A field experiment was conducted at Metu Agricultural sub – centre on station in 2015 and 2016 cropping seasons to evaluate the effectiveness and economic feasibility of weed management methods on maize grain yield at Metu area. BH 661 at 25 kg/ha used as seed source. The experiment comprised of nine treatments laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. The result revealed that the highest average grain yield 62.8 q/ha was obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l 1.0 liter with two supplementary hand weeding followed by 61.6 q/ha from Integrity EC 668g/l 1 liter with one hand weeding. Similarly, the minimum above ground wee dry biomass mean 0.07q/ha, 1.5 q/ha obtained from three hand weeding at 30, 60 and 90 days after planting and Integrity EC 668g/l 1.0 liter with two supplementary hand weeding respectively. Consequently highest weed control efficiency 99.93% and 98.5%obtained from the same treatment. In economic feasibility aspect the highest net benefit Accordingly the highest net benefit 61296.4 ETB ha-1 was obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l at 1.0 L/ha + two time supplementary hand weeding with 3042.86 MRR% followed by 60146.2 ETB ha-1 net benefit with 5661.90% MRR obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + one times supplementary hand weeding whereas the minimum net benefit 50551.2 ETB ha-1 and 53224.2 ETB ha-1 obtained from one hand weeding at 30 & 454 days after planting respectively. Therefore, Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + two times supplementary hand weeding and Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + one time supplementary hand weeding treatment consecutively more profitable weed management practices to control weeds in maize and there by improve crop production up to 56.94% than other treatments and can be recommended for maize production at Metu area.
| Published in | American Journal of Plant Biology (Volume 9, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11 |
| Page(s) | 1-8 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Economic Analysis, Hand Weeding, Integrity Herbicide, Weed Free, Metu
| [1] | FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization), (2016). Crop Prospects and Food situation. No. 2 June, 2016. |
| [2] | CSA (Central Statistical Agency) (2017). Agricultural sample survey: Report on area and production of crops vol. 1. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. |
| [3] | Tsedeke A., Monica F., Tahirou A., Girma TK, Rodney L., Paswel M., Woinishet A., (2017). characterstics of Maize cultivars in Africa. How Modern are they and how many do smallholder farmers grow. Agriculture and Food Security 6: 30. |
| [4] | Rezene Fissehaei, 1985. A Review of weed science research activity on maize and sorghum in Ethiopia. In: A Review of Crop Protection Research in Ethiopia. Proceedings of 1st Ethiopian Crop Protection Symposium. 4-7 Feb., 1985, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. |
| [5] | Getahun Dereje, Tesfaye Balemi and Habtamu Ashagre (2018). Effect of Weed Interference and Plant Density on Maize Grain Yield. Ethiop. J. Crop Sci. Vol 6 No. 1 2018. |
| [6] | Kebede D (2000). Weed control Methods Used in Ethiopia. Pp 250-251. In Starkey, P & Simalenga, T. (eds.) Animal power for weed control. |
| [7] | Marshall EJP (2004) Glufosinate-tolerant maize: Implication of the USA experience for weed control in forage maize in the UK. A report for Green peace UK. |
| [8] | Khan MH et al. 2003. Efficacy of different herbicides for co trolling broadleaf weeds in wheat. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 2: 254-56. |
| [9] | Stroud A and Parker. 1989. A weed identification guide for Ethiopia. FAO, Rome. |
| [10] | Walia, U.S., (2003). Crop-weed competition in weed management. Kalyani Publishers, Ludhiana. 65-67pp. |
| [11] | Balasubramaniyan, P., and S. P. Palaniappan (2007). Principle and practice of agronomy. 2nd (ed.). Agrobis India. 576. pp. |
| [12] | CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center) (1988). From agronomic data to farmer recommendations: An economics training manual (Completely revised ed) Mexico. |
| [13] | Mehmeti AA, Demaj I, Demelezi, Rudari H (2012) Effect of Post-Emergence Herbicides on Weeds and Yield of Maize. Pak J Weed Sci Res 18: 27-37. |
| [14] | Temesgen Desalegn, Wondimu Fekadu, KasahunZewudie, WogayehuWorku, TakeleNegewo, and (2015). Effect ofweed control methos on weed density and Maize yield in West shewaOromia. 9(11), pp 8-12. |
| [15] | Tesfay A, Amin M, Mulugeta N (2014) Management of Weeds in Maize (Zea mays L.) through Various Pre and Post Emergency Herbicides. Adv Crop Sci Tech 2: 151. https://doi.org/10.4172/2329-8863.1000151 |
| [16] | Abdullahi, S., Ghosh, G. and Dawson, J. (2016). Effect of Different Weed Control Methods on Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea Mays L). Under Rainfed Condition in Allahabad. J. Agri. and Vet. Sci., 9(4); 44-47. |
| [17] | Dawit Dalga, Sharma, J. J. and Lisane workNigatu (2011). Effect of Pendimethalin andS- metolachlor Application Rates on Weed Dynamics and Yield of Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) at Areka, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Weed Management, 4: 37-53. |
| [18] | Duncan B, Eric C, Mark K, Bruno H (1990). Economic analysis of on farm trials: A review of approaches and implications for research program design. Michigan State University, Senegal. |
