See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265468725

Integrated weed management in wheat

Chapter · August 2014

CITATIONS READS
6 8,710

3 authors, including:

Rajender Singh Chhokar Virender Kumar

ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research, Karnal, India International Rice Research Institute
116 PUBLICATIONS   1,999 CITATIONS    127 PUBLICATIONS   4,901 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) View project

"Cereal System Initiative for South Asia (CSISA)" CIMMYT project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Virender Kumar on 14 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Integrated weed management in wheat
Rajender Singh Chhokar1, Hari Ram2 and Virender Kumar3
1
Directorate of Wheat Research, Karnal, India
2
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
3
Cropping Systems Agronomist, CIMMYT-CSISA office, Patna, Bihar, India

INTRODUCTION
Wheat is an important crop worldwide and in India it is the second most important staple
food after rice. Its production increased from a meagre 11.0 million tons during 1960-61
to 93.51 million metric tons during 2012-13 due to the adoption of short stature high
yielding varieties long with increased fertilizers, irrigation and herbicides use. The high
nutrient and water requirements along with less competitive nature of these high
yielding dwarf varieties have provided the conducive environment for increased weed
infestation. Weeds account for about one third of total losses caused by all pests. For
realizing full genetic yield potential of the crop, the proper weed control is one of the
essential ingredients. Weeds not only reduce the yield but also make the harvesting
operation difficult. Therefore, for sustaining food grain production to feed ever-
increasing population and ensuring food security, effective weed management is very
essential.
WEED FLORAAND WEED FLORA SHIFT
Weed flora of wheat differs from field to field depending on environmental conditions,
irrigation, fertilizer use, soil type, weed control practices and cropping sequences. The
predominant weeds associated with wheat crop are Phalaris minor Retz., Avena
ludoviciana Dur., Lolium temulentum, , Poa annua L , Polypogon monspliences Desf.,
Chenopodium album L., Vicia sativa L., Lathyrus aphaca L., Cirsium arvense L.,
Melilotus alba Lamk, Coronopus didymus L., Rumex dentatus, Anagallis arvensis L.,
Argemone mexicana L., Asphodelus tenuifolius Cav., Carthamus oxycantha Beib,
Convolvulus arvensis L., Cannabis sativa L., Euphorbia helioscopia L., Fumaria
parviflora Lamk., Malva parviflora, Medicago denticulata Willd, Polygonum plebejum
R. Br., Spergula arvensis L.
Yellow thistle (Carthamus oxycantha Beib) was main weed before green revolution but
increased irrigation and tillage along with increased cropping intensity have almost
eliminated this weed. Similarly, wild oat has been eliminated from heavy soils where
rice is grown. Although, Maize-wheat rotation allows it's gradual build up. Among
grassy weeds, Phalaris minor Retz. and among broad-leaved weeds Rumex dentatus L.
and Medicago denticulta are of major concern in irrigated wheat under rice-wheat
system in India (Singh et al., 1995; Chhokar et al., 2006). P. minor is major problem in
heavy soil soils, whereas, wild oat is more prevalent in light textured soil. Both P. minor
and Rumex dentatus are highly competitive weeds and can cause drastic yield reduction
under heavy infestation. Multiple herbicide resistance has evolved in P. minor (Chhokar
156 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

and Sharma, 2008) against isoproturon, clodinafop and sulfosulfuron and as a result, it is
emerging as a single weed species limiting wheat productivity in the northern plains of
India. In areas where the farmers are using graminicides like clodinafop and fenoxaprop
the broad-leaved weed flora particularly Rumex spp. has increased. Continuous use of
isoproturon also led to increased infestation of Medicago denticulata, Convolvulus
arvensis, Cirsium arvense. Under these conditions, broad-spectrum weed control is
essential and for that combinations of herbicides as well as weed control methods are
needed.
Brar and Walia (2009) conducted a field survey in the three districts of Punjab i.e.
Patiala, Sangurur and Moga and found slightly higher population of broadleaf weeds
was observed in zero tillage as compare to the conventional methods while adverse
trend was seen in case of grass weeds. Recently, Rumex dentatus have evolved
resistance to metsulfuron (Chhokar et al., 2013) and the problem of Rumex dentatus and
Malva parviflora in wheat is increasing under no till situations. In future, the menace of
these weeds may increase due to increase in area under no till conditions and resistance
evolution.
WEED COMPETITION AND LOSSES
Weeds compete with crop plants for moisture, nutrients, light and space, thereby
depriving the crop of vital inputs. The competition becomes severe due to more
smothering effect, when weeds emerge earlier than the crop. In rice-wheat system, due
to enough soil moisture after harvesting of rice, weeds emerge earlier than wheat or
along with wheat crop. Losses in wheat yield are primarily due to reduction in tillering.
The average yield losses caused by weeds in different wheat growing zone ranges from
20 to 32 per cent. The losses depend on weed species and density, time of emergence,
wheat cultivar, planting density, soil and environmental factor (Chhokar and Malik,
2002; Malik and Singh, 1993; Malik and Singh, 1995). In extreme cases, the losses
caused by weeds can be up to complete crop failure (Malik and Singh, 1995). The cases
of complete crop failure were quite common during late seventies in the absence of
effective herbicide and mid nineties due to heavy population of P. minor after the
evolution of resistance against isoproturon. During both the situations some of the
farmers were forced to harvest their immature wheat crops as fodder (Malik and Singh,
1993; Chhokar and Malik, 2002).
Before green revolution, weeds were not a serious problem in wheat cultivation because
of the inherent better competing habit of tall wheat cultivar and secondly because of the
relatively less aggressive nature of weeds which were mostly broadleaf annuals. P.
minor and wild oat which remained inconspicuous in the tall wheat assumed serious
proportions in dwarf wheat in major wheat growing areas of the country. Both, wild
oats and Phalaris minor belong to the grass family and have similar habit of growth and
development as wheat. It is very difficult to distinguish them from the wheat plants in
the vegetative phase. Moreover, these weeds grow much taller than the dwarf wheat,
cause partial shading of wheat plants and being having weak stem lodge severely,
smother the wheat plants causing heavy grain yield reductions. Density and yield
comparisons revealed that wheat and wild oat were equally competitive on per plant
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 157

