Impact of different herbicides on productivity of rice and their economics in North Eastern Coastal Plain Zone of Odisha

(1)

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Special Issue on International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET) Vol.-4, Iss-5, 2016 For National Conference on “Recent Innovations in Engineering and Management Sciences” (RIEMS-2016) Modern Engineering & Management Studies Balasore, ODISHA, ISSN (Online): 2347 - 2812, 20th March 2016

7

Impact of different herbicides on productivity of rice and their economics in North Eastern Coastal Plain Zone of Odisha

M.R. Pradhan

Balasore College of Engineering and Technology, Sergarh, Balasore-756060, Odisha Email: [email protected]

Abstract : A field experiment was conducted at RRTTS, Ranital , Bhadrak during kharif 2008 and 2009 to study the productivity, phytotoxicity and their economics of chemical weed mangement in transplanted rice. The major grass weed intercepted in the experimental field were Echinochloa colonum, Leersia hexandra, Digitaria sanguinalis, Paspalum scrobiculatum. Among the sedges the dominant species noticed were Cyperus iria, Fimbristylis miliacea. Among broadleaf weed mainly Ammania baccifera, Ludwigia parviflora, Marselia quadrifolia were found during both the years of experimentation.. Hand weeding twice recorded lowest weed biomass and maximum grain yield. However, Metsulfuron methyl + Chlorimuron ethyl @6g a.i. ha-1 (Almix) as post emergence herbicide executed at par grain yield with hand weeding and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl and was found to be economic over farmers practice (hand weeding). Almix was found to be more economic and remunerative in realizing maximum benefit cost ratio (3.349). Despite giving higher grain yield than PSE, Pretilachlor, Oxadiargyl and HW Twice proved to be less economic due to higher cost involvement. Oxadiargyl @ 100g a.i./ ha showed temporary phytotoxic effects on plants which was not reflected in the yield.

I. INTRODUCTION

Rice is the staple food of more than 60 percent of world’s population. About 90 percent of all rice grown in the world is produced and consumed in the Asia region. Rice is the staple food crop in India as well as in our state, Odisha. Odisha expects to produce around 7 million tonne of rice, which is about 6.7 percent of country’s total rice-output. After China, India contributes 21.5 per cent of global rice production. Rice occupies a pivotal place in Indian agriculture and is grown on more than 44 million hectares and accounts for about 43 per cent of total food grain production in the country.

Weeds are one of the most important agricultural pests which reduced the grain yield in transplanted rice by 16- 48 percent and yield loss up to 90 percent is not unheard of. This loss is therefore a serious threat for the food deficit. Weed management in transplanted rice is accompanied by mechanical, cultural, chemical methods and combination of two or, more of these practices.

Though hand weeding is very effective; but it is tedious, time consuming and expensive. Chemicals inform of herbicides are the good substitute for mechanical as well

as manual method of weed control. During the past three decades, the agro-chemical industry has produced a range of herbicides for weed control in various crops.

But in this investigation different herbicides have been tested along with their economics involved during Kharif season.

II. MATERIALS AND METHOD

A field experiment was carried out at the RRTTS farm, Ranital, Bhadrak, Odisha during kharif season of 2008 and 2009. The rice variety was swarna. The experiment was laid out at Randomized Block Design having seven treatments with three replications. Soil type was clay loam in texture with having pH 6.8. The treatment comprised unweeded control, hand weeding at 21 and 42 days after transplanting (DAT), Butachlor @1.25 kg ha^-1 and Pretilachlor @0.5 kg ha^-1were appliedat 3 DAT where Oxadiargyl @0.1 kg ha^-1and Metsulfuron methyl + Chlorimuron ethyl @ 6 g ha^-1applied at 5 DAT and Pyrazosulfuron ethyl (PSE) @30 g ha^-1at 10 DAT by a Knapsack sprayer fitted with a nozzle- WFN 0.40 with 500 L water hectare. The rice crop Swarna was raised during kharif season with recommended package of practices followed uniformly. Quadrate of 0.5 X 0.5 m² was used twice in each plot randomly to record the weeds for their dry weight at 30 and 50 DAT.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Phytotoxic effects of different herbicidal treatments Except Oxadiargyl, all other chemical treatments did not exhibited any phytotoxic effects on rice plants (Table-1).

Oxadiargyl @100g ha^-1showed more severe but not lasting phytotoxicity on rice plants upto 15 days after application. However, at later stages the plant growth picked up well. Caseley et al., 1997 working on Propanil and Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl reported similar observation.

