Documents

Urea/ZA + herbicide

Description
Description:
Categories
Published
of 8
4
Categories
Published
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Similar Documents
Share
Transcript
  Journal of American Science 2010;6(11) Effect of Adding Urea or Ammonium Sulphate on some Herbicides Efficiency in Controlling Weeds in Onion Plants 1 El-Metwally, I. M.; *1 Kowthar G. El-Rokiek; 1 Salah A. Ahmed; 1 Ebrahim R. El–Desoki and 2 Emad E. H. Abd-Elsamad 1 Botany Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo,Egypt. 2 Vegetable Crops Research Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo,   Egypt. * ahmed_ezat2000@yahoo.com Abstract:  Two field experiments were conducted during two successive seasons of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 at the Agricultural Experiments Station of the National Research Centre at Nobariya, Behaira Governorate, Egypt, to study the effect of adding urea or ammonium sulphate at 2% to herbicide solution on weed control efficiency in onion fields. Weed control treatments were as follows: Metosulam at 20 ml/fed or Clodinafop-propargyl at 70g/fed with or without addition of urea or ammonium sulphate (AMS) at 2% of herbicide solution in comparison to Metosulam at 40 ml/fed, Clodinafop- propargyl at 140g/ fed, Metosulam at 20 ml + Clodinafop- propargyl at 70 g / fed, two hand hoeing and unweeded check. All weed control treatments significantly depressed weed growth when compared to the unweeded one. Two hand hoeing showed the best control of broadleaved weeds in both seasons, followed by that of Metosulam at 40 ml, Metosulam + urea and Metosulam  + AMS treatments, respectively. Clodinafop –  propargyl at 140 g, Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g, Clodinafop – propargyl + urea, Clodinafop – propargyl + AMS and Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl were very effective in controlling most grass weeds. Meanwhile, hand hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl , Metosulam at 40 ml and Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g /fed were the most effective in controlling onion weeds. All herbicidal treatments as well as hand hoeing markedly increased onion yield in both seasons. Maximum values of bulb length, diameter, weight and bulb yield (t/fed) were recorded from Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Metosulam at 20 ml and hand hoeing twice.   [El-Metwally, I. M.; Kowthar G. El-Rokiek; Salah A. Ahmed; Ebrahim R. El–Desoki and Emad E. H. Abd-Elsamad. Effect of Adding Urea or Ammonium Sulphate on some Herbicides Efficiency in Controlling Weeds in Onion Plants. Journal of American Science 2010; 6(11):536-543]. (ISSN: 1545-1003). Keywords:  Onion, Urea, Ammonium sulphate, Metosulam, Clodinafop-propargyl, weeds. 1. Introduction: Onion (  Allium cepa L . ) is one of the most important field and vegetable crops for both local or export market in Egypt. Weeds in transplanted onion fields not only compete with onion seedlings for growth factors but also act as hosts of insects and fungal diseases such as downy mildew that in turn infest onion plants (Ghalwash et al.,  2008). Unlike most crops, onion plants grow slowly and do not form a leaf canopy because of their upright growth habit. This character of onion makes competition with weeds very poor. Thus, onion is the least competitive crop against weeds (Karim et al.,  1998). Weed growth reduce the yield of transplanted onion  by 26    – 48 %  ( Babiker and Ahmed, 1986 ). Weed control in onion fields must be carried out, especially at the early developmental stages. Due to the severe shortage of hand labour with highly paid wages, hand weeding has become uneconomical  processes. Consequently, chemical weed control would be a highly demanded alternative to decrease the cost and increase the economic return due to the increase in onion yield. Effective weed control and high yield of onion were achieved by application of hand hoeing (Radwan and Hussein; 2001, El–Sayed  et al.,  2002 and Ghalwash et al.,  2008), Clodinafop – propargyl (Khan et al., 2005  and Ghalwash et al ., 2008) and Metosulam (El-Metwally, 2002; Sharara et al.,  2006; Ghalwash et  al., 2008 and El-Metwally and Saudy, 2009 ). However, the recommended dose of herbicide is relatively high and hence its cost is high and too expensive under the Egyptian conditions. Recently, some evidences have been gathered that adding some additives, especially the nitrogenous fertilizers to herbicide solution could