basis. This was true even though wild oat had less leaf area per plant than did wheat.
Wild oat has a height advantage over wheat in late season which results in shading and
yield reduction (Cudney et al., 1991).
Weeds have enjoyed dominance over crop basically because of poor agronomic
management. To introduce good agronomic practices and the ecology, it is important to
understand the competition between weeds and the wheat crop.
The critical period of weed control in wheat is 30-45 days after sowing and crop should
be kept weed free during this period. Majority of the farmers are not adhering to this
critical period for the management of weeds and mostly delay the herbicide application
leading to yield reductions.
EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON WEEDS IN WHEAT
Climate change is now a widely accepted phenomenon.Atmospheric CO2 concentration
have risen from about 280 ppm (pre-industrial period) to today's about 401.88 ppm and
st
it is expected that by the end of 21 century, it will reach to the levels of 600-700 ppm, if
current emission trends continue (IPCC 2001). Climate models projected that the global
st
earth surface temperature is likely to rise in a range of 1.1 to 6.4 °C during the 21
century due to the rising CO2 concentration (IPCC 2004).
There are concerns that global CO2 enrichment will affect weeds and crop yields directly
or indirectly through global warming and its associated changes in climate such as
alteration in precipitation, wind pattern, rise in sea level and more flood and drought.
Wheat has been predicted as a vulnerable crop to climate change and according to the
recent study conducted by Indian Agricultural Research Institute indicates the
possibility of loss of 4-5 million tonnes in wheat production with every rise of 1° C
temperature throughout the growing season (Aggarwal, 2008). Terminal heat stress
during grain filling stage has been considered a major threat to wheat productivity in
India. For example, in March 2004, the temperature was 3-6 °C higher than normal in
the Indo-Gangetic Plains, which was almost equivalent to 1C/day over the whole crop
season, which resulted in 10-20 days early maturity of wheat and a loss of 4 million
tonnes of wheat in the country (Samra and Singh, 2004).
Climate change, in addition to its direct impact on the crop, may also affect the
performance of crop through its indirectly effect on weeds and weed management.
Changes in CO2 concentration, temperature and precipitation will affect (1) crop weed
competition, (2) efficacy of weed management tactics including chemical and
mechanical, and (3) weed species distribution and prevalence (Mahajan et al., 2012).
Generally, it is reported that plants with C3 photosynthetic pathways are expected to
benefit more than C4 from CO2 enrichment but inverse is true with rising temperature.
This differential response of C3 and C4 plants to elevated CO2 and temperature can have
important implications on crop/weed competition as most of the weeds are C4. But this
fundamental idea that most crops are C3 and most weeds are C4, and hence weed
competition will consequently decrease as CO2 increases, should not be viewed as
universal axiom (Ziska 2000, 2004). In contrast, in wheat crop, majority of the key weed
158 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

species are of C3 photosynthetic pathway. Under elevated CO2, for crop like wheat (C3
photosynthetic pathway), it is expected to have positive effect on crop competitiveness
with C4 weeds. In all the crop-weed competition study conducted under elevated CO2 to
date where photosynthetic pathway of both crop and weeds are same, weed growth is
favoured. These results suggest that problem of P. minor, A. ludoviciana, and
Chenopodium album would aggravate with increase in CO2. Similarly, perennial weeds
of wheat such as Canada thistle (Cirsium arvensis), and Cynodon dactylon may show
strong response to increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration as higher CO2
concentration may stimulate below ground growth relative to aboveground growth.
This suggest that problem of perennials may increase in wheat crop in near future. In
addition to effect on crop-weed competition, the aberration in weather conditions may
also trigger weed seed germination in several flushes which ultimately affect weed
management strategy (Mahajan et al., 2012). The weeds emerging in two to three
flushes are likely to aggravate under climate change condition and would make weed
control less effective with single herbicide application.
Climate change may bring changes in weed population and in their phenology. Many
weed species may expand their range and spread to new areas. For example, incidence
of Rumex spinosus has increased in northwest India. It is therefore important to predict
which weeds would dominant in future so that effective management strategies against
those emerging species can be developed.
It is predicted that climate change can reduce the effectiveness of current weed
management practices (Ziska et al. 1999; Ziska and Teasdale, 2000). Chemical control
is the most common form of weed control. Changes in temperature, wind speed, soil
moisture and humidity can influence the efficacy of herbicides. For example, drought
can lead to thick cuticle development which in turn can reduce the herbicide entry in the
plant. Ziska et al. (1999) also found that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations can
reduce the glyphosate efficacy. They reported reduced efficacy of glyphosate on C.
album grown under elevated CO2. Problem of herbicide resistant weeds and poor weed
control with herbicide application may increase with climate change. Reduction in
herbicide efficacy under elevated CO2 level can increase the tolerance of weeds to
herbicides (Ziska, 2000). Mechanical control of perennial weeds is also likely be
adversely affected by elevated CO2 conditions.
More research is needed to assess the interactive effects of multiple climate change
factors simultaneously to help predict how weed problems may change in future with
changing climate in order to develop flexible integrated weed management practices
which are based on a foundation of knowledge of weed biology and ecology.
NON-CHEMICAL METHODS OF WEED CONTROL
1.Stale seed bed preparation: In this technology weeds seeds are encouraged to
germinate through application of one to two pre-sowing irrigations. The emerged weed
seedlings are then killed through ploughing or by the use of non-selective herbicides.
(paraquat, glyphosate, or glufosinate). This technique is effective not only in reducing
weed emergence during the crop season but also in reducing the weed seedbank (Kumar
and Ladha, 2011; Singh et al., 2009)
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 159