Impact of different treatments on weed biomass As evident from table no.-2 and 3 the herbicidal treatments significantly reduced the total weed biomass at harvest over weedy check. MSM+CME recorded the lowest weed biomass of 4.45 g m ^–2and 0.76 g m ^–2 in 2008 and 2009 respectively. This was followed by Oxadiargyl, PSE and Pretilachlor. All these chemicals and hand weeding exhibited significantly lower weed

(2)

________________________________________________________________________________________________

8 biomass than Butachlor. However the highest total weed biomass was observed with weedy check in both years of experimentation.

Effect on crop

All the treatments except Butachlor recorded significantly higher plant height over weedy check (Table 2 and Table 3). MSM+CME exhibited highest plant height which was followed by hand weeding, Oxadiargyl treatments. Among all treatments, MSM+CME produced highest number of effective tillers per plant (252 and 258), grains per panicle which was at par with hand weeding and PSE in both years of experimentation. In 2008 MSM+CME recorded the highest yield (50.80 q ha ^-1), which was at par with hand weeding and weedy check had the lowest value (39.40 q ha ^-1). Again, MSM+CME recorded the highest yield (54.6 q ha ^-1), which was at par with hand weeding treatment, and weedy check had the lowest value (42.1 q ha ^-1) in the year 2009. The herbicidal treatments Oxadiargyl, PSE and Pretilachlor were at par and exhibited higher yield over Butachlor and Weedy check.

Economics of different treatments

It is evident from Table - 4 that among all treatments, CME + MSM (Almix) showed maximum net return (Rs.

47478.00 ha^-1) with a benefit cost ratio of 3.076 in the year 2008. Butachlor, Pretilachlor, Oxadiargyl and HW twice realized comparable benefit cost ratio in comparison to PSE (benefit cost ratio 2.906).Weedy check given a lowest net return of Rs 37396.00 with a benefit cost ratio of 2.548.

Similarly from Table – 5 it is clear that among all treatments CME + MSM (Almix) realized maximum gross return (Rs. 56454.00 ha^-1) with a benefit cost ratio of 3.622 in the year 2009. The corresponding figure is lowest for weedy check with a benefit cost ratio of 2.938. Pretilachlor, PSE and Oxadiargyl were gave gross return of Rs. 49739.00,Rs. 50220.00 and Rs. 50357.00 respectively with corresponding benefit cost ratio of 3.235, 3.226 and 3.221 as compared to Butachlor (benefit cost ratio 3.114 ).

IV. CONCLUSION

Application of Metsulfuron Methyl 10% + Chlorimuron ethyl 10% @6g a.i. ha-1 (MSM+CME) as post emergence herbicide was found to be more economic and effective over farmers practice (hand weeding), hence recommended for North Eastern Coastal Plain Zone of Odisha.

Table 1: Effect of different weed management on Crop Toxicity Rating in rice

Treatments Crop Toxicity Rating

T₁ (Check) 1

T₂ (Butachlor) 1 T₃ (Pretilachlor) 1 T₄ (Oxadiargyl) 3*

T₅ (PSE) 1

T₆ (MSM+CME) 1 T₇ (HW twice) 1

1: No reduction or injury; 3*: more severe and not lasting

Table 2: Impact of different treatment on weed biomass at harvest, growth, yield attributing characters and yield of rice -2008

Treatments Weed biomass (g m^-2)

Plant Ht.

(cm)

Effective Tillers/ plant

Grains/

panicle

Test wt.

(g)

Grain yield (q ha^-1)

T₁(Weedy check) 21.73 97.50 218.00 228.00 20.98 39.40

T₂(Butachlor) 11.03 99.20 238.00 240.00 21.12 44.10

T₃(Pretilachlor) 5.54 99.30 240.00 248.00 21.15 45.10

T₄ Oxadiargyl) 4.80 99.40 244.00 246.00 21.24 46.00

T₅ (PSE) 5.02 100.20 247.00 248.00 21.26 47.90

T₆ (MSM+CME) 4.45 102.10 252.00 258.00 21.28 50.80

T₇ (HW twice) 9.21 101.50 249.00 254.00 21.24 49.10

SE(m)+ 0.191 0.976 7.211 6.785 0.750 1.981

CD(P=0.05) 0.587 3.006 22.218 20.904 NS 6.105

Table 3: Impact of different treatment on weed biomass at harvest, growth, yield attributing characters and yield of rice -2009

Treatments Weed biomass (g m^-2)

Plant Ht.