increase its activity, consequently the dose could be lowered and its cost  price could be decreased. Moreover, lowering the dose of any herbicide is much appreciated from the  point of view of minimizing pollution. In addition, Metwally and Hassan (2001) and El–Metwally (2002)   recorded that using some herbicides with urea or ammonium sulphate had higher efficiency in controlling annual weeds and increased yield and its components of wheat or maize as compared with other treatments used. http://www.americanscience.org editor@americanscience.org   536  Journal of American Science 2010;6(11) Therefore, the objective of this work was to study the effect of adding urea or ammonium sulphate to herbicide solutions on weed control efficiency in onion crop. 2. Materials and methods Two field experiments were carried out during the two successive seasons of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 at the Experimental Station of the  National Research Centre at Nobariya, Behaira Governorate, Egypt, to study the influence of adding urea or ammonium sulphate at 2% (equall 4kg/fed) of herbicide solutions on weed control efficiency in onion crops. The soil of the experiments was sandy, the mechanical analysis (Piper, 1950) and chemical analysis (Jackson, 1960) of the soil were carried out  before sowing and presented in Table (1). Table (1): Mechanical and chemical analysis of Nobariya soil before executing experiment .  Components Value Sand % 75.6 Silt % 17.4 Clay % 5.5    M  e  c   h  a  n   i  c  a   l  a  n  a   l  y  s   i  s Texture class Sandy PH 7.9 E.C. 0.11 mm hos/ cm CO 3  HCO 3  2.5 meq / 100 g soil Cl -  1.0 meq / 100 g soil Ca +2  2.5 meq / 100 g soil Mg +2  1.0 meq / 100 g soil  Na 1.3 meq / 100 g soil    C   h  e  m   i  c  a   l  a  n  a   l  y  s   i  s K  +  0.05 m. equivalent / 100 g soil A complete randomized blocks design with three replications was used in the two seasons. Weed control treatments were as follows: 1- Metosulam (N- 2,6 – dichloro – 3 –methyl phenyl)  – 5.7 – dimethoxy – (1,2,4) Triazolo (1,5a)  pyrimidine – 2- sulphona mide), known commercially as Sinal 10 Sc sprayed after 30 days from transplanting at the rate of 40 ml/ fed. 2- Metosulam at 20 ml/fed. 3- Metosulam at 20 ml + urea at 2%. 4- Metosulam at 20 ml +ammonium sulphate (AMS) at 2%. 5- Clodinafop – propargyl (Prop – 2 – ynyl – (R) – 2  – (4-(5–chloro– 3- fluoro pyridine – 2- yloxy)  phenoxy) = propionate , known commercially as Topik 15 WP sprayed after 50 days from transplanting at the rate of 140g/fed. 6 - Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed. 7- Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g + urea at 2%. 8- Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g + AMS at 2%. 9- Metosulam at 20 ml + Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed. 10- Hand hoeing after 30 and 50 days from transplanting (DFT). 11- Unweeded check (control) without hoeing or herbicide. The herbicides were applied with knapsack sprayer equipped with one nozzle boom and water volume was 200 L/ fed (fed=4200m 2 ). The drip irrigated was the irrigation system. Each treatment  plot consisted of 3 lateral lines, each was 10 m long, 70 cm distances between drip lateral lines. The treatments plot area was 21 m 2 . Onion plants were transplanted in two sides of drip lateral lines, 20 cm apart between the plants. Seedlings of onion cultivar (Giza 6) were transplanted at the last week of December in the two seasons. The previous summer crop in both seasons was peanut (  Arachis hypogaea  L .). All agronomic practices for growing onion were done as recommended. Data recorded were: A –Weeds: Weeds were hand pulled randomly from one square meter from each plot after 75 and 110 days after transplanting and then were identified and classified to broadleaved, grasses and total weeds.  Number and dry weight of each category was estimated. B-   Bulb characters and onion yield : At harvest time, ten bulbs were chosen at random from each plot and the following data were recorded: 1- Bulb length 2 – Bulb diameter 3- Bulb weight 4- Bulb yield (t/fed) C- Some chemical constituents of onion bulbs: a- Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents (NPK)  Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents were determined in dried tissues of onion bulbs according to the official and modified methods of analysis (A.O.A.C., 1984). http://www.americanscience.org editor@americanscience.org   537  Journal of American Science 2010;6(11)  Number and dry weight of grass weeds were significantly decreased by different weed control treatments (Table 3). Clodinafop - propargyl at 140 and 70 g with or without urea, ammonium sulphate or Metosulam were very effective in controlling most grass weeds at 75 and 110 days from transplanting. These treatments decreased dry weight of grass weeds by 93.3, 91.1, 89.4, 89.2 and 86.6 % at 75 days and by 94.4, 91.8, 90.6, 89.7 and 89.6 %, at 110 days from transplanting.  