2.Crop Rotations: Mono-cropping facilitates an increase in weed species that are able
to effectively compete with that crop or able to overcome competition through some
avoidance mechanism. Weed species with similar life cycles to that of the crop tend to be
the greatest problem. Winter weeds are predominant in winter crops and summer annual
weeds proliferate in spring-planted crops (Moyer et al., 1994). The crop rotations which
are diverse in nature can cause a shift in weed species composition and are the
cornerstone of integrated weed management (Liebman et al., 2001). Knowledge of
theses shifts can help in changing the composition of the weed seed bank from
undesirable to easy-to-manage species. Singh et al., (2008) reported that rice-wheat-
greengram sequence recorded lowest population of all the three groups of weeds
followed by rice-wheat, rice-chickpea and rice-pea sequence. Diversification of the
area under rice-wheat cropping system will not only bring changes in weed spectrum
but will also create soil conditions unfavourable for Phalaris minor. Replacing wheat
with alternate crops like berseem, potato, sunflower, gobhi sarson for 2-3 years in rice-
wheat cropping system, the population of P. minor was found to be reduced
significantly. Loeppky and Derksen (1994) reported that quackgrass [Elytrigia repens
(L.)] could effectively be controlled through use of diverse crop rotations. Cropping
sequences also dictate herbicide use and these factors often interact to affect weeds.
Replacing wheat with winter maize can take care of due to use of atrazine in winter
maize (Walia et al., 2006). Crop rotations including cereal, oilseed, and pulse crops
allow for greater herbicide choice over years and avoid continuous use of the same
herbicide which may select for weed resistance. Different crops are naturally planted at
different times of the year and this can significantly affect weed populations. In heavy
soils, infestations of wild oats that predominated in maize–wheat systems were
completely eliminated by growing rice instead of maize (Gill and Brar, 1975).
3.Tillage: Tillage affects weed management, weed seed production and pattern of soil
disturbances. P. minor, which germinates from upper soil layers, can be buried by deep
cultivation. Zero tillage technique integrated with timely planting of wheat (October
sowing) has shown promising results in reducing P. minor infestation and higher grain
yields. Zero tillage has been found helpful in reducing the population of P. minor
(Chhokar et al., 2007; Franke et al., 2007). Franke et al. (2007) observed that emergence
rate of all three flushes of P. minor in wheat sown on the same date were lower in no
tillage compared with conventional tillage. The first emergence flush, which was the
most important flush affecting crop–weed competition was about 50% lower in no
tillage than in conventional tillage (Franke et al., 2007). Chhokar et al. (2007) estimated
39% lower biomass of P. minor under no tillage compared with conventional tillage
because of lower density. So no tillage played an important role in the controlling of P.
minor. Ram et al. (2005) found that raising wheat crop on raised bed can be used to
reduce P. minor in bed planting the upper 1-2 cm soil layer becomes dry and weed seed
can not germinate in the upper soil. So raised bed planting not only save irrigation water
but also reduce the weed problem.Dev et al. (2013) reported that density and dry matter
accumulation of weeds in no tillage was lower than conventional tillage. They reported
that it might be due to the fact that Phalaris minor seeds, which were in deeper soil layer
comes to upper soil layer due to conventional and reduced tillage and get germinated in
conducive environment.
160 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

4.Competitive crop cultivars: A competitive crop species or cultivar is that which

maintains its yield well in the presence of weeds i.e. tolerance to weed pressure and also
able to reduce weed growth significantly i.e. weed suppressive ability (Olesen et al.,
2004). Increasing the ability of crop cultivars to compete with weeds is an attractive
control option for future weed control strategies (Lemerle et al., 2001). Crop species
vary naturally in their competitive ability with weeds {rye (Secale cereale L.) > oat
(Avena sativa L.) > barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) > wheat > canola > field pea (Pisum
sativa L.)}. Differential competitive ability of crops is associated with early emergence,
rapid leaf expansion forming a dense canopy, increased plant height and early vigorous
root/shoot system (Lemerle et al., 2001). Under weedy conditions growing a
competitive crop should be considered before growing a poorly competitive crop.
Differences between wheat cultivars in competitiveness with weeds have also been
shown to exist. The tall varieties have more potential to compete with weeds but these
tend to produce lower yields and are susceptible to lodging (Paul and Gill 1979). In
addition to plant height, other plant attributes that improve early ground cover also
contribute to competitiveness to the weeds. Long duration varieties like PBW 343, WH
542 and PBW 34 due to their fast growing habits suppress the growth and development
of P. minor. Rapid growth and more tillering are the important traits leading to early
canopy cover in these varieties and weed competitiveness. Recently new wheat variety
PBW 550 reported to be more competitive than DBW17 and PBW 502 due to its quick
early growth (Anonymous, 2012).More shoot and root growth in varieties suggests that
more significant competition between weeds and crops results from competition below
ground (Wilson, 1988). The significant differences in competitive ability between
cultivars of wheat against a range of weed species have been reported (Lemerle et al.,
2001; Balyan et al., 1991; Seavers and Wright, 1999). Weed suppression was more
efficiently with tall varieties of cereal having planophile leaf inclination as compare to
the shorter erectophile type (Eisele and Kopke, 1997). These varietal characteristics
may be included in variety testing programme to identify more competitive variety in
collaboration with plant breeders. The crop varieties must be developed for their local
environment not only for higher yield and quality traits but also for traits that enhance
competitive ability with weeds.
5.Seed rate and sowing methods: The role of increasing crop density and decreasing
row spacing in reducing competitiveness and seed output by weeds has been reported in
several studies. The establishment of a crop with a more uniform and dense plant
distribution can increase its ability to suppress weeds. This is due to more rapid canopy
closure that better shades weeds.Shallow planting of vigorous seed in narrower rows
and at higher seeding rates will encourage uniform and dense crop stands. Higher grain
yield were reported when the row spacing was reduce from 23 cm to 8 cm in both weed-
free and weedy conditions (Champion et al., 1998). Tillering capacity and early ground
cover have been reported highly correlated with good weed suppression ability
(Whiting et al., 1990). Narrow row spacing (15 cm) reduced P. minor biomass by 16.5%
compared with normal spacing of 22.5 cm (Mahajan and Brar, 2002). Recent studies
reported that close spacing of 15 cm recorded to be more competitive than 20 cm row
spacing (Anonymous, 2012).However, a decrease in wheat row spacing from 30 to 20
cm had little effect on foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum L.) biomass or wheat yield
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 161