(cm)

Effective Tillers/ plant

Grains/

panicle

Test wt.

(g)

Grain yield (q ha^-1)

T₁(Weedy check) 15.60 98.10 228.00 120.30 21.05 42.10

T₂(Butachlor) 9.12 99.60 240.00 134.70 21.13 46.60

T₃(Pretilachlor) 3.14 101.60 248.00 137.30 21.18 48.10

T₄ Oxadiargyl) 1.11 102.50 246.00 138.60 21.25 48.70

T₅ (PSE) 1.26 101.70 248.00 139.70 21.25 48.60

(3)

________________________________________________________________________________________________

9

T₆ (MSM+CME) 0.76 104.40 258.00 144.40 21.30 54.60

T₇ (HW twice) 8.16 102.60 254.00 140.20 21.25 51.20

SE(m)+ 0.144 0.903 6.785 5.040 0.756 2.053

CD(P=0.05) 0.445 2.781 20.904 15.528 NS 6.327

Table - 4: Economics of different treatments-2008 Treatments Cost of

cultivation

Cost of produce

Benefit:

cost ratio T1:Weedy check 14676.00 37396.00 2.548 T2:Butachlor 15316.00 41211.00 2.691 T3:Pretilachlor 15226.00 42151.00 2.768 T4:Oxadiargyl 15483.00 42988.00 2.776 T5:PSE 15416.00 44795.00 2.906 T6:Almix 15435.00 47478.00 3.076 T7:HW Twice 16776.00 45905.00 2.736

Table - 5: Economics of different treatments-2009 Treatments Cost of

cultivation

Cost of produce

Benefit:

cost ratio T₁:Weedy check 14826.00 43559.00 2.938 T₂:Butachlor 15466.00 48158.00 3.114 T₃:Pretilachlor 15376.00 49739.00 3.235 T₄:Oxadiargyl 15633.00 50357.00 3.221 T₅:PSE 15566.00 50220.00 3.226 T₆:Almix 15585.00 56454.00 3.622 T₇:HW Twice 16926.00 52972.00 3.130

REFRENCES

[1] Anandhakrishnan, B. and Jayakumar, R. 2003.

Bio-efficacy and phytotoxicity of triclopyr butotyl ester (TBE) in transplanted rice Oryza sativa L.

Pestology Vol. XXVII, No. 9 10-14.

[2] Bhanurekha, K., Raju, M. S. and Reddy, M. D.

2002. Effect of herbicides in transplanted rice.

Indian Journal of Weed Science 34 (1 & 2) : 123- 125.

[3] Bharadwaj, R.B.L. and Verma, R.D. 1969. The chemical control of weeds in rice fields. Indian Journal of Agronomy 4 (2) : 123-129.

[4] Caseley, J.C., Palgrave,C., Haas, E. and Valverde, B. 1997. Herbicides with alternative modes of action for the control of propanil and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl resistant Echinochloa colona.

Brighton Crop protection Conference, Weeds Proceedings on an International Conference, Brighton, UK,17-20 Nov., 1997, Volume 1, PP.215-220

[5] De Datta, S.K., Bantilan, R.T. and Park, J.K. 1969.

Selective control of annual grassy weeds in transplanted tropical rice with 2, 2, 2-trichloroethyl styrens. Nature 22 (1) : 52-75.

[6] De Datta, S.K. and Barker, R. 1977. Economic evaluation of modern weed control techniques in rice. (In) : Integrated control of Weeds (Eds. J.D.

Fryer and S. Matsunaka) University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo : 205-288.

[7] De Datta, S.K. 1979. Weed problems and methods of control in tropical rice. (In) Symposium on weed control in tropical crops.

Publication by Weed Sciences Society Philippines, INC, and Philippines council for Agriculture and Resources Research. pp. 9-44.

[8] Ghosh, P., Ghosh, R.K., Saha, M. and Mandal, D.

2007.Effect of clomazone + 2,4 DEE on growth and productivity of rice and on total bacteria in soil. Jounal of Crop and Weed. 3(1):18-23 [9] Janardhan, G. and Muniyappa, T.V. 1994.

Economics of some pre-emergence herbicides in transplanted rice. Current research University of Agricultural Sciences (Bangalore), 22 (11-12) : 154-156.

[10] Ray, D.K. (2004). Weede management in Puddle seeded rice. Annual of Agricultural Research, 25 (3),pp:369 -272

