop of wheat did not suffer in its yield from simazine or atrazine application made to maize. Pre-emergence treatments of simazine and atrazine @ 1 kg a. i. I ha also increased the nitrogen uptake of the crop plant. Simazine application @ 2 kg a. L/ha proved toxic to the maize crop and reduced the yield.

Email

Address

Agronomist (Weed Control), J. G. F. R. I. Jhansi, Professor & Head and Research Asstt, (Weed Control) Agronomy Department, Punjab Agricultural University, Hissar,

Abstract:

A detailed collection of weeds in ten tehsils of Chambal Commanded Area, Have been listed with a statistical synopsis in the present paper. Leguminaceae, Compositeae and Gramineae make more than 1/3 of the flora, these coupled with Euphorbiaceae and Amaranthaceae cover about fifty per cent of the flora. The remaining flora is composed of thirtyeight families. Except Gramineae monocots are poorly developed. Euphorbia, Indigofera, Corchorous have more than four species. Other genera are poorly represented.

Digera, Psoralia, Celosia, Alysicarpus, Rungia, Justicia and Euphorbia are very common in kharif season. Obnoxious creeping weeds of this season are Cynotis, Merremia, Trianthema, Convolvulus and Ipomea spp. In Rabi season Chenopodium, Sonchus, T'rigonella, Medicago, and some species of Euphorbia are very common in this area. The only parasites found in the crops in this area are Striga euphr asioides and Cuscuta spp.

Certain crop weed associations need special mention because ot their severe competition with crops and further studies are required regarding the relative losses and their extent due to such competition. Wheat crop suffers

due to Chenopodium album, C. murale and Convolvulus arvensis, Paddy due to Ammania baccii era, Rottela denscfiora, Cyperus aristatus and Caesulia axillaris, In kharif sorghum, pluses, Til, Groundnut, in general sustain a strong competition with Digera muricata, Ru.ngia ,epens, Celosia argente a, Echinochola colonurn, Psoralea corvlii olia. Merremia emarfinl.1ta, Cyperus rotundus, d usticia quinqueangularis, Vernon; a cony zoides, Vicoa indica etc. These weeds are very common and under favourable conditions of good rainfall even total crop losses in some fields do occur due to these competitions. Selective association of Cuscuta in Lucerne. Striga in Jowar and Ipomea in sunhemp are also worth recording.

Email

Address

Contrtbution of Department of Agriculture, Rajasthan, Jaipur. Work done under the scheme of River Valley Project-at Irrigation Research Centre Chambal Commanded area, Kota.

All issues

Indian Journal of Weed Science

Print ISSN: 0253-8050Online ISSN: 0974-8164 NAAS rating: 5.17

Chief Editor

Associate editors

CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPER

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

Article submission guideline

Paper Publication Process –

CALL FOR RESEARCH PAPER

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

Article submission guideline

Paper Publication Process –

Guidelines for Authors

Format

Title

Author(s) name(s) and affiliations

Abstract

Key words

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgement

References

Length

Units, abbreviations and nomenclature

Tables and figures

Some useful tips

Manuscript submission

Peer Review Policy

Paper Publication Process –

Peer Review Policy

Initial manuscript evaluation

Type of Peer Review

How the reviewer is selected

How long does the peer review process take?

Final report

Special Issues / Conference Proceedings

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

Editorial Board

Editorial office:

Publisher Address:

Editors

Indexing Indexing & Abstracting Services

Volume- 1 | Issue-1&2 (Jan-Jun) | Year 1969

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

Abstract:

Email

Address

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

NAAS rating: 5.17