(Blackshaw et al., 1999). Research indicates that there is good potential to reduce both
herbicide dose and the number of herbicide applications when they are utilized with
competitive crops. Therefore, herbicide efficacy can be increased when used in
conjunction with competitive crop species (Christensen, 1994) or cultivars (Lemerle et
al., 1996). Efficacy of tralkoxydim herbicide on wild oat was greatly enhanced as barley
-1
seed rate was increased from 75 to 175 kg ha (O'Donovan et al., 2001). The greatest
potential to reduce herbicide doses was at the highest barley seed rate. Thus, growers
can attain competitive crops through choice of species, cultivar, or suitable agronomic
practices. Wheat yield losses from weed competition can be reduced if crop
competitiveness is improved by measures like perfect row spacing and by using
appropriate seed rate for strong competitiveness.Manipulating method of sowing to get
even dense canopy also helps to control weeds by causing shading effects on weeds due
to overcrowding e.g. bi-directional sowing in wheat gives less weeds as compared to
unidirectional sowing although seed rate is same. Borger et al (2013) reported that in
treatments where wheat and barley crops oriented east–west, weed biomass was
reduced by 51 and 37%, and grain yield increased by 24 and 26% as compared with
crops oriented north–south. This reduction in weed biomass and increase in crop yield
likely resulted from the increased light (photosynthetically active radiation)
interception by crops oriented east–west (i.e., light interception by the crop canopy as
opposed to the weed canopy was 28 and 18% greater in wheat and barley crops oriented
east–west, compared with north–south crops). The appropriate combination of row
spacing, row direction, sowing method and seed rate can be an effective and economical
weed management tool.
6.Sowing time: Weed species have specific soil temperature and moisture requirements
for emergence and establishment. If sufficient differences exist between the crop and
weed in their germination requirements, then seeding date may be manipulated to
benefit the crop. The sowing time of crop should be recommended so that it is maximum
favourable for crop growth and development and least favourable for weed germination
and growth. The early sowing (25th October to 10th November) of wheat is preferred
because temperature is less favourable for P. minor germination and when P. minor
germinates after first irrigation the crop is more competitive compared to late sowing
(Walia et al. 2005). Similarly, Avena ludoviciana can be reduced by planting wheat late
in the season. However, length of delayed sowing of improved weed management has to
be offset against reduced yield due to shortened growing season. Similarly, wheat will
germinate in cooler soils than green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.) thus planting wheat in
early spring when soil temperatures are normally cool improves its competitive ability
with green foxtail (Blackshaw et al., 1981). Under timely planting conditions, PBW-
343 and WH-542 were equally competitive with P. minor (Chahal et al., 2003; Kaur et
al., 2003; Mahajan and Brar, 2002), but under delayed sowing conditions, PBW-343 is
superior to other cultivars against P. minor (Kaur et al., 2003).
7.Crop Fertilization: Fertilizer timing, dose, and placement can be manipulated to
reduce weed interference in crops (Di Tomaso, 1995). Nitrogen fertilizer is known to
break weed seed dormancy and thus may directly affect weed densities. Blackshaw,
(2004) documented that the growth response of many agricultural weeds to added
nitrogen is similar to or greater than that of wheat. Nitrogen can markedly alter crop
162 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

weed competitive interactions and, depending on the weed species and density, nitrogen
fertilizer can increase the competitive ability of weeds more than that of the crop, and
crop yield remains unchanged or actually decreases in some cases (Ampong-Nyarko
and de Datta, 1993). Fertilizer placed in narrow bands below the soil surface near to crop
row compared to being surface broadcast has been found to increase crop
competitiveness with weeds (Kirkland and Beckie, 1998). Side-row banding of
nitrogen fertilizer for four consecutive years of zero-till barley production reduced
green foxtail levels below those causing economic injury. Dodamani and Das (2013)
reported that the natural weed infestation including Chenopodium album, and the pure
2
stand densities of 128 and 64 /m inflicted more yield losses at 120 than 60 kg
nitrogen/ha. But, at lower densities up to 32 weeds/m2, increasing nitrogen levels
favoured wheat more, resulting in greater crop-weed balance at 120 than at 60 kg N/ha.
Banisaeidi et al. (2014) reported that increased plant density and nitrogen fertilizer can
improve spring wheat competitiveness and reduce grain yield loss, wild oat seed
production and biomass.
8.Surface residue mulch: The use of cover crops and their residues to suppress weeds,
particularly in reduced tillage systems, has shown potential to manage weeds. Because
surface retained residues provide physical barrier to the emerging weeds, delaying
germination and increasing weed seedling mortality. Erenstein, 2002 reported that
mulching reduced the weed dry matter due to physical hindrance and reduced solar
radiation reaching the weeds. Ram et al. (2013) reported that application of 6 t ha-1 of
straw mulch reduced the weed dry matter by 50.9% compared to no mulch. Earlier
studies by Ahmed et al. (2007), Sidhu et al. (2007) and Kumar et al. (2013) have shown
the suppressive effect of mulching on weed population in wheat. The release of
allelopathic compounds from surface retained residue also reduces the weeds (Yenish et
al., 1995).
CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL
In wheat, chemical weed control is preferred over manual and mechanical methods
because of its better efficiency along with less cost and time involvement. Herbicides
cause no mechanical damage to the crop that happens during manual weeding.
Moreover, the control is more effective as the weeds even within the rows are killed,
which invariably escape, because of morphological similarity to crop, during
mechanical control. Effective weed control depends on the proper selection of
herbicides depending on the type of weed flora infesting the crop and further herbicide
should be applied at optimum dose and time using proper application technology. Wheat
crop is generally invaded by both grass and broad-leaved weeds but the major challenge
offered is by grass weeds. This is due to narrow selectivity between grassy weeds and
wheat crop being both of grass in nature exhibits similar physiology and reaction to
herbicides compared to broad-leaved weeds.
In wheat, generally post-emergence herbicides are adopted by the growers, which are
mainly applied 7-10 days after first irrigation using knapsack sprayer. The optimum
dose of herbicides and their effectiveness against target group are given in Table 1.
The efficacy of herbicides can be improved by applying at optimum dose and time with
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 163

proper application method. Balyan et al., 1988 observed that control of weeds was
excellent, when isoproturon was applied up to 35 DAS (Days after sowing) and poor
control was observed with delay in application. Similarly, Malik, et al., 1984 reported
better control of wild oat with isoproturon when applied 25 DAS compared to its
application at 35 DAS.
Herbicides effective against isoproturon resistance biotypes of P. minor are
sulfosulfuron, clodinafop, fenoxaprop, tralkoxydim, pendimethalin, Atlantis and
pinoxaden. Sulfosulfuron, Atlantis and pendimethalin are effective against both grass
and non-grass weeds, whereas, clodinafop, fenoxaprop, tralkoxydim and pinoxaden are
specific to grasses. However, sulfosulfuron and pendimethalin are not effective against
Rumex dentatus and Avena ludoviciana, respectively. For control of broad-leaved
weeds in wheat, three major herbicides used are metsulfuron, 2,4-D and carfentrazone
(Chhokar et al., 2007). For control of broad-leaved weeds, 2,4-D has been used for a
long time, however, the application of 2,4-D at inappropriate time as well as on sensitive
cultivar can lead to yield reduction due to malformation (Pinthus and Natowitz, 1967;
Bhan et al., 1976). In addition, 2,4-D butyl ester application often results in injury to
adjacent sensitive broadleaf crops, due to its volatilization and solution drifting (Zhang
et al., 2005) as a result it is less preferred by the growers.
Table 1. List of wheat herbicides, their optimum doses and target group
Herbicide Dose Weed Control
g a.i.ha-1 Grasse Broadle
s af
Clodinafop 60
Fenoxaprop-ethyl 100-120
Pinoxaden 40-50
Tralkoxydim 350
Sulfosulfuron 25
Isoproturon 1000
Atlantis (Mesosulfuron + iodosulfuron) 12 + 2.4
Total (Sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron) 30 + 2
2,4-D-E 500
Metsulfuron 4
Chlorsulfuron 25
Carfentrazone 20
Ally Express (Metsulfuron + 25(5 + 20)