| [19] | Tadele Bekele, GetachewMekonnen, AshenafiMitiku. (2023). Effect of Pre-Emergence Herbicides on Weeds Infestation and Yield of Chickpea (Cicerarietum L.) at EzhaWoredaGurage Zone, Central Ethiopia. International Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences. Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 90-100. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijnfs.20231204.12 |
APA Style
Bidira, T., Dechassa, N. (2024). Evaluation of Weed Management Practices in Maize (Zea mays) at Metu, Ethiopia. American Journal of Plant Biology, 9(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11
ACS Style
Bidira, T.; Dechassa, N. Evaluation of Weed Management Practices in Maize (Zea mays) at Metu, Ethiopia. Am. J. Plant Biol. 2024, 9(1), 1-8. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11
AMA Style
Bidira T, Dechassa N. Evaluation of Weed Management Practices in Maize (Zea mays) at Metu, Ethiopia. Am J Plant Biol. 2024;9(1):1-8. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11,
author = {Tigist Bidira and Nagassa Dechassa},
title = {Evaluation of Weed Management Practices in Maize (Zea mays) at Metu, Ethiopia},
journal = {American Journal of Plant Biology},
volume = {9},
number = {1},
pages = {1-8},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajpb.20240901.11},
abstract = {A field experiment was conducted at Metu Agricultural sub – centre on station in 2015 and 2016 cropping seasons to evaluate the effectiveness and economic feasibility of weed management methods on maize grain yield at Metu area. BH 661 at 25 kg/ha used as seed source. The experiment comprised of nine treatments laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. The result revealed that the highest average grain yield 62.8 q/ha was obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l 1.0 liter with two supplementary hand weeding followed by 61.6 q/ha from Integrity EC 668g/l 1 liter with one hand weeding. Similarly, the minimum above ground wee dry biomass mean 0.07q/ha, 1.5 q/ha obtained from three hand weeding at 30, 60 and 90 days after planting and Integrity EC 668g/l 1.0 liter with two supplementary hand weeding respectively. Consequently highest weed control efficiency 99.93% and 98.5%obtained from the same treatment. In economic feasibility aspect the highest net benefit Accordingly the highest net benefit 61296.4 ETB ha-1 was obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l at 1.0 L/ha + two time supplementary hand weeding with 3042.86 MRR% followed by 60146.2 ETB ha-1 net benefit with 5661.90% MRR obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + one times supplementary hand weeding whereas the minimum net benefit 50551.2 ETB ha-1 and 53224.2 ETB ha-1 obtained from one hand weeding at 30 & 454 days after planting respectively. Therefore, Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + two times supplementary hand weeding and Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + one time supplementary hand weeding treatment consecutively more profitable weed management practices to control weeds in maize and there by improve crop production up to 56.94% than other treatments and can be recommended for maize production at Metu area.
},
year = {2024}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of Weed Management Practices in Maize (Zea mays) at Metu, Ethiopia AU - Tigist Bidira AU - Nagassa Dechassa Y1 - 2024/02/27 PY - 2024 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11 DO - 10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11 T2 - American Journal of Plant Biology JF - American Journal of Plant Biology JO - American Journal of Plant Biology SP - 1 EP - 8 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2578-8337 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20240901.11 AB - A field experiment was conducted at Metu Agricultural sub – centre on station in 2015 and 2016 cropping seasons to evaluate the effectiveness and economic feasibility of weed management methods on maize grain yield at Metu area. BH 661 at 25 kg/ha used as seed source. The experiment comprised of nine treatments laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. The result revealed that the highest average grain yield 62.8 q/ha was obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l 1.0 liter with two supplementary hand weeding followed by 61.6 q/ha from Integrity EC 668g/l 1 liter with one hand weeding. Similarly, the minimum above ground wee dry biomass mean 0.07q/ha, 1.5 q/ha obtained from three hand weeding at 30, 60 and 90 days after planting and Integrity EC 668g/l 1.0 liter with two supplementary hand weeding respectively. Consequently highest weed control efficiency 99.93% and 98.5%obtained from the same treatment. In economic feasibility aspect the highest net benefit Accordingly the highest net benefit 61296.4 ETB ha-1 was obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l at 1.0 L/ha + two time supplementary hand weeding with 3042.86 MRR% followed by 60146.2 ETB ha-1 net benefit with 5661.90% MRR obtained from Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + one times supplementary hand weeding whereas the minimum net benefit 50551.2 ETB ha-1 and 53224.2 ETB ha-1 obtained from one hand weeding at 30 & 454 days after planting respectively. Therefore, Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + two times supplementary hand weeding and Integrity EC 668g/l at 1 l/ha + one time supplementary hand weeding treatment consecutively more profitable weed management practices to control weeds in maize and there by improve crop production up to 56.94% than other treatments and can be recommended for maize production at Metu area. VL - 9 IS - 1 ER -
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Jimma Agricultural Research Centre, Jimma, Ethiopia
Information