b- Total carbohydrate contents Total carbohydrates in onion bulbs were extracted according to Herbert et al . (1971) and estimated colourimetrically by the phenol-sulphoric acid method as described by Montogomery (1961). Statistical analysis: All data were statistically analyzed according to the technique of analysis of variance (ANOVA) of a randomized complete blocks design. Since the obtained results of the two seasons of experiment were with the same trend, combined analysis was followed for the two seasons (Little and Hills, 1978). Least significant difference (LSD) method was used to test the differences between treatment means at 5% level probability (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). 3. Results and Discussion: Effect of different weed control treatments on: A- Onion weeds: The common weeds in both growing seasons of onion crop were: Chenopodium album L. ; Ammi majus L .; Coronopus squamatus, L . Melilotus indicus L . and  Centaurea calcitrapa as broadleaf weeds, while the grassy weeds were  Avena fatua L .; Lolium multiforum L . and L. The effect of different weed control treatments   on number and dry weight of onion weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting are presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4. 1- Broadleaved weeds: The results in Table 2 showed significant effects on number and dry weight of broadleaved weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting in  both seasons. Hand hoeing exerted the highest reduction in number and dry weight of broadleaved weeds, followed by Metosulam at 40 ml, Metosulam + urea and Metosulam + ammonium sulphate treatments, respectively. These treatments decreased dry weight of broadleaved weeds than unweeded treatment by about 84.2, 60. 9, 59.6 and 59.1 % at 75 days and by 86.3, 66.7, 64.2 and 63.8 %, at 110 days from transplanting, respectively. 2- Grass weeds: 3- Total weeds: It is obvious from the results in Table (4) that weed control treatments revealed significant decrease on number and dry weight of total weeds. Hand hoeing twice, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Metosulam at 40ml and Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g /fed recorded the highest efficiency in decreasing total number of weeds at 75 and 110 days from transplanting. These treatments reduced number of total weeds than unweeded check by 84.3, 68.1, 59.1 and 53.8 %, at 75 days and by 83.3, 69.7, 60.8 and 55.6%, at 110 days from transplanting. Two hand hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 and 70 g /fed treatments were very effective in controlling onion weeds when compared with other weed control treatments at 75 days from transplanting. These treatments reduced the total dry weight of weeds by 85.0, 67.5, 59.2 and 57.4 %, respectively, as compared to unweeded check. With regard to dry weight of total weeds at 110 days from transplanting, results in Table (4) cleared that the highest efficiency in decreasing dry weight of total weeds was obtained from plots treated with hand hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g, Metosulam at 40 ml and Clodinafop –  propargyl at 70 g /fed + urea. These treatments decreased dry weight of total weeds than unweeded treatment by 84.2, 72.8, 62.00, 59.6 and 54.9 %, respectively at 110 days from transplanting. Generally, results in Tables 2, 3 and 4 revealed that all herbicidal treatments used alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate and hand hoeing decreased statistically the number and dry weight of broad leaved, grasses and total weeds grown with onion crop as compared with unweeded treatment. These results may be due to the inhibitory effect of herbicidal treatments on weeds growth. Two hand hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Metosulam at 40 ml, Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g and Metosulam + urea were the most effective for controlling the weeds. Also, Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g, Clodinafop – propargyl + urea, Metosulam + ammonium sulphate, Metosulam + urea and Clodinafop – propargyl + ammonium sulphate treatments produced a promising effect against weed  prevailing in onion fields compared with unweeded treatment. Such results may be due to that urea or ammonium sulphate had capacity to give synergistic effects with herbicides used that reflected by the higher reduction in weed growth. Similar results on the synergestic effect of herbicide and ammonium http://www.americanscience.org editor@americanscience.org   538  Journal of American Science 2010;6(11) http://www.americanscience.org editor@americanscience.org   539sulphate on broad leaved weeds were obtained with Abouziena et al . (2009-a). In this connection, it is worthy to mention that Suwnnamek and Parker (1975) found that the synergistic mechanism of urea or ammonium sulphate when mixed with Glyphosate could be attributed to some degree of activation inside the weed plants. Abouziena et al . (2009-b) reported that adding AMS to the glyphosate solution increased absorption and translocation of glyphosate to 90 and 67%, respectively.Similar results were recorded by many investigators, who showed that effective control of weeds could be obtained with Metosulam(Sharara et al., 2006; Ghalwash et al., 2008 and El-Metwally and Saudy, 2009 ), Clodinafop  – propargyl (Saini and Angiras, 2005; El-Metwally and El- Rokiek,2007 and Ghalwash et al., 2008 ) as well as hand hoeing twice (Ishwar et al., 2000; Ved– Prakash et al., 2000; Kolhe, 2001 and Ghalwash et al., 2008). Table (2): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate (AMS) on number and dry weight of broadleaved weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting (Combined analysis for 2008 / 2009 and 2009/2 010 seasons). At 75days from transplanting At 110 days from transplanting Treatments  Number % of reduction Dry weight (g/ m 2 ) % of reduction  Number % of reduction Dry weight (g/ m 2 ) % of reduction Metosulam at 40 ml / fed 39.0 62.9 102.0 60.9 50.4 64.9 150.6 66.7 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed 46.5 55.7 125.2 52.0 58.6 59.2 174.5 61.4 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + urea at 2%. 42.0 60.0 105.4 59.6 53.4 62.8 161.8 64.2 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + AMS at 2%. 44.3 57.8 106.7 59.1 53.8 62.6 163.8 63.8 Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g / fed 71.2 32.2 173.1 33.6 92.7 35.5 266.2 41.2 Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed 73.8 29.7 176.8 32.2 102.2 28.9 311.2 31.2 Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed + urea at 2% 75.3 28.3 182.6 30.0 106.4 26.0 322.2 28.8 Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed + AMS at 2% 76.4 27.2 189.7 27.3 112.5 21.7 330.1 27.1 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed 45.4 56.8 122.0 53.2 56.8 60.5 171.8 62.0 Two hand hoeing 18.3 82.6 41.2 84.2 22.9 84.1 62.0 86.3 Unweeded check 105.0 260.8 143.7 452.5 LSD at 0.05 3.97 5.5 3.04 4.39 Table (3): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate (AMS) on number and dry weight of grass after 75 and 110 days from transplanting. (Combined analysis for 2008 / 2009 and 2009 / 2010 seasons). At 75days from transplanting At 110 days from transplanting Treatments  Number % of reduction Dry weight (g/ m 2 ) % of reduction  Number % of reduction Dry weight (g/ m 2 ) % of reduction Metosulam at 40 ml / fed 27.4 52.1 115.2 40.9 37.1 53.5 149.5 48.5 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed 33.1 42.1 130.2 33.2 44.7 43.9 166.5 42.7 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + urea at 2% 38.6 32.5 148.4 23.9 49.5 37.9 185.6 36.1 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + AMS at 2% 39.0 31.8 151.7 22.2 56.5 29.1 198.5 31.6 Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g / fed 3.7 93.5 13.0 93.3 6.6 91.7 16.4 94.4 Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed 4.9 91.4 17.4 91.1 7.4 90.7 23.7 91.8 Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed + urea at 2% 5.5 90.4 20.7 89.4 8.2 89.7 27.3 90.6 Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed + AMS at 2% 5.9 89.7 21.1 89.2 10.3 87.1 30.0 89.7 Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed 6.3 89.0 26.2 86.6 11.0 86.2 30.2 89.6 Two hand hoeing 7.1 87.6 27.3 86.0 14.4 81.9 55.4 80.96 Unweeded (Control) 57.2 195.0 79.7 290.3 LSD at 0.05 1.90 4.47 3.66 2.12

article.pdf

Sep 22, 2019

Ceremonia Boda

Sep 22, 2019
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x