Pendimethalin 1000-1500
Trifluralin 1000-1500
Terbutryn 1000-1500
Pyroxasulfone 125-150
Pyroxsulam 18
Flufenacet 300
Dicamba 360
Generally a herbicide is more effective against some of the weeds and less or not
effective against the others. Metsulfuron and 2,4-D are ineffective against some of the
weeds like Malva parviflora (Chhokar et al., 2007) and S. nigrum (Mukerjee et al.,
2011). Also, 2,4-D is not effective against Rumex spinosus (Singh et al., 2011). It is also
164 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

poor against some of the broad-leaved weeds such as Anagallis arvensis, Melilotus
indica, Medicago denticulata etc. Isoproturon is also poor against some of the weeds
like Convolvulus arvensis, Rumex spp, Lathyrus aphaca, Vicia sativa, Cirsium arvensis,
Anagallis arevensis and Melilotus spp. (Malik and Singh, 1993). To overcome these
problems, evaluation of alternative herbicides alone or in combination becomes
imperative. One of the ready mixture to control the hardy weeds as well as diverse
spectrum of broad spectrum of broad leaf weeds is Ally Express (Metsulfuron +
carfentrazone).The advantage of combination of metsulfuron and carfentrazone over
alone application of metsulfuron and carfentrazone will be in situations having the
diverse infestation of broad-leaved weeds particularly the M. parviflora, S. nigrum and
L. aphaca. Metsulfuron and 2,4-D are not effective against M. parviflora and S. nigrum,
whereas, carfentrazone is not effective against L. aphaca. The ready mix combination
of metsulfuron + carfentrazone will provide the control of these weeds. Similarly, Singh
et al., 2011 reported better control of R. spinosus (92%) with metsulfuron +
carfentrazone tank mixture compared to sole application of either metsulfuron (85%) or
carfentrazone (78%). This mixture was better than 2,4-D formulations as none of the
2,4-D formulations was effective against R. spinosus.
For the control of complex weed flora (grass and broadleaf weeds) and to provide long
term residual weed control, combination of herbicides are needed. Tank mix
combinations or ready mixtures are advantageous over sequential application due to
saving in application timing and cost. Herbicide mixture besides providing control of
complex weed flora will also help in managing and delaying the herbicide resistance
problem (Wruble and Gressel, 1994). The possibility of evolution of herbicide
resistance as well as shift towards difficult to control weed are more common with
continuous usage of single herbicide. Therefore, for sustaining wheat production, we
have to evaluate new herbicide and herbicide mixtures with different mechanism of
action. The effectiveness of grass herbicides are generally reduced when mixed with
broad-leaved herbicides. About 80 per cent of the interactions that has been observed in
species of the family Poaceae (grasses) refer to cases of antagonism (Zhang et al., 1995).
Whereas, synergism/compatibility has been found to occur more frequently in mixtures
where the companion herbicides belong to the same chemical groups (Damalas, 2004).
Sulfosulfuron + metsulfuron are compatible (Chhokar et al., 2007) but tank mix
application of grass herbicides (clodinafop, fenoxaprop, tralkoxydim and pinoxaden)
with either 2,4-D or metsulfuron is antagonistic (Mathiassen and Kudsk, 1998).
Antagonism between herbicides can be avoided by altering the application timing of
herbicides. Ideally, it is desirable to select herbicide combinations that have synergistic
effect on weeds and antagonistic effect on crop. To avoid antagonism the grass and
broad-leaved herbicides should be applied sequentially.
Some of the herbicide having good soil activity (sulfosulfuron) can be targeted as early
post emergence application (just before first irrigation).
Herbicide resistant weeds in wheat in northern plains: Littleseed canarygrass
(Phalaris minor) is the most problematic grass weed of irrigated wheat in India. The
problem of this weed emerged after "green revolution" (mid seventies). due to adoption
of dwarf high yielding varieties, improved irrigation and fertiliser facilities. During the
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 165

late 1970s, Indian wheat farmers were so troubled by heavy infestations of this weed
that many farmers ploughed down their immature wheat crop or harvested as forage. For
its control in the late seventies isoproturon was recommended and from 1980 to 1990,
isoproturon kept P. minor and other weeds under control and farmers realised the full
advantage of the high yielding albeit less competitive, dwarf wheat. However, during
early nineties, P. minor evolved isoproturon resistance due to sole dependence on this
herbicide (Malik and Singh, 1995). After isoproturon resistance evolution, there were
again instances when wheat farmers were forced to harvest their immature wheat crop
as fodder in the absence of effective alternate herbicides (Malik and Singh, 1995). The
factors which favoured the development of isoproturon resistance in India are mono-
cropping (Rice-wheat), mono-herbicide (Isoproturon use only) and under dosing.
For the control of isoproturon resistant P. minor, five herbicides (tralkoxydim, diclofop,
clodinafop, sulfosulfuron and fenoxaprop) were recommended during late nineties but
farmers mainly accepted sulfosulfuron and clodinafop. Now again the P. minor has
evolved resistance against these herbicides. The multiple resistance problems at few
locations are so severe that it is causing huge grain yield reductions.
For control of isoproturon resistant P. minor, clodinafop, fenoxaprop-p-, pinoxaden,
mesosulfuron, flufenacet, metribuzin, pendimethalin, trifluralin and sulfosulfuron can
be used. For control of clodinafop resistant populations of P. minor, sulfosulfuron,
mesosulfuron, flufenacet, metribuzin, pendimethalin and trifluralin can be used. For
controlling sulfosulfuron resistant populations, clodinafop, fenoxaprop-p-, pinoxaden,
flufenacet, metribuzin, pendimethalin, trifluralin can be used. However, major concern
is where P. minor has evolved resistance against clodinafop and sulfosulfuron and under
such conditions we have limited options and effective herbicides are flufenacet,
metribuzin, pendimethalin and trifluralin. Pyroxasulfone is another herbicide that
controls the multiple resistant populations (resistant to isoproturon, clodinafop and
sulfosulfuron) of P. minor. However, the metabolic nature of isoproturon resistance can
make most of the herbicides as ineffective by further extension of resistance. This has
already happened in annual ryegrass (Lolium spp) in Australia (Burnet et al., 1991).
Recently, Rumex dentatus has also evolved resistance against metsulfuron and has
shown cross resisatnce to pyroxsulam and mesosulfuron+iodosulfuron. In near future
the resistance problem may be further aggravated if solely depened on herbicides for
weed control. Therefore, management strategies must be developed to prevent selection
and spread of herbicide resistant populations. The different ways by which we can
reduce the selection pressure for resistant populations are alternative herbicide,
herbicide mixture, crop rotation and other agronomic practices providing the crop with
a competitive edge over the weed (Wrubel and Gressel, 1994). Crop rotation and
herbicide rotation helps in lowering the selection pressure (Gressel and Segel, 1990).
Crop rotations do not merely delay resistance by allowing use of different management
options, but they also restore diversity in weed flora. Some crop rotations growing
Egyptian clover (Trifolium alexandrinum) for two years may even be able to exhaust the
soil seed bank of P. minor, thus providing a long term solution (Malik and Singh, 1995).
It is also necessary to follow sanitation practices (weed-free crop seeds, well-rotten
manure and clean machinery). Where possible, consideration should also be given to
166 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

applying manual weed control methods to remove weeds surviving the application of
herbicide before seed-setting. The integration of non chemical agronomic tactics
(competitive variety, early sowing, higher seed rate, ZT, stale seed bed) with chemical
weed control will help in minimising the impact of herbicide resistance on wheat
production and farmers income.
INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT
It is not desirable to depend on single method of weed control. The best approach is
integrated weed management in which all suitable methods of weed control are used in a
compatible manner to reduce weed population and maintain them at levels below the
threshold causing economic injury. Plant density, time of sowing, variety, seed rate,
spacing, tillage practices, quantity and time of fertilizer and irrigation water are some of
important factors, which influence the weed-crop competition. Regulation of these
factors should be such that they give the competitive edge to crop over weeds. The
integration of these factors with chemical measure is advisable to avoid the ill effects
caused by the sole dependence on the herbicides. Some of the negative impacts of sole
dependence on herbicides are evolution of herbicide resistance, weed flora shift and soil
and environmental pollution. Also, the continuous dependence on single method of
weed control leads to shift of weed flora in favour of more tolerant and difficult to
control species and to tackle this problem, there is need to adopt integrated weed
management practices. The rising cost of labour and input will wipe out the profits of
farmers unless an integrated approach with focused attention of ecology and herbicides
is adopted.
CONCLUSIONS
Weed infestation is one of the main biotic constraints in wheat production and
productivity. Wheat is infested by diverse weed flora comprising grasses and broadleaf
weeds. For weed control most of the wheat farmers depend on herbicides due to cost and
time effectiveness compared to manual weeding. However, continuous use of same
herbicide or herbicides of similar mode and mechanism of action is resulting in the build
up of tolerant weed species as well as evolution of resistant populations of weeds. In
India, P. minor has evolved multiple herbicide resistance and Rumex dentatus has
evolved sulfonylurea resistance. The evolution of herbicide resistant weeds is a threat to
wheat sustainability. Long term strategies to manage or avoid the build up of herbicide
resistant and tolerant weeds should include integration of non-chemical methods (crop
rotation, stale seed bed, zero tillage, early planting, competitive cultivars and increased
seeding rate) with chemical (herbicide rotation and herbicide mixture) for sustainable
wheat production.
REFERENCES
Aggarwal. P.K. 2008. Global climate change and Indian agriculture: impacts, adaptation and
mitigation. Indian J. agric. Sci. 78: 911-919.
Ahmed, Z.I, M. Ansar, M. Iqbal, N.M. Mainahs. 2007. Effect of planting geometry and mulching
on moisture conservation, weed control and wheat growth under rainfed conditions. Pak.
J. Bot. 39: 1189-1195.
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 167

Ampong-Nyarko, K. and S.K. de Datta. 1993. Effects of nitrogen application on growth, nitrogen
use efficiency and rice-weed interaction. Weed Res. 33:269-276.
Anonymous. 2012. Progress Report of All India Coordinated Wheat & Barley Improvement
Project 2012-13, Vol. II, Resource Management. Eds: R.K. Sharma, S.C. Tripathi, S.
Chander, R.S. Chhokar, R.P. Meena, Anita Meena, A. Verma, Indu Sharma. Directorate of
Wheat Research, Karnal, India. P. 205.
Balyan R.S., R.K. Malik and V.M. Bhan. 1988. Effects of time of application of isoproturon on the
control of weeds in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Indian J. Weed Sci. 20: 10-14.
Balyan, R.S., R.K. Malik, R.S. Panwar and S. Singh. 1991. Competitive ability of winter wheat
cultivars with wild oat (Avena ludoviciana). Weed Sci. 39: 154-158.
Banisaeidi, A.K., E. Zand, A. Modhj, S. Lak and M.A. Baghestani. 2014. Influence of nitrogen
and plant density on spring wheat (Tritium aestivum L.) and oat (Avena ludoviciana L.)
competitiveness. Int. J. Biosci. 4: 113-119.
Bhan V.M., P.S. Negi, R.S. Chaturvedi and D.B.B. Chaudary. 1976. Spike malformation by 2,4-D
in dwarf wheats. Indian J. Weed Sci. 8: 53-59.
Blackshaw, R.E. 2004. Application method of nitrogen fertilizer affects weed growth and
competion with winter wheat. Weed Biol. Manage. 4: 103-113.
Blackshaw, R.E., E.H. Stobbe and A.R.W. Sturko. 1981. Effect of seeding dates and densities of
green foxtail (Setaria viridis) on the growth and productivity of spring wheat (Triticum
aestivum). Weed Sci. 29: 212-217.
Blackshaw, R.E., F.J. Larney, C.W. Lindwall, P.R. Watson and D.A. Derksen. 2001. Tillage
intensity and crop rotation affect weed community dynamics in a winter wheat cropping
system. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81: 805-813.
Blackshaw, R.E., G. Semach, X. Li, J.T. O'Donovan and K.N. Harker. 1999. An integrated weed
management approach to managing foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum) in conservation
tillage systems. Weed Technol. 13: 347-353.
Borger, C.P.D., A. Hashem and S. Pathan. 2010. Manipulating crop row orientation to suppress
weeds and increase crop yield. Weed Sci. 58: 174-178.
Brar, A.S. and U.S. Walia. 2009. Weed dynamics and wheat (Triticum aestivum l.) productivity as
influenced by planting techniques and weed control practices. Indian J. Weed Sci. 41:
161-166.
Burnet M.W.M., Hildebrand O.B., Holtum J.A.M. and Powles S.B. 1991. Amitrole, triazine,
sustituted urea and metribuzin resistance in a biotype of rigid ryegrass (L. rigidum). Weed
Sci. 39: 317-323.
Chahal, P. S., H. S. Brar, and U. S. Walia. 2003. Management of Phalaris minor in wheat through
integrated approach. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 35: 1–5.
Champion G.T., Froud-Williams R.J., Holland J.M. 1998. Interactions between wheat (Triticum
aestivum L.) cultivar, row spacing and density and the effect on weed suppression and
crop yield. Annals Appl. Biol. 133: 443–453.
Chhokar R.S. and R.K. Malik. 2002. Isoproturon resistant Phalaris minor and its response to
alternate herbicides. Weed Technol. 16: 116-123.
Chhokar R.S. and R.K. Sharma.2008. Multiple herbicide resistance in littleseed canarygrass
(Phalaris minor):A threat to wheat production in India. Weed Biol.Manage 8: 112-123.
Chhokar R.S., R.K. Sharma, D.S. Chauhan and A.D. Mongia. 2006. Evaluation of herbicides
against Phalaris minor in wheat in north-western Indian plains. Weed Res. 46: 40-49.
168 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

Chhokar R.S., R.K. Sharma, A.K. Pundir and R.K. Singh. 2007. Evaluation of herbicides for
control of Rumex dentatus, Convolvulus arvensis and Malva parviflora. Indian J. Weed
Sci. 39: 214-218.
Chhokar R.S., R.K. Sharma, R. Garg and Indu Sharma. 2013. Metsulfuron resistance in Rumex
dentatus. Wheat barley Newsletl. 7(2): 11.
Chhokar, R.S., R.K. Sharma, G.R. Jat, A.K. Pundir, and M.K. Gathala. 2007. Effect of tillage and
herbicides on weeds and productivity of wheat under rice– wheat growing system. Crop
Prot. 26:1689–1696.
Christensen, S. 1994. Crop weed competition and herbicide performance. Weed Res. 34:29-36.
Cudney D.W., L.S. Jordan, W.E. Bendixen, J. Holt, A.E. Hall , C.J. Corbett and J.S. Reint. 1991.
Wild oat competition in short statured wheat. California Agri. 45(1): 22-23.
Damalas C.A. 2004. Herbicide tank mixtures: Common interactions. International Journal of
Agriculture Biology 6: 209-212.
Dev, D., Vivek, S.P. Singh and R. Kumar. 2013. Weed management studies in wheat (Triticum
aestivum) with herbicides under different establishment methods. Indian J. Agron.58:
215-219.
Di Tomaso, J.M. 1995.Approaches for improving crop competitiveness through the manipulation
of fertilization strategies. Weed Sci. 43:491-497.
Dodamani B.M. and T.K. Das. 2013. Density and nitrogen effects on interference and economic
threshold of common lambsquarters in wheat. J. Pest Sci. 86: 611–619.
Eisele, J.A. and U. Köpke. 1997. Choice of cultivars in Organic Farming: New criteria for winter
wheat ideotypes. 2: Weed competitiveness of morphologically different cultivars.
Pflanzenbauwissenschaften 1: 84-89.
Erenstein, O. 2002. Crop residue mulching in tropical and semitropical countries: an evaluation of
residue availability and other technological implications. Soil Tillage Res. 67: 115–133.
Franke, A.C., S. Singh, N. Mcroberts, A.S. Nehra, S. Godara, R.K. Malik, and G. Marshall. 2007.
Phalaris minor seedbank studies: longevity, seedling emergence and seed production as
affected by tillage regime. Weed Res. 47: 73–83.
Gill, H. S. and L.S. Brar. 1975. Importance of weedicides in the agriculture of Punjab and
Haryana. Pesticides 9: 20–24.
Gressel J. and L.S. Segal. 1990. Modelling the effectiveness of herbicide rotations and
mixtures as strategies to delay or preclude resistance. Weed Technol. 4: 186-198.
IPCC 2001.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. http://www.ipcc.ch/
IPCC 2004. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Fourth Assessment Report:
Climate Change 2007 (AR4). http:// www.ipcc.ch
Kaur, H., H.S. Brar, and U.S. Walia. 2003. Competitive ability of wheat cultivars sown on
different dates with littleseed canarygrass (Phalaris minor Retz.). Indian J. Weed Sci. 35:
21–23.
Kirkland, K.J. and H.J. Beckie. 1998. Contribution of nitrogen fertilizer placement to weed
management in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 12:507-514.
Koscelny J.A., T.F. Peeper, J.B. Solie and S.G. Solomon. 1991. Seeding date, seedling rate and
row spacing affect wheat (Triticum aestivum) cheat (Bromus secalinus). Weed Technol. 5:
707-712.
Kumar, V, S. Singh, R.S. Chhokar, R.K. Malik, D.C. Brainard and J.K. Ladha. 2013. Weed
management strategies to reduce herbicide use in zero-till rice–wheat cropping systems
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 169

of the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Weed Technol. 27: 241–254.

Kumar, V. and J.K. Ladha. 2011. Direct-seeding of rice: recent developments and future research
needs. Adv. Agron. 111: 297–413.
Lauren, N.K., E.R. Gallandt and E. B. Mallory 2014. Impact of spring wheat planting
density, row spacing, and mechanical weed control on yield, grain protein, and
economic return in maine. Weed Sci. 60: 244-253.
Lemerle, D., B. Verbeek and N.E. Coombes. 1996. Interaction between wheat (Triticum aestivum)
and diclofop to reduce the cost of annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) control. Weed Sci.
44:634-639.
Lemerle, D., G.S. Gill, C.E. Murphy, S.R. Walker, R.D. Cousens, S. Mokhtari, S.J. Peltzer, R.
Coleman and D.J. Luckett. 2001. Genetic improvement and agronomy for enhanced
wheat competitiveness with weeds. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 52: 527-548.
Liebman, M.C., L. Mohler, and C.P. Staver. 2001. Ecological management of agricultural weeds.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 532 p.
Loeppky, H.A. and D.A. Derksen. 1994. Quackgrass suppression with crop rotation. Can. J. Plant
Sci. 74: 193-197.
Mahajan, G, S. Singh and B.S. Chauhan. 2012. Impact of climate change on weeds in the rice-
wheat cropping system. Curr. Sci.102: 1254-1255.
Mahajan, G. and L.S. Brar. 2002. Integrated management of Phalaris minor in wheat: rationale
and approaches—a review. Agric. Rev. 23: 241–251.
Malik, R.K. and S. Singh. 1995. Little seed canary grass (Phalaris minor Retz.) resistance to
isoproturon in India. WeedTechnol. 9: 419-425.
Malik, R.K., V.M. Bhan, S.K Katyal, R.S. Balyan and B.V. Singh 1984. Weed management
problems in rice-wheat cropping system adoption of weed control technology in
Haryana. Haryana agricul. Univ. J. Res. 14: 45-50.
Malik, R.K. and Singh S. 1993. Evolving strategies for herbicide use in wheat. Resistance and
integrated weed management. Proceedings of Indian Society of Weed Science
International Symposium on Integrated Weed management for Sustainable Agriculture,
18-20 November,1993, Hisar. India Vol. 1: 225-238.
Mathiassen, S.K. and P. Kudsk 1998.. Influence of broadleaved weed herbicides on the
activity of fenoxaprop-p-ethyl. Weed Res. 38: 283-289.
Moyer, J.R., E.S. Romain, E.W. Lindwall, and R.E. Blackshaw. 1994. Weed management in
conservation tillage systems for wheat production in North and South America. Crop
Prot. 13: 243-258.
Mukherjee P.K., Bhattacharya P.M. and A.K. Chowdhury. 2011. Weed control in wheat (Triticum
aestivum L.) under terai-agroecological region of West Bengal. J. Wheat Res. 3(2): 30-35.
O'Donovan, J.T., K.N. Harker, G.W. Clayton, D. Robinson, R.E. Blackshaw and L.M. Hall. 2001.
Implementing integrated weed management in barley (Hordeum vulgare): a review. p.
75-89. In Integrated Weed Management: Explore the Potential. R.E. Blackshaw and L.M.
Hall (ed.) Expert Committee on Weeds, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, Canada.
Olesen, J.E., P.K. Hansen, J. Berntsen and S. Christensen. 2004. Simulation of above-ground
suppression of competing species and competition tolerance in winter wheat varieties.
Field Crops Res. 89: 263-280.
Paul, S. and H.S. Gill. 1979. Ecology of Phalaris minor in wheat-crop ecosystem. Trop. Ecol.
20:186–191.
170 WHEAT : Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India

Pinthus M.J. and Y. Natowitz. 1967. Response of spring wheat to the application of 2,4-D at
various growth stages. Weed Res. 7: 95-101.
Ram H, Y. Singh, J. Timsina, E. Humphreys, S.S. Dhillon, K. Kumar and D.S. Kler. 2005b.
Performance of upland crops on raised beds in northwest India. Proc. of Workshop on
Evaluation and Performance of Permanent Raised bed cropping systems in Asia,
Australia and Mexico. March 1-3 at Australian Centre for International Agriculture
Research Canberra,Australia. ACIAR Proc. 121: 41-58.
Ram, H., V. Dadhwal, K.K. Vashist, H. Kaur. 2013. Grain yield and water use efficiency of wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.)in relation to irrigation levels and rice straw mulching in North
West India. Agric. Water Manage. 128: 92-101.
Samra J.S. and G. Singh. 2004. Heat wave of March 2004: Impact on Agriculture, 32 pp. Indian
Council ofAgricultural Research.
Seavers, G.P. and K.J. Wright. 1999. Crop canopy development and structure influence weed
suppression. Weed Res. 39: 319-328.
Sidhu, H.S., M. Singh, E. Humphreys , Y.Singh, B. Singh, S.S. Dhillon, J. Blackwell, V. Bector,
M. Singh and S. Singh. 2007. The Happy Seeder enables direct drilling of wheat into rice
stubble. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 47: 844–854.
Singh, R.K., J.S. Bohra, V.K. Srivastava and R.P. Singh. 2008. Effect of diversification of rice
wheat system on weed dynamics in rice. Indian J. weed Sci. 40: 128-131.
Singh, S., R.C. Kirkwood and G. Marshall. 1999. Biology and control of Phalaris minor Retz.
(littleseed canarygrass) in wheat. Crop Prot. 18: 1-16.
Singh, S., R.K. Malik , R.S. Balyan and S. Singh. 1995. Distribution of weed flora of wheat in
Haryana. Indian J. Weed Sci. 27: 114-121.
Singh, S., S.S. Punia, A. Yadav and V.S. Hooda 2011. Evaluation of Carfentrazone-
ethyl+Metsulfuron-methyl against Broadleaf Weeds of Wheat. Indian J. Weed Sci. 43:
12-22.
Usman, K., Ullah I, S.M. Khan, M.U. Khan, S. Ghulam and M.A. Khan. 2012. Integrated weed
management through tillage and herbicides for wheat production in rice-wheat cropping
system in northwestern Pakistan. J. Integrative Agri. 11: 946-953.
Walia, U.S., L.S. Brar and B. Singh. 2006. Recommendations for weed control in field crops.
Research Bulletin, PunjabAgric. Univ. Ludhiana: 1-32.
Whiting, A.J.; M.C. Richards and Helen Brown. 1990. Crop competiveness as an aid to weed
control in cereals. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf., British Crop Protection Council,
1990. p. 197-200.
Wilson, J.B. 1988. A review of evidence on the control of shoot-root ratio, in relation to models.
Annals Bot. 61:433-449.
Wrubel R.P. and J. Gressel. 1994. Are herbicide mixtures useful for delaying the rapid evolution
of resistance? Acase study. Weed Technol. 8: 635-648.
Xue Q and R.N. Stougaard. 2002. Spring wheat seed size and seeding rate affect wild oat
demographics. Weed Sci. 50: 312-320.
Yenish J.P., A.D. Worsham and W.S. Chilton.1995. Disappearance of DIBOA-glucoside,
DIBOA, and BOAfrom rye (Secale cereale L.) cover crop residue. Weed Sci., 43: 18-20.
Zhang C.X., X.G. He and H.B. Li 2005. Drift injury of 2,4-D butyl ester and remedial measures to
cotton. Hubei Plant Prot. 1: 35-36 (in Chinese).
 Rajender Singh Chhokar 171

Zhang J, A.S. Hamill and S.E. Weaver. 1995. Antagonism and synergism between herbicides:
trends from previous studies. Weed Technol. 9: 86-90.
Ziska, L.H. 2004 Rising carbon dioxide and weed ecology. In: Weed Biology and Management,
(ed Inderjit), (Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands). pp 159-176.
Ziska, L.H., J.R. Teasdale and J.A. Bunce. 1999. Future atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentrations may increase tolerance to glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine] in
weedy species. Weed Sci. 47: 608-615.
Ziska, L.R. and J.R. Teasdale. 2000. Sustained growth and increased tolerance to glyphosate
observed in a C3 perennial weed, quackgrass (Eiytrigia repens), grown at elevated carbon
dioxide. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 27: 159-166.
Ziska, LH. 2000. The impact of elevated carbon dioxide on yield loss from a C3 and C4 weed
in field grown soybean. Global Change Biol. 6: 1-7.

